Poll: Would you kidnap a child?

[Zen Toombs]

I would want to, but I couldn't. It isn't my place to decide, and unless the child wanted the treatment I have no right to intervene.

 

[Savryc]

Depends. How much cash do I get in the end?

Wait, do so for the child's well being? Fuck that right out the window I don't transport humans for anything less than £50,000

 

[Moonlight Butterfly]

Now that you've clicked on this thread to see what merits asking such an outrageous question I can begin.

Yesterday I was watching Family Guy when I saw an episode where a child suffering from a highly treatable form of cancer was prayed for by his Christian "scientist" parents instead of being given treatment. At this point I was thinking of just kidnapping the child and taking it to the hospital myself (Which the Griffins later planned). That got me thinking. Would anyone else do the same? Why? Why not?

EDIT: For those of you who didn't watch, the Griffins kidnapped the child because the police did nothing about it. Add that to the mix if you please.

Hrm.. Im compelled to wonder if you would think it was ok to abduct you because you are being deprived of a moralistic center.

I cannot for the life of me imagine why people feel sooo compelled to shove their own personal beliefs down other peoples throats like that. Let people live the way they wish to live. Even if that means they are living just so they can die, then so be it. Just because you dont agree with the education someone has been given does not make that position any more valid than any other and certainly does not give the right to impose ideas onto others who do not share those ideas.

I think a lot of people wouldn't have any problem with an adult doing this to themselves but a child is vulnerable and not able to make those sorts of judgements or decisions at that age. It would disturb and concern me if an adult did it but as you said that is there decided faith, the child has no say in this and that's why it seems a grey area to people posting.

 

[Da Orky Man]

No. Whats the point? What would i do? Where would i go with that kid? I would get arrested soon and it's not like hospitals are like mcdonalds, 'one cancer treatment for the kid, thanks!'

Mostly in America. You'd be able to drop the child off at a hospital almost anywhere in Europe, tell the staff the child has said treatable cancer, and the child would be treated. Money does not equate life, at least not here.

 

[SpaceBat]

No sarcasm, no trolling. If your child is dying and you believe that imagining he or she will get better is a better course of action than actually trying to get your kid medical help, you deserve to be taught a harsh lesson in reality.

So basically, you're saying that it's fine if children die a painful death so that their parents can learn their lesson. You're saying that it's fine if innocent people, especially children who basically rely on adult guidance, die because of other people's stupidity. What the hell did the child ever do wrong? The child might simply be the victim of overly religious (and moronic) parents and that doesn't in any way justify a painful and unnecessary death.

I understand that you may hate stupid, overly religious parents like that and would like them to get punished one way or another for their stupidity, but to actually be okay with an innocent person dying in order to achieve that goal....get your fucking priorities straight, man.

 

[Mikeyfell]

No sarcasm, no trolling. If your child is dying and you believe that imagining he or she will get better is a better course of action than actually trying to get your kid medical help, you deserve to be taught a harsh lesson in reality.

So basically, you're saying that it's fine if children die a painful death so that their parents can learn their lesson. You're saying that it's fine if innocent people, especially children who basically rely on adult guidance, die because of other people's stupidity. What the hell did the child ever do wrong? The child might simply be the victim of overly religious (and moronic) parents and that doesn't in any way justify a painful and unnecessary death.

I understand that you may hate stupid, overly religious parents like that and would like them to get punished one way or another for their stupidity, but to actually be okay with an innocent person dying in order to achieve that goal....get your fucking priorities straight, man.

Working on the assumption that children are inherently innocent. My outlook is that children are blank people not innocent people. In that situation (If the kid survives) he'll either grow up with the knowledge that his parents were willing to let him die, or he'll believe that it was the will of god that he was saved. That kid's not growing up to be a well adjusted person.
If the kid dies either the parents learn their lesson, or the parents still naively believe their kid was meant to die, in that case their already so far gone no damage was done.

There are a lot of people, it's not worth getting worked up over one or two, especially not a kid who you don't know. Who you can't know because they aren't the person they're going to be yet.

The kid might have turned out fine or even great but like I said, there are a lot of people.

 

[Mikeyfell]

no, because the child needs to die so that the parents can see how bullshit there belifes are.

NO. If you're that ignorant your kids can die as slowly and painfully as you want them to

Either my sarcasm detector is broken or you guys are trying way too hard to troll people. Nobody is going to believe that you actually mean what you're saying.

