Child's death tests Oregon law on faith healing

An Oregon City couple who tried to heal their dying daughter with prayer walked hand-in-hand into a crowded Clackamas County courtroom Monday and pleaded not guilty to charges of manslaughter and criminal mistreatment.

Carl Brent Worthington, 28, and Raylene Marie Worthington, 25, are the first parents prosecuted since Oregon cracked down on faith-healing deaths nine years ago, according to legislators and legal experts. If convicted, they could spend more than six years in prison.

National advocates for religious freedom and child welfare have been following the Worthington case, and reporters shadowed the defendants from the moment they arrived Monday at the Clackamas County courthouse, flanked by attorneys.

Read it all.

print

Posted in * Culture-Watch, Health & Medicine, Law & Legal Issues, Religion & Culture

4 comments on “Child's death tests Oregon law on faith healing

  1. Festivus says:

    If I believed a Dr. could heal my child and the child died, would I also be arrested? Or does the law plainly discriminate against Christian faith and support practice and faith and practice in medicine?

  2. Death Bredon says:

    The notion that Americans truly believe in religious freedom is refuted by the cases of (1) Christian Science; (2) peyote-smoking aboriginal religious practice; and (3) Santerian ritual animal sacrifice.
    In truth, we believe that religious freedom has limits and must be governmentally regulated. Originally, we allowed each state to do this job (which is what the First Amendment actually says — “[Federal] Congress [only State Legislatures] shall make no laws . . . .”) Now, we allow the Supreme Court to set the limits on a case-by-case basis. Not surprisingly, the Court operates in accord with common sentiment: Christian Science medical neglect cases are prohibited but, for example, Orthodox/Catholic reliquaries are protected (despite involving desecration of corpses).

  3. Harvey says:

    I cannot picture the US Government placing any regulations on religion – unless of course it might mention a religion like the terrorist section of Islam that advocates death and destruction of any group that spaks out against them. Someting like a non religious statement I remember: “Freedom of speech does not mean you have the right to yell “FIRE” in a crowed theater.

  4. Death Bredon says:

    The U.S. Government HAS ALREADY place numerous limits on religion — the anti-Mormon monogamy laws, laws banning use of Peyote by in Aboriginal (Native) American religious practices, criminalization of Faith Healing, etc.

    Justice Scalia wrote the Supreme Court’s Opinion “explaining” why the Federal and State Governments may do this in Oregon v. Black (I think that was style).