Parents indicted in faith healing death

**Jaded** · March 29th, 2008, 06:54 PM

CLACKAMAS COUNTY - The parents of a baby girl who died from a treatable illness voluntarily surrendered to police Friday night after arrest warrants were issued for them.

Carl Worthington, 28, and Raylene Worthington, 25, face charges of second-degree manslaughter and second-degree criminal mistreatment in connection with the death of their daughter, 15-month-old Ava Worthington.

The infant died March 2 from bacterial bronchial pneumonia and an infection, both of which the state medical examiner said could have easily been cured with common antibiotics.

Numerous sources told KATU News that instead of taking their daughter to a doctor, her parents prayed over her.

The Worthingtons are members of the Followers of Christ Church in Oregon City, a church that has a history of faith healing. The couple also lost a son in 2001.

http://www.katu.com/news/17118866.html

I've been doing a little bit of research on the Followers of Christ Church. Seems to me like it's more of a cult. Since it's beginning, there have been over 80 deaths of infants, children and mothers in childbirth.

This article is a bit long, but it goes a little deeper into the Followers of Christ Church and their practices...
http://www.positiveatheism.org/writ/deadbabies.htm

**gprime** · March 29th, 2008, 08:56 PM

What was that about religion improving a person and doing good in the world again?

**Jaded** · March 29th, 2008, 09:14 PM

If you were to take religion completely out of the equation....you're pretty much just left with neglect, abuse and manslaughter. Makes me wonder why more of these dumbass parents don't use the religion card.

**swivel** · March 29th, 2008, 11:16 PM

Originally Posted by gprime

What was that about religion improving a person and doing good in the world again?

Exactly. Thank you.

Again, you have good people and bad people with and without religion. But only WITH religion can you get good people to do evil things. We can't possibly know if this couple is good or evil, because religious tradition is clouding our view of them. They could love their kids very much, and be doing what they think is best for their health, which makes them moral (but no less culpable).

We must end the long cycle of propping up religion by equating it with morality. Please read this for a brief glimpse of why religion and morality can not have anything to do with one another.

**Angel** · March 30th, 2008, 09:18 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

Exactly. Thank you.

Again, you have good people and bad people with and without religion. But only WITH religion can you get good people to do evil things. We can't possibly know if this couple is good or evil, because religious tradition is clouding our view of them. They could love their kids very much, and be doing what they think is best for their health, which makes them moral (but no less culpable).

We must end the long cycle of propping up religion by equating it with morality. Please read this for a brief glimpse of why religion and morality can not have anything to do with one another.

Swivel, I have to take exception with a couple of things you said here.
Quote: "But only WITH religion can you get good people to do evil things."

Truly good people are not going to do evil things. People in a cult and brainwashed people might, but not any religion that teaches about the TRUTH of God and His Son. Also, those who are cult members, or brainwashed cannot be considered good or evil anyway. They are simply doing what they have been 'conditioned' to do. Much like pit bulls who are trained to be vicious. The dog is not evil, only the trainer. I believe I have seen you promote that philosophy elsewhere on this site, haven't I? If not, I apologize in advance for putting words in your mouth.

Before you say "Well, the leader claims to be a godly/holy/religious man.", remember that just because someone claims to be something, doesn't mean it's true. Most cult leaders throughout history have been proven to be raving psychotics. Charles Manson, Jim Jones and the like have convinced thousands to do their bidding, by claiming a direct link to God (or Allah, or any of the other recognized deities). The fact that they claim it does not make it so, any more than my saying gravity doesn't exist will help me to fly. Going to a church doesn't make me a Christian any more than standing in a garage would make me an automobile.

If my church, tomorrow, decided that medical care for my children was wrong, I would be looking for another church immediately. Churches do not cause their followers to do things like this. Individual weaknesses of the members do. Being brainwashed might. But as I said earlier, that makes the leader evil, and the followers weak or stupid (take your pick), but not evil, and not religious. Brainwashed people can no more be religious than the above mentioned pit bull could. They are puppets, not people.