No sarcasm, no trolling. If your child is dying and you believe that imagining he or she will get better is a better course of action than actually trying to get your kid medical help, you deserve to be taught a harsh lesson in reality.

Religion or "faith in god" should be treated the same way as luck, some people pray, some people cross their fingers or rub a rabbit's foot.
Nobody would say "Little Timmy has cancer, but I found a 4 leaf clover. I'm pretty sure he's going to get better on his own"

Well yeah, but that harsh lesson should not be in the form of the child's suffering and death. The neglectful, abusive parents should go to prison.

I never said they shouldn't.
The preacher at their church should also be investigated, if he didn't adamantly demand that they take the kid to the hospital the preacher should be arrested as an accomplice to manslaughter.

But if the kid doesn't die the chances that the parents will learn a lesson are significantly reduced.

Another reason is that the apple doesn't fall far from the tree. If this kid grows up thinking god saved him he'll be more likely to make the same decision regarding his kid's illnesses. then you'll be asking this question again in 30 years. Even though it's possible the kid could grow up normal I wouldn't chance it.

 

[AtheistGuy]

But if the kid doesn't die the chances that the parents will learn a lesson are significantly reduced.

It doesn't matter if the child dies or not. When the parents pray they scrub themselves of any hope of feeling guilty for their neglect. Every time they clasp their hands it's like their saying "Welp. I've done all I can do. The rest is in the Lord's hands" and call it the will of their god when the child dies, as opposed to the direct consequence of their gross negligence.

 

[Mikeyfell]

But if the kid doesn't die the chances that the parents will learn a lesson are significantly reduced.

It doesn't matter if the child dies or not. When the parents pray they scrub themselves of any hope of feeling guilty for their neglect. Every time they clasp their hands it's like their saying "Welp. I've done all I can do. The rest is in the Lord's hands" and call it the will of their god when the child dies, as opposed to the direct consequence of their gross negligence.

As opposed to them thinking the kidnapping and treatment of their kid was the act of god.

Do I have to draw the stupid square grid

If they pray and the kid lives kidnapping or no they think it's god's will
If they pray and the kid dies there's a chance that they'll consider the possibility that their faith is a bunch of malarkey.


And think about the kid's future if he does survive (I forgot if you were the one I already said this to)
The kid will either grow up thinking it was god's will that saved him (making him just as bad as his parents so when his kids get terminal diseases he'll just pray instead of getting them help leaving you right back at square 1)
Or he'll grow up knowing that his parents were perfectly willing to let him die and some random stranger was the only person who cared enough about him to try and help him not die a slow painful death.

Either way that's not a well adjusted person when he grows up.

Letting the kid live is a no win situation. letting the kid die has a slight chance of turning a positive.

 

[Heronblade]

If I could be reasonably certain of success, the answer is yes, with little hesitation, even if it means serving time in jail for it afterwards.

The problem is that it is far from a simple thing to pull off. The initial kidnapping would actually be the easy bit. In order to get the kid into the hospital log enough to do them any good (probably at least 3 months) I not only have to get the kid to trust me well enough not to raise a fuss or tell anyone anything that would give it away, but I would have to fake hospital records for him/her with either myself, or my own fake identity, as a guardian. All the while avoiding any cops looking for the two of us.

A more effective path to take might be to raise some kind of partly trumped up legal fracas (an accusation of child abuse for example, likely to be true anyways in such a case) that would force the state to take custody of the child. Even if the charges are dismissed in the long run, it should last long enough for them to get his medical problems treated.

 

[Lionsfan]

No. Whats the point? What would i do? Where would i go with that kid? I would get arrested soon and it's not like hospitals are like mcdonalds, 'one cancer treatment for the kid, thanks!'

Mostly in America. You'd be able to drop the child off at a hospital almost anywhere in Europe, tell the staff the child has said treatable cancer, and the child would be treated. Money does not equate life, at least not here.

I don't think that's the point he was trying to make, rather than cancer isn't something that's cured just like that, and that the parents would probably go to court and get their kids back before any meaningful progress would be made, which is something that doesn't change whether or not you have public health care

 

[game-lover]

No.

It sounds all great in theory but there would be consequences. And I feel for the child but I'm not risking my freedom and comfort in circumstances like this.

Besides, the child could get out of this on his/her own if they wished.

I watched an episode of Law and Order: SVU about this child who pretty much emancipated himself from his parents who were using some type of herbal whatever to treat his cancer. Sadly, they pretty much disowned him for going against their beliefs and shit but the boy got treated. Decided it was worth the price because he wanted to be healed.