A horrible news story

[elmo]

[Mary K]

Oooo, I was about to have an opinion.... Glad my internet crapped out on me and it didn't post...

Mk

[madjack]

Froggy, there is no rule against religious discussion...but the nature of your post, was sure to lead to an argument/debate. Vast, past experience has shown that will lead to a fight, since peoples beliefs are strongly held and there is a rule about fighting...in fact, it is the only rule on this board.

Saying "god bless you" or "I'll pray for you" is akin to saying "good luck" and "I hope things work out"...should we ban those sentiments as well.

I have made no secret that I consider myself to be an animist and my wife is Wican, so if you think you are being singled out for religious reason, you couldn't be more wrong...
madjack

[elmo]

Hi there

Sorry, I didnt know there was a no discussion rule on religion, after this post I will not refer to it again (unless answering a specific query)

Just one point if there should be no religous discussion, how come god bless and I'll pray for you is allowed? maybe all references to religion should be taboo?

Elmo on a practical note about praying doing no harm, actually the only scientific study done on praying showed that those who were prayed for actually did worse than the not prayed for control group.

I AM GOING TO KEEP MY MOUTH/KEYBOARD SHUT!!!

If you decide to PM me this scientific study that proves we just did more harm than good to this girl I would be more than happy to read it and PM you back on what a load of......never mind!

All of my thoughts and comments about this will be done by PM's from now on.

God Bless to all that want it and if you don't please forgive me! I meant no harm.

[Ira]

Frog, I'm with you on the God thing--to me, it's a fantasy.

But me and you have to live under a different standard, so I phrase my agnostic beliefs in subtle ways. (Or at least I TRY to.)

I too feel attacked all the time for expressing my views when I feel attacked with this--but we're simply not allowed to.

I've been TRYING to figure out an answer to this, but so far, we're losing.

[elmo]

Ira...pm'd ya!

[Joseph]

Not arguing, just explaining.

Frog, I don't think that anyone who believes in God believes that He is there to protect us from all adversity and harm. Quite the contrary - it is intuitively obvious to the most casual observer that bad things happen to good people. But many if not most people who believe in God believe that He WILL help us through adversity if we only ask.

And if you don't ask or don't believe in Him - fine. You're on your own.

Joseph

[NightCap]

The key is to not get angry about peoples opinions. Do you think getting bent out of shape can do any good? I have strong opinions and get along with just about everyone. Course there will always be people that hate my guts. I never did figure out that one.

[Toolie]

I have strong religeous beliefs and I have one question -

What does "Zirky-proof" mean?

[Laredo]

But despite all the sound and fury in the thread, the logical question went unanswered.

Why would a deity who didn't protect the child against the injury in the first place now be interested in protecting/assisting the child?

I don't know.

I do wonder.

Bad things happen all the time. Sometimes, it's just your turn to be first in line when they're due.
Sometimes, things happen -- and how you react to them makes them bad, or worse.

Of course, if somebody had told me this five minutes after we found the glass broken out of the rental Cherokee and all our luggage swiped (including some company property) last month, I'd've probably been perfectly happy busting the messenger in the mouth.

[Elumia]

Have there been any reports of the girl's progress? I hope she is recovering well.

Seems too often the media is eager to report the bad and the ugly. It would be unfortunate if that moment is her 15 minutes of fame.

Mark

[bg]

This is all I could find:

http://www.associatedcontent.com/articl ... arold.html

[Podunkfla]

Have there been any reports of the girl's progress? I hope she is recovering well.

Seems too often the media is eager to report the bad and the ugly. It would be unfortunate if that moment is her 15 minutes of fame.

Mark

The last report I saw they had managed to successfully reattach one foot... Sadly, the other one was too damaged, according to the doctors. I wish this poor child a quick recovery. Such a terrible and probably needless accident. It sure looks like a maintainence problem? For once, I hope she gets a million+ $$$ settlement from the insurance compaines. It won't make her whole again, but it might give her a chance for a good life and make up for a little of what she has lost.

[Ira]

Brick--you know me, so I'm always suspicious:

I am really, really, REALLY curious whether the ability to reattach only one foot has to do with the ability of the staffing, insurance coverage and normal opetaing procedures to do what's "best" for the patient under current health care conditions.

I would guess that reattaching one foot would require 10 personnel at a cost of at least $2 million. And not only didn't they have the extra few personnel to work on the other one, insurance wouldn't pay for it either.

This happens all the time with people who lose multiple digits on their hands:

They'll pay for a thumb, but not the "F" finger.

Anyone not believe me?

Just look at your disability insurance policy and see what they pay depending on which finger you lost. Health care works the same way.

[Laredo]

The last report I saw they had managed to successfully reattach one foot... Sadly, the other one was too damaged, according to the doctors. I wish this poor child a quick recovery. Such a terrible and probably needless accident. It sure looks like a maintainence problem? For once, I hope she gets a million+ $$$ settlement from the insurance compaines. It won't make her whole again, but it might give her a chance for a good life and make up for a little of what she has lost.

Now, THIS wish I can get behind, no problem. This sentiment also suggests a concrete plan for recompense. If it's not a maintenance problem, it's a design flaw, and that ought to be the responsibility of the operators under the "attractive nuisance" section of applicable state liability law(s).