Even believing that, I believe that they should be punished for their actions, just as I would advocate euthanasia for a dog that kills. They are dangerous, and should be neutralized, before they hurt again. Apparently it's twice too late for this couple since this is the second child of theirs to die for the beliefs of the parents.

Another quote: "...religion and morality can not have anything to do with one another."

Exactly! Which is another reason everything I said above applies! If religion and morality were companions, then none of my reasoning would have any merit. It is precisely BECAUSE they have nothing to do with one another that your comments, which are a judgment of all religion, should be applied only to the morally bankrupt groups that claim 'religion' as a basis for their cruelties, and immoral acts.

Third quote: "We must end the long cycle of propping up religion by equating it with morality."

I do not equate my religion with morality (and there are millions of others who feel the same as I do), I equate my moral acts, or lack thereof, with morality. I equate my religion with God, and my relationship to Him. I can be a religious person, and still commit immoral acts - it is called free will. Anyone who says that their acts are all moral just because they claim 'religious status', is either a liar, or delusional. I am neither. I am a Christian, but I would never use it as an excuse for an immoral act; and those who do, ARE delusional, and should be dealt with as nutjobs are, by committing them to a psychiatric facility until they are 'sane' enough to stand trial.

Just as I said in the thread about the related story several days ago, freedom of religion, and the protections afforded to ensure that freedom, do not give the followers carte blanche to abuse the laws enacted to protect all citizens. If it did, NAMBLA, among other groups, would be able to use that to 'protect' their 'right' to terrorize and rape children by calling themselves a religious group.

I am getting more and more worked up over this, and I think I will just come back to it later. If there are any areas of this you take exception to, please let me know, so I might be able to better explain myself. Because I do not enjoy being lumped into the same group with these abusers (and that IS what they are) just because we both claim 'religion' as a part of our lives.

:ange: :diablo: Which am I? Both, or neither, depending on who you ask.

**swivel** · March 30th, 2008, 10:36 PM

Here's what I mean by "Only with religion can Good people do Evil things":

A good person (not a moral person, these are two separate concepts) does what their society tells them to do. They obey the mores of their culture. The problem with religion is that it creates moral standards that are at odds with the Objective Ones. For instance, Christianity tells you that you must kill your wife if she is not a virgin on your wedding night. This is Objectively Evil. But a good person, doing what their culture tells them is "right", will happily kill their wife. They will be doing Evil while feeling that they are doing Good.

Modern examples: Brothers and fathers that kill their sister/daughter for being alone with another man (or even for being raped). This is an Objective evil, but religion has Good people carrying these actions out. Killing abortion doctors or bombing clinics is the same. Flying airplanes into skyscrapers is a Good act within fundamental Islam, but it is still Evil.

The point behind the quote (not my original saying) is that you will always have moral and immoral people. But religion can make good people do evil things. Quite often, really.

**Angel** · March 31st, 2008, 12:27 AM

Originally Posted by swivel

Here's what I mean by "Only with religion can Good people do Evil things":

A good person (not a moral person, these are two separate concepts) does what their society tells them to do. They obey the mores of their culture. The problem with religion is that it creates moral standards that are at odds with the Objective Ones. For instance, Christianity tells you that you must kill your wife if she is not a virgin on your wedding night. This is Objectively Evil. But a good person, doing what their culture tells them is "right", will happily kill their wife. They will be doing Evil while feeling that they are doing Good.

Modern examples: Brothers and fathers that kill their sister/daughter for being alone with another man (or even for being raped). This is an Objective evil, but religion has Good people carrying these actions out. Killing abortion doctors or bombing clinics is the same. Flying airplanes into skyscrapers is a Good act within fundamental Islam, but it is still Evil.

The point behind the quote (not my original saying) is that you will always have moral and immoral people. But religion can make good people do evil things. Quite often, really.

Thanks for clarifying your point.

I still say that the difference in our views on this particular concept are insignificant. If my church told me that I had to kill someone, in order to be following proper doctrine, I would find another church. That is the difference between religion and fanaticism. The difference between crazy and sane. And, as I said, the crazies, like vicious dogs, are still wrong. Either kill them, or lock them up until they are sane enough to stand trial. But don't let them use 'religion' as a copout.

