IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags anti-atheist incidents , court cases , custody cases , Rich Lee

Reply
Old 26th September 2019, 09:42 PM   #1
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Biohacker Loses Joint Custody of Kids due to Atheism

Heard this story on Snap Judgment the other night; which to be fair isn't precisely a credible news source. Nevertheless, pretty disgusting and presumably unlawful end to a child custody battle. Biohacker Rich Lee's ex-wife freaks out after he elects to implant rods in his shins and tries to gain sole custody of their children. The judge decides any possible self-mutilation issues from his "biohacking" are irrelevant, but declares that Lee's atheistic beliefs are unhealthy for the kids. Lee loses custody.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts...dgment-podcast

FTR: I believe the actual court case took place back in 2016. The child custody part of the story begins at around 22:00 or so.

Last edited by Shadowdweller; 26th September 2019 at 09:50 PM.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 04:25 AM   #2
applecorped
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 20,145
The title refutes its own claim this had nothing to do with atheism
applecorped is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 05:10 AM   #3
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,552
what's the point of having kids if you can't test out CRISPR on them?
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 07:14 AM   #4
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by applecorped View Post
The title refutes its own claim this had nothing to do with atheism
Your linguistic skills are lacking.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 07:15 AM   #5
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by The Great Zaganza View Post
what's the point of having kids if you can't test out CRISPR on them?
Lee never tested CRISPR or any such thing on his kids.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 07:19 AM   #6
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
Heard this story on Snap Judgment the other night; which to be fair isn't precisely a credible news source. Nevertheless, pretty disgusting and presumably unlawful end to a child custody battle. Biohacker Rich Lee's ex-wife freaks out after he elects to implant rods in his shins and tries to gain sole custody of their children. The judge decides any possible self-mutilation issues from his "biohacking" are irrelevant, but declares that Lee's atheistic beliefs are unhealthy for the kids. Lee loses custody.

https://www.wnycstudios.org/podcasts...dgment-podcast

FTR: I believe the actual court case took place back in 2016. The child custody part of the story begins at around 22:00 or so.
Would it be possible for you to link to the actual judgement, as officially recorded?
__________________
There is no Antimemetics Division.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 07:23 AM   #7
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by theprestige View Post
Would it be possible for you to link to the actual judgement, as officially recorded?
I'll look when I get the chance. An audio excerpt of the judge's ruling is part of the podcast.

Last edited by Shadowdweller; 27th September 2019 at 07:25 AM.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 07:47 AM   #8
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
I'll look when I get the chance. An audio excerpt of the judge's ruling is part of the podcast.
Cueing up a bit of audio in a longer stretch of audio is kind of a pain in the ass. I generally only listen to podcasts when I've got long stretches of mindless activity in front of me. Walking to and from work. Prolonged car trips. Etc. If I'm going to do that, I'm going to use that time to work through the backlog of podcasts and audiobooks I already have lined up. Unless there's some pressing personal need to isolate some audio, in a podcast I'm not already invested in, I'm not going to bother. Let me know when you find the transcript.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 08:15 AM   #9
The Great Zaganza
Maledictorian
 
The Great Zaganza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2016
Posts: 22,552
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
Lee never tested CRISPR or any such thing on his kids.
I was talking about my kids ...
The Great Zaganza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 12:56 PM   #10
casebro
Penultimate Amazing
 
casebro's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 19,788
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
...... implant rods in his shins... self-mutilation issues from his "biohacking"....
CRISPR is bio-hacking.

huh? The only rod in a shin I know of was to brace up a broken tibia.

eta, OK, it's an adjustable rod put in after the surgeon breaks the leg bones. It's for height gain, 2-3 inches. Body modification. I don'tthink that is considered "bio-hacking".
__________________
Any sufficiently advanced idea is indistinguishable from idiocy to those who don't actually understanding the concept.

Last edited by casebro; 27th September 2019 at 01:02 PM.
casebro is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th September 2019, 03:04 PM   #11
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Originally Posted by casebro View Post
CRISPR is bio-hacking.

huh? The only rod in a shin I know of was to brace up a broken tibia.

eta, OK, it's an adjustable rod put in after the surgeon breaks the leg bones. It's for height gain, 2-3 inches. Body modification. I don'tthink that is considered "bio-hacking".
Nope. There's been some...expansion... regarding what qualifies as "biohacking" in recent years. Rich Lee is a grinder, an individual who chooses to implant garage-made "cybernetic" devices into himself. The rods in this case were a type of implanted armor...based on Lee's account anyway. I'm unfamiliar with the specifics of grinding, but the implication is that surgical implantation is NOT performed by a qualified and licensed physician. That being one reason Lee would have had the implantation performed without true anesthesia. And supposedly posted the procedure to youtube.

