"Perversion is No Defense"- Jonathan Turley
Mort Zuckerman
scientifi...@ostp.gov, pkru...@princeton.edu,
Stanle...@fiu.edu, emcsw...@niaid.nih.gov, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
Spin...@yahoogroups.com, kshe...@calea.org, fit...@gmail.com,
patrick.f...@usdoj.gov, model...@sbcglobal.net,
jdr...@nejm.org, let...@courant.com, Jgerb...@cdc.gov,
michae...@po.state.ct.us, con...@po.state.ct.us, executive-
edi...@nytimes.com, managin...@nytimes.com, news-
ti...@nytimes.com, biz...@nytimes.com, for...@nytimes.com,
nati...@nytimes.com, dv...@cdc.gov, brigidc...@optonline.net,
tr...@hotmail.com, illino...@aol.com, jle...@courant.com,
tinaj...@yahoo.com, jhorn...@fff.org, thomas...@usdoj.gov,
thoma...@po.state.ct.us, kur...@washpost.com,
georg...@washpost.com, p...@allegorypress.com,
commissi...@po.state.ct.us, brans...@comcast.net,
vts...@comcast.net, o...@po.state.ct.us, freet...@charter.net,
scott....@po.state.ct.us, govern...@po.state.ct.us,
attorney...@po.state.ct.us, randall...@usdoj.gov,
Robert....@yale.edu, edi...@greenwich-post.com,
harol...@yale.edu, sedm...@nswbc.org, rrmcg...@aol.com,
fr...@nytimes.com, dpr...@stmartin.edu
Cc: fra...@ucia.gov, dr-ahma...@president.ir,
eugener...@washpost.com, afa...@niaid.nih.gov,
bmi...@newstimes.com, tr...@hotmail.com, rast...@aol.com,
billc...@gmail.com, amcg...@rms-law.com, rjmu...@aol.com,
paulcrai...@yahoo.com, sidney_b...@yahoo.com,
criminal...@usdoj.gov, karla.d...@usdoj.gov,
christophe...@usdoj.gov, richar...@yale.edu,
harol...@yale.edu, james.p...@yale.edu, inq...@aldf.com,
ly...@idsociety.org, meganm...@theatlantic.com
Subject: "Perversion is No Defense"- Jonathan Turley
Date: Nov 15, 2009 5:21 AM
ARTICLE BELOW
============================
When a child dies from medical neglect
called "Lyme Disease" (deliberately
disclaimed by Yale, et al, through the
ALDF.com and EUCALB's websites), saying
their disease is caused by not-enough-sex,
is a murder charge. Or, when children
are maimed by the Tuberculosis/AIDS/
Cancer-causing vaccine, OspA or LYMErix,
or Pam3Cys, that, too, is a murder charge.
Because it isn't an accident. Yale
and UConn knew their vaccine did not
work. That's why they changed the
definition of the disease in 1994:
http://www.actionlyme.org/ARTHURWEINSTEIN.htm
"People who don't have Allen Steere's
and Arthur Weinstein's Dearborn version
of 'Lyme Disease' are the sickest."
The FDA Meeting where Dattwyler says
the Steere/Dearborn version of Lyme Disease
is bogus took place in June 1994, but Dearborn
happened 4 months later, in *October, 1994*:
http://www.actionlyme.org/CRYMEDISEASE_CHP3_B.htm
Now we know why that is: OspA-induced
immunosuppression and the activation
of latent viruses of all kinds (MS and cancer);
the inability to fight off fungal infections,
particularly in the blood (cancer & MS) and
brain (Lou Gehrig's Disease):
http://www.actionlyme.org/Pam3Cys_Version15.htm
Given how large is the international
epidemic of diseases caused by fungal-
antigen-related immunosuppression
and dysregulation (Cancer, MS, ALS,
Sarcoidosis, Lupus, and the failed
HIV and tuberculosis vaccines), it's
more than ridiculous - diabolical, in
fact - to be attacking real religious
beliefs, rather than the religion
of perversion, psychiatry.
Here we see, once again, a lawyer
blowing poison wind out the alimentary
port of his face because he does not
know what a fact is.
I really don't know if we will ever
see an end to this kind of astronomical
abuse and stupidity. These men, these
males, psychiatrists and lawyers, act
more like girls than girls. All they
care about is emotionalism. ***They have
no knowledge or awareness of acting like
a man.***
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7jZrW4PoE9Y&feature=related
Like ^^^that. That's the true
shape of the perverted, the cowardly.
Lawyers & psychiatrists. Because they're
so arrogant and full of themselves, and
so hate humans... That's what cowards
look like in the domain of INTENTION towards
others.
Like this:
http://www.actionlyme.org/ANTHRAX_SWEEG_KNOWS.htm
"Last November, the American Association of Insurance Services
(aais.org) filed a new virus and bacteria exclusion designed to
prevent insurance company losses that may arise from claims related to
infectious diseases and bioterrorism. "Coverage is excluded for loss,
cost, or expense caused by, resulting from, or relating to any virus,
bacterium, or other microorganism that causes or is capable of causing
disease, illness, or physical distress. In addition, the exclusion
explicitly applies to any loss, cost or expense arising from denial of
access to property because of any...microorganisms." The exclusion is
designed for commercial and farm insurance policies, but there is no
reason to think it will not eventually trickle down to homeowners and
small businesses."