**nurseronda** · March 31st, 2008, 03:38 AM

Angel, when are you going realize that you can't argue with Swivel.......He is always right....just ask him....:D

**Angel** · March 31st, 2008, 03:45 AM

Originally Posted by nurseronda

Angel, when are you going realize that you can't argue with Swivel.......He is always right....just ask him....:D

Well, as an Angel, I guess I just feel it is my duty to defend the faith. "And I will smite him with my flaming sword of truth."

LOL.;)

**nurseronda** · March 31st, 2008, 03:52 AM

Aw heck, he'll just throw a bucket of water on that sword. I sure hope you got something mightier than the sword. :erf:

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 07:45 AM

I try to behave when Morbid let's me loose outside of my "Three Things" cage.

**Angel** · March 31st, 2008, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by nurseronda

Aw heck, he'll just throw a bucket of water on that sword. I sure hope you got something mightier than the sword. :erf:

I do - it's called a brain. Maybe not the best one ever fashioned, and maybe just the tiniest bit warped, but a functional brain, nonetheless. And with that, I feel that I am equal to the challenge. Besides I love a good debate, or battle of the wits - ah, hell, I just love a good argument! My husband often tells me that I would happily argue with a brick wall - and probably win. It may be immovable, but I am impossible! LOL. Ya know, I sometimes think he may be on to something......

**Angel** · March 31st, 2008, 01:27 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

I try to behave when Morbid let's me loose outside of my "Three Things" cage.

Yes, you're being a good boy, and polite to boot. Are you sure you're Swivel? LOL. I enjoy the opportunity to use my mind as something other than a repository for children's songs and grocery lists and you have filled that position admirably. Thanks for giving me the chance to 'argue' with someone other than my hubby. I've heard all of his good arguments already, and they never seem to change - boooorrrrinnng! :great:

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 02:25 PM

Originally Posted by Angel

Yes, you're being a good boy, and polite to boot. Are you sure you're Swivel? LOL. I enjoy the opportunity to use my mind as something other than a repository for children's songs and grocery lists and you have filled that position admirably. Thanks for giving me the chance to 'argue' with someone other than my hubby. I've heard all of his good arguments already, and they never seem to change - boooorrrrinnng! :great:

I'll start a new religion thread in Three Things so you and I can have it out as often as you like. Just please keep in mind that what goes on in there does not correlate to anything that happens in the rest of the forums.

Maybe I'll bless you with my disproof of god at some point.

**Angel** · March 31st, 2008, 02:54 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

I'll start a new religion thread in Three Things so you and I can have it out as often as you like. Just please keep in mind that what goes on in there does not correlate to anything that happens in the rest of the forums.

Maybe I'll bless you with my disproof of god at some point.

Maybe I'll bless you with proof that He exists.
This should be interesting at the very least.....:D

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 03:29 PM

Originally Posted by Angel

Maybe I'll bless you with proof that He exists.
This should be interesting at the very least.....:D

Very interesting, we can't both be right.

Here, I started a thread for you. Let's hear your proof...

**Lizard** · March 31st, 2008, 03:35 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

Very interesting, we can't both be right.

Here, I started a thread for you. Let's hear your proof...

Oh, shit, it is ON!

**dop** · March 31st, 2008, 03:37 PM

Another Swivel vs religion thread? Booooy this is going to be fun... Who will he turn into atheism now? Will Angel end up so disgusted with religion she wil legaly change her name? stay tuned for another great episode...

Anyway I asked this on other thread a few days back but I dont belive I got an answer. Does anyone know what the fuck happend to Barker, im guessing hes just to bussy, no net acces or something like that but that post by Morbid brougth him to my mind and had me wondering.

**Athena** · March 31st, 2008, 04:23 PM

Hmmm...

Luckily, liberal states don't protect hippies like conservative states try to protect the religious. There was a case here in WA not too long ago where a mother was forced to submit her son to western medicine instead of seeking "natural" remedy.