There is, clearly, a certain amount of dangerous crazy involved.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 03:23 AM   #12
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,960
Atheism sounds like the least of the concerns here.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 07:15 AM   #13
Horatius
NWO Kitty Wrangler
 
Horatius's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 29,690
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Atheism sounds like the least of the concerns here.


It almost sounds like an excuse, rather than the reason.
__________________
Obviously, that means cats are indeed evil and that ownership or display of a feline is an overt declaration of one's affiliation with dark forces. - Cl1mh4224rd
Horatius is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 07:23 AM   #14
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Horatius View Post
It almost sounds like an excuse, rather than the reason.
Which is why I'm curious to see the transcript of the Judge's decision.

---

I understand the podcast in the OP has an excerpt of the audio, but for me a person's reasoning is much better examined and discussed in writing. I can see if the audio clip is taken in or out of context. I can see how each part of the context informs the other parts. I can more easily copy, paste, and quote passages of interest to the discussion. Etc. At that point, if there is some claim of tone or inflection that changes the meaning of the written words, we can check that against the audio record. But in all the long future history of this case, as case law and precedent, the written record will be by far the most important determining factor in the interpretation of this decision. So I'd like to use it here if we can.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 28th September 2019, 10:39 AM   #15
Shadowdweller
Graduate Poster
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 1,400
Regrettably Utah court records are behind a pay wall, so..not going to happen. And that's presuming that personal stuff like custody determinations are accessible to the public anyway. Might be up for typing out a transcript of the relevant portions of the podcast (including judicial excerpts), as I have time. Yes, there are significant accuracy / objectivity concerns from a narrative created solely by a single, interested party.

The Atheism-related part of the claim starts around 30:00 (out of 36:00) so it's comparatively short if anyone cares.
Shadowdweller is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 09:53 AM   #16
Silly Green Monkey
Cowardly Lurking in the Shadows of Greatness
 
Silly Green Monkey's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Arizona
Posts: 5,718
Originally Posted by Shadowdweller View Post
Nope. There's been some...expansion... regarding what qualifies as "biohacking" in recent years. Rich Lee is a grinder, an individual who chooses to implant garage-made "cybernetic" devices into himself. The rods in this case were a type of implanted armor...based on Lee's account anyway. I'm unfamiliar with the specifics of grinding, but the implication is that surgical implantation is NOT performed by a qualified and licensed physician. That being one reason Lee would have had the implantation performed without true anesthesia. And supposedly posted the procedure to youtube.

There is, clearly, a certain amount of dangerous crazy involved.
I remember hearing when I was kid about someone who tried to armor himself up by applying hot plastic sheets to his shins. Somehow they failed to bond to his skin and instead caused severe burns...
__________________
Normal is just a stereotype.
Silly Green Monkey is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th September 2019, 08:57 PM   #17
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,960
Originally Posted by Silly Green Monkey View Post
I remember hearing when I was kid about someone who tried to armor himself up by applying hot plastic sheets to his shins. Somehow they failed to bond to his skin and instead caused severe burns...
Good grief. Of course removable athletic shin-guards are a thing you can use to protect the shins, so I don't see the point of either surgery or trying to bond something directly to the skin.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 12:24 AM   #18
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Judge: "As I sat here listening to this I realised that I have 2 screws in my leg because of a motorcycle accident, I have corneas in both eyes, I'd be blind without them, I know that plastic surgery is an accepted part of society, breast augmentation [inaudible]... and what the respondent does or doesn't do with his body is not an issue in this case unless it affects the children negatively, and on a whole I find that it hasn't and it doesn't, and in fact there was some inference that they were kind of proud that their dad had some things that made him kind of cool. Beyond that I've also found some evidence that he's a good dad, he loves his kids,[inaudible...]* he's busy with work, he's busy with biohacking, I don't find that troubling, the biohacking I don't find that troubling."

Closing statement by the mother's attorney (read from a transcript by the podcast host): "Richard has openly rejected not only the idea of personal reality but the very religious tradition upon which western morality is based. He insisted that the children be raised in an atheistic environment, he has openly stated his contempt for religion. With their mother the children receive traditional moral direction."

Judge: "The factors that a court needs to look at is the past conduct and demonstrated moral standards of the parties."

[inaudible]

Judge: "Much was made about the respondent's alleged atheistic lifestyle, and while this court can't take any position on religion, at least the petitioner stated that she would like to give her kids the chance to accept or reject religion. I'm not sure that the respondent would be willing to do that."

Then the dude starts to comment on what the judge was saying.