There. That's ^^ what we're fighting
against. The insurance companies know
fungal antigens will kill you and your
children, or at least cause them
20 years of disability before losing
their lives 20 years early, and this
arrogant tard, Turley, wants to go after
Christians.
The bioterrorist agent that causes the
most illness and loss of productivity
worldwide is Pam3Cys, or Yale's OspA
"vaccine:"
http://www.actionlyme.org/Pam3Cys_Version15.htm
On that ^^^ page are linked the references
to the presentation so you can verify
independently that these diseases processes
are directly linked to OspA or tripalmitoyl
cysteine - Yale's Lyme "vaccine."
KMDickson
http://www.actionlyme.org
===============================
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/11/13/AR2009111302220_pf.html
When a child dies, faith is no defense
Why do courts give believers a pass?
By Jonathan Turley
Sunday, November 15, 2009
"Suffer little children to come to me." So begins one of the most
cited passages in the Bible. Yet, in cases involving the deaths of
children in faith-healing families, the second half of Jesus's
admonition from Luke 18:16 is at the heart of legal controversy:
". . . and forbid them not."
In the past 25 years, hundreds of children are believed to have died
in the United States after faith-healing parents forbade medical
attention to end their sickness or protect their lives. When minors
die from a lack of parental care, it is usually a matter of criminal
neglect and is often tried as murder. However, when parents say the
neglect was an article of faith, courts routinely hand down lighter
sentences. Faithful neglect has not been used as a criminal defense,
but the claim is surprisingly effective in achieving more lenient
sentencing, in which judges appear to render less unto Caesar and more
unto God.
This disparate treatment was evident last month in Wisconsin, a state
with an exemption for faith-based neglect under its child abuse laws.
Leilani and Dale Neumann were sentenced for allowing their 11-year-old
daughter, Madeline Kara Neumann, to die in 2008 from an undiagnosed
but treatable form of diabetes. The Neumanns are affiliated with a
faith-healing church called Unleavened Bread Ministries and continued
to pray with other members while Madeline died. They could have
received 25 years in prison. Instead, the court emphasized their
religious rationale and gave them each six months in jail (to be
served one month a year) and 10 years' probation.
During their sentencing, Marathon County Circuit Court Judge Vincent
Howard said the Neumanns are "very good people raising their family
who made a bad decision, a reckless decision." He then gently
encouraged them to remember that "God probably works through other
people, some of them doctors."
Compare the Neumanns' legal treatment with a couple of other recent
cases in which children were injured or killed by nonreligious
neglect. Russell J. Wozniak Jr. and Jennifer Ann Wozniak, of Chippewa
Falls, Wis., received basically the same sentence as the Neumanns for,
the criminal complaint said, allowing their 2-year-old to wander
around covered in vomit and wearing a full diaper.
Then there are the parents of Alex Washburn. The 22-month-old died
after hitting his head at home in Cross Lanes, W.Va. His parents,
Elizabeth Dawn Thornton and Christopher Steven Washburn, said the boy
fell a lot and hit his head on the corner of a table and his chin on a
toilet. They apologized for not seeking medical help and agreed to
terminate their parental rights to their other children, handing over
custody to the state. "I wish I did seek medical treatment for my son
faster," Washburn told the court. "That will definitely be with me for
the rest of my life." The court sentenced both parents to three to 15
years in prison.
So the Neumanns got one month in jail for six years and kept custody
of their children, and the Washburns got up to 15 years in prison and
agreed to give up their kids.
In a nation founded on the free exercise of religion, the legal system
struggles with parents who act both criminally and faithfully in the
deaths of their children. This paradox has perplexed courts for
centuries. One of the earliest prosecutions of such a case occurred in
England in the 1800s, when the crown charged followers of a sect known
only as the Peculiar People, a name derived from a translation of the
phrase "chosen people" from the book of Deuteronomy. They were accused
of killing numerous children as a result of faith-healing practices.
Today, the Old Peculiars are largely gone (their faith-healing views
thinned their numbers considerably), but many other sects such as
Unleavened Bread Ministries have prospered. While the vast majority of
fundamentalist and faith-healing parents avail themselves of a
doctor's care when faced with a dire medical condition, some religious
parents continue to maintain that belief in God means belief in His
power and discretion to heal. They take literally the fact that one of
the names of God in the Old Testament, Jehovah-Rapha, means "I am the
Lord your Physician," and point to Exodus 15:26, where God says, "I am
the Lord that heals you."
In the four Gospels, Jesus heals the sick, including in Mark 5:34,
where He cures a hemorrhaging girl who was unsuccessfully treated by
doctors, saying: "Daughter, your faith has made you well. Go in peace!
Be cured from your illness."