If you don't want an epidural when giving birth, more power to you. But that's as far as it should go. Don't try to fix your kids with fucking roots and herbs when modern science has provided reasonable and efficient treatments for their ailments, damnit.

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 04:26 PM

Originally Posted by Athena

If you don't want an epidural when giving birth, more power to you. But that's as far as it should go. Don't try to fix your kids with fucking roots and herbs when modern science has provided reasonable and efficient treatments for their ailments, damnit.

Goddamnit I love it when you sacrifice human liberty for the sake of the Objective Moral Truth.

*thread bookmarked*

**ThreeOnAMeathook** · March 31st, 2008, 04:28 PM

I guess they missed the studies saying there is no power in prayer.

Sucks their kid had to be sacrificed.

**Athena** · March 31st, 2008, 04:49 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

Goddamnit I love it when you sacrifice human liberty for the sake of the Objective Moral Truth.

*thread bookmarked*

Ass. :p

When faced with contradicting rights, the formula for consideration is pretty clear. I consider the two rights and which one is more important. In a case like this, the child's right to life and sane medical treatment trumps the parent's right to raise their child as they see fit.

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 04:50 PM

Originally Posted by Athena

When faced with contradicting rights, the formula for consideration is pretty clear. I consider the two rights and which one is more important. In a case like this, the child's right to life and sane medical treatment trumps the parent's right to raise their child as they see fit.

You sound a lot like someone I know very well and love very much.

**Athena** · March 31st, 2008, 05:04 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

You sound a lot like someone I know very well and love very much.

If you don't mind...I'll just take that as a compliment and move on. I can't gauge an appropriate response. :p

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 05:20 PM

Originally Posted by Athena

If you don't mind...I'll just take that as a compliment and move on. I can't gauge an appropriate response. :p

You could always groan my narcissism.

**Athena** · March 31st, 2008, 05:31 PM

Groaning isn't my style. I was inundated with sharp responses and just couldn't settle on one. I have to live with that.

**swivel** · March 31st, 2008, 05:34 PM

Originally Posted by Athena

Groaning isn't my style. I was inundated with sharp responses and just couldn't settle on one. I have to live with that.

Jesus Christ, I just now notice you have never groaned someone. That would be an interesting challenge.

**Athena** · March 31st, 2008, 05:38 PM

Originally Posted by swivel

Jesus Christ, I just now notice you have never groaned someone. That would be an interesting challenge.

Nah. I've never even been tempted. I can't even think up circumstances that would cause me to utilize the function. Like I said...It's just not my style.

**SqueakyClean** · May 16th, 2008, 06:42 PM

Oops, sorry, didn't even notice this was an older thread.

**coffee achiever** · July 6th, 2009, 04:08 PM

The trial has begun:

http://www.oregonlive.com/clackamasc...ays_babys.html

Ava Worthington was the victim of "long-standing medical neglect," Dr. Dan Leonhardt testified this morning.

Leonhardt, a pediatrician and child abuse expert at Legacy Emanuel Hospital & Health Center, said Ava started life as a large and sturdy baby but when she died 15 months later her weight and height was so far off the growth chart that "there isn't even a line for it."

Her "failure to thrive" was caused by a cyst on her neck that impeded her ability to breathe and swallow, said Leonhardt. His testimony mirrored that of other pediatricians who testified for the prosecution in the trial of Ava's parents, Raylene and Carl Brent Worthington.

The Worthingtons, an Oregon City couple who believe in faith healing rather than secular medicine, are charged in Clackamas County Circuit Court with second-degree manslaughter and criminal mistreatment for failing to seek medical care for their daughter.

Leonhardt said Ava should have been hospitalized in December 2007 when she got a cold that caused a cyst on her neck to balloon. The growth put pressure on her airway and esophagus. Poor nutrition and difficulty breathing left Ava weakened and lowered her immunity, Leonhardt said.

The child died on March 2, 2008 after being sick for several days. "She struggled so long she couldn't struggle any more," Leonhardt said. Ava could have been saved, right up to her last hour, with medical treatment, he said.