Judge: "I think it's in the kids best interest not to have a 50/50 custody arrangement. I believe and find that it is in the kid's best interest to have mom be the sole custodial parent. And I so conclude. After the weekend I want the new arrangement to start."

As those are separate quotes in the podcast it's not clear if there was or was not more said in between.

*The biohacker guy is speaking over the audio during these sections that I've marked as inaudible. IT's possible that the judge says something that he doesn't want us to hear, but they are very brief and in the context it doesn't seem likely. Others can form their own opinion by listening to the audio. You may be able to make out the judge's words, but I don't feel like spending the time repeatedly listening to it in order to do so.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 07:36 AM   #19
Roboramma
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Shanghai
Posts: 16,039
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post

Closing statement by the mother's attorney (read from a transcript by the podcast host): "Richard has openly rejected not only the idea of personal reality but the very religious tradition upon which western morality is based. He insisted that the children be raised in an atheistic environment, he has openly stated his contempt for religion. With their mother the children receive traditional moral direction."
Correction: the highlighted should read "personal morality" not "reality". Weird mistake on my part. I read through it again and the rest should be correct. Too late to edit, though.
__________________
"... when people thought the Earth was flat, they were wrong. When people thought the Earth was spherical they were wrong. But if you think that thinking the Earth is spherical is just as wrong as thinking the Earth is flat, then your view is wronger than both of them put together."
Isaac Asimov
Roboramma is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 07:55 AM   #20
theprestige
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: The Antimemetics Division
Posts: 69,914
Originally Posted by Roboramma View Post
Judge: "As I sat here listening to this I realised that I have 2 screws in my leg because of a motorcycle accident, I have corneas in both eyes, I'd be blind without them, I know that plastic surgery is an accepted part of society, breast augmentation [inaudible]... and what the respondent does or doesn't do with his body is not an issue in this case unless it affects the children negatively, and on a whole I find that it hasn't and it doesn't, and in fact there was some inference that they were kind of proud that their dad had some things that made him kind of cool. Beyond that I've also found some evidence that he's a good dad, he loves his kids,[inaudible...]* he's busy with work, he's busy with biohacking, I don't find that troubling, the biohacking I don't find that troubling."

Closing statement by the mother's attorney (read from a transcript by the podcast host): "Richard has openly rejected not only the idea of personal reality but the very religious tradition upon which western morality is based. He insisted that the children be raised in an atheistic environment, he has openly stated his contempt for religion. With their mother the children receive traditional moral direction."

Judge: "The factors that a court needs to look at is the past conduct and demonstrated moral standards of the parties."

[inaudible]

Judge: "Much was made about the respondent's alleged atheistic lifestyle, and while this court can't take any position on religion, at least the petitioner stated that she would like to give her kids the chance to accept or reject religion. I'm not sure that the respondent would be willing to do that."

Then the dude starts to comment on what the judge was saying.

Judge: "I think it's in the kids best interest not to have a 50/50 custody arrangement. I believe and find that it is in the kid's best interest to have mom be the sole custodial parent. And I so conclude. After the weekend I want the new arrangement to start."

As those are separate quotes in the podcast it's not clear if there was or was not more said in between.

*The biohacker guy is speaking over the audio during these sections that I've marked as inaudible. IT's possible that the judge says something that he doesn't want us to hear, but they are very brief and in the context it doesn't seem likely. Others can form their own opinion by listening to the audio. You may be able to make out the judge's words, but I don't feel like spending the time repeatedly listening to it in order to do so.
Thank you. Food for thought.
theprestige is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 30th September 2019, 07:30 PM   #21
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Yokohama, Japan
Posts: 28,960
Based on the above, the judge's reasoning process is still not very clear.

But it does seem that he did express some more sympathy toward her religious views than his. How old are the kids and how many of them are there?
On the one hand he says that "this court can't take any position on religion" but on the other hand he seems to disapprove of the idea that the respondent would not "give [his] kids the chance to accept or reject religion." Does that mean taking them to church or Sunday school and letting them be told that they will burn in hell forever if they don't accept Jesus?
I've never taken my own kids to church and so far at least, they've never asked me to. I've never exposed them to religious indoctrination. But they are free to decide for themselves. What the judge seems to be saying is that the kids should be exposed to religion before deciding whether to accept or reject it. I'm not comfortable with that. I think it's effectively pro-religion and pro-indoctrination. Let them decide for themselves after they become adults and have developed at least some independent reasoning skills.

I haven't indoctrinated my kids to be little atheists either. Religion just isn't a topic of discussion in our household.
__________________
A fool thinks himself to be wise, but a wise man knows himself to be a fool.
William Shakespeare
Puppycow is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 08:22 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.