Some parents go to incredible lengths to prevent doctors from doing
God's work. Colleen Hauser of Minnesota gained national attention in
May when she went into hiding with her 13-year-old son to avoid a
court order that he receive chemotherapy for a Hodgkins lymphoma tumor
growing in his chest. She was eventually forced to yield; this month,
her son finished his final radiation treatment and his family says his
cancer is gone.
But the Hauser case is an exception. The advocacy group Children's
Health Care Is a Legal Duty estimates that roughly 300 children have
died in the United States since 1975 because care was withheld. When
such parents appear in court, they often insist that they love their
children and their God -- an argument that receives a sympathetic
hearing from judges and prosecutors.
While defendants generally show contrition for their actions, the
Neumanns remained unrepentant about not calling emergency personnel
until after Madeline stopped breathing. Leilani Neumann said: "I do
not regret trusting truly in the Lord for my daughter's health." Dale
Neumann told the court: "I am guilty of trusting my Lord's wisdom
completely. . . . Guilty of asking for heavenly intervention. Guilty
of following Jesus Christ when the whole world does not understand.
Guilty of obeying my God."
In Oregon, the Followers of Christ church has been cited for injuries
and deaths associated with its faith-healing beliefs for decades. In
one 10-year period, estimated Larry Lewman, an Oregon state medical
examiner, the church experienced 25 child deaths related to faith-
based medical neglect. A recent case involved Ava Worthington, a 15-
month-old who fell ill in 2008. Rather than call doctors, her parents
-- Carl Brent Worthington and Raylene Worthingon -- allowed a simple
cyst on her neck to grow to the size of a softball as they anointed
her with oil and administered small amounts of wine, according to
testimony at the trial. She died of a blood infection and pneumonia.
Judge Steven L. Maurer, a circuit court judge in Clackamas County,
Ore., said he would "stand by my assessment that this was wrong,
wrong, wrong. This was an unnecessary tragedy." However, the
prosecutor asked for six months in prison, half the maximum sentence
for misdemeanor criminal mistreatment. Maurer gave Carl Brent
Worthington two months in jail and five years' probation. Despite the
record of deaths and injuries at their church, the Worthingtons were
allowed to keep custody of their 5-year-old daughter and a new baby
that was coming in a matter of months. They needed only to promise to
bring them to a doctor for scheduled checkups.
Now another trial is pending for the family: Raylene Worthington's
parents, Jeff and Marci Beagley, were charged with criminally
negligent homicide in the death of their 16-year-old son, Neil
Beagley. He died in 2008 from a urinary tract blockage that could have
been treated with a minor surgical procedure. In cases such as this,
in which courts confront repeated faith-based fatalities in a single
religious community, the legal system risks becoming a facilitator, if
not an accessory, to the crimes through lenient sentencing.
These cases have thrived in a gray zone left by the Supreme Court
decades ago. In 1944, in Prince v. Massachusetts, the U.S. Supreme
Court ruled that "the right to practice religion freely does not
include liberty to expose the community or the child to communicable
disease, or the latter to ill health or death." The court, however,
did not expressly forbid the use of faith as a mitigating factor in
sentencing -- a matter left to the states. Not only does this use
place children at risk, it results in the troubling image of courts
favoring religious parents over nonreligious parents in a nation
committed to the separation of church and state.
The key to the use of such a defense is that it must involve belief in
a divine being, not a particular lifestyle. In 2007, Jade Sanders and
Lamont Thomas of Atlanta were convicted of malice murder and given
life sentences for the death of their 6-week-old child. The defense
attorneys cited the couple's strict vegan lifestyle to explain why
they fed their newborn son a diet of soy milk and organic apple juice,
though during the trial Sanders said she had also breast-fed her son,
who died in an emaciated state at 6 weeks, weighing just 3 1/2 pounds.
The prosecutor and court had no qualms in treating this couple's
beliefs as a poor excuse for murder, calling a nutritionist and vegan
expert as a witness to show that a vegan diet can be safe for an
infant. The prosecutor even told the jury: "They're not vegans,
they're baby-killers."
The next test of the faith-based defense will be in Philadelphia,
where prosecutors last month charged Herbert and Catherine Schaible in
the January death of their son, Kent Schaible, 2, from bacterial
pneumonia. His parents and other adults prayed around him, practicing
faith-healing for two weeks without seeking medical assistance. Then
they called a funeral home. The couple were charged with involuntary
manslaughter and other related crimes.
Denying children critical care may be divinely ordained for some
parents, but it should not be countenanced by the legal system. Until
courts refuse to accept religion as a mitigating factor in sentencing
in such cases, children will continue to die, neglected as an article
of their parents' faith.
Jonathan Turley is a professor of public interest law at George
Washington University and a practicing criminal defense lawyer. He'll
be online to chat with readers about this piece on Monday at 1:30 p.m.
ET. Submit your questions and comments before or during the
discussion.
Post a Comment
"[Real] scientists are *fiercely* independent. That's the good
news."-- NIH's Top Fool, Anthony Fauci