I don't know if there is a specific denomination or sect, but every now and then you hear on the news that some child died because the parents refused to seek medical help due to their faith. Like I said I think it is rare, and I'll add that not all bad medical practices are due to religion or faith, but it is an example of faith hurting others without explicitly being violent.
I kind of shot from the hip in my last post when it came to specific points. I didn't make them up, but it's been a few years since I looked them up so let's see what I can find on google lol.
I found this news article from 2018 about a couple charged with negligent homicide of their newborn for not seeking medical attention when it was obvious that their newborn needed help: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2018/07/10/a-religious-oregon-couple-didnt-get-medical-care-for-their-newborn-the-child-died-and-now-theyre-going-to-prison/?utm_term=.c6e716363daf
From the article: "The Mitchells are the fifth set of parents from the Followers of Christ Church to face criminal charges after failing to secure medical attention for their children in the past nine years, according to the prosecutor." .... “For far too long, children in this church have been needlessly suffering and dying because their parents, as a condition of their religious beliefs, have refused to seek medical care for their children,” the district attorney’s office stated.
I found this (quotes italicized for convenience): https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3194801/
Excerpt from abstract (2011): "Using the most recent national data (2005) from all U.S. states with information on sex education laws or policies (N = 48), we show that increasing emphasis on abstinence education is positively correlated with teenage pregnancy and birth rates. This trend remains significant after accounting for socioeconomic status, teen educational attainment, ethnic composition of the teen population, and availability of Medicaid waivers for family planning services in each state. These data show clearly that abstinence-only education as a state policy is ineffective in preventing teenage pregnancy and may actually be contributing to the high teenage pregnancy rates in the U.S."
I also found this review of abstinence only education from 2017 (AOUM = abstinence only until marriage): https://www.jahonline.org/article/S1054-139X(17)30260-4/fulltext
"Although abstinence is theoretically effective, in actual practice, intentions to abstain from sexual activity often fail. Given a rising age at first marriage around the world, a rapidly declining percentage of young people remain abstinent until marriage. Promotion of AOUM policies by the U.S. government has undermined sexuality education in the United States and in U.S. foreign aid programs; funding for AOUM continues in the United States. The weight of scientific evidence finds that AOUM programs are not effective in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse or changing other sexual risk behaviors."
"While advocates of AOUM policies and programs have asserted their effectiveness, scientific evidence suggests otherwise. A 2007 systematic review by Douglas Kirby  found no scientific evidence that AOUM programs demonstrate efficacy in delaying initiation of sexual intercourse, reducing the number of sexual partners, or facilitating secondary abstinence. Moreover, a rigorous national evaluation was completed in 2007 by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc., with support from the Department of Health and Human Services Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation ; among four-model AOUM programs, no impact was found on initiation of sexual intercourse, numbers of sexual partners, or other behaviors.
A 2007 Cochrane meta-analysis of 13 AOUM programs found that evaluated programs consistently showed no impact on sexual initiation, frequency of vaginal sex, number of partners, condom use, or the incidence of unprotected vaginal sex . More recently, a 2012 meta-analysis by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention examined 66 comprehensive risk reduction (CRR) sexual health programs and 23 abstinence programs. CRR programs had favorable effects on current sexual activity (i.e., abstinence), number of sex partners, frequency of sexual activity, use of protection (condoms and/or hormonal contraception), frequency of unprotected sexual activity, STIs and pregnancy . In contrast, the meta-analysis of risk avoidance (AOUM) programs found effects on sexual activity, but not on other behaviors. (Equivocal changes were found for a decrease in frequency of sexual activity and an increase in pregnancy.) Importantly, the effect on sexual activity was only significant in the nonrandomized control trial subgroup and not significant in the stronger randomized control trial subgroup. Thus, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention concluded that while CRR programs were an effective strategy for reducing adolescent pregnancy and STI/HIV among adolescents, “no conclusions could be drawn on the effectiveness of group-based abstinence education.” . More recently, a 2016 review of 37 systematic reviews, summarizing 224 randomized controlled trials of school-based sex education programs concluded that abstinence-only interventions did not promote positive changes in sexual initiation or other sexual behaviors .
Add Health data suggest that many adolescents who intend to be abstinent fail to do so, and that when abstainers do initiate intercourse, many fail to use condoms and contraception to protect themselves [37, 38]. Other studies find higher rates of human papillomavirus and nonmarital pregnancies among adolescent females who took a virginity pledge than those who did not .
Consequently, these studies suggest that user failure with abstinence is high. Thus, although theoretically completely effective in preventing pregnancy, in actual practice the efficacy of AOUM interventions may approach zero."
Sorry for the long quotes. I wanted to show that it wasn't just one study but many studies including several meta analyses with the same basic conclusion. In actual practice abstinence only education is not really effective at preventing premarital adventures (hormones are a powerful thing), and when those kids do break abstinence they don't have the education to properly mitigate the chances of pregnancy or STIs resulting in an increase of those things.
I don't have time right this instance to pour over the literature, but I want to get this post out so I'll just post some of the statements about conversion therapy from respected psychological associations (quotes italicized for convenience). https://www.hrc.org/resources/policy-and-position-statements-on-conversion-therapy
"The American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry finds no evidence to support the application of any “therapeutic intervention” operating under the premise that a specific sexual orientation, gender identity, and/or gender expression is pathological. Furthermore, based on the scientific evidence, the AACAP asserts that such “conversion therapies” (or other interventions imposed with the intent of promoting a particular sexual orientation and/or gender as a preferred outcome) lack scientific credibility and clinical utility. Additionally, there is evidence that such interventions are harmful. As a result, “conversion therapies” should not be part of any behavioral health treatment of children and adolescents."
We, as national organizations representing millions of licensed medical and mental health care professionals, educators, and advocates, come together to express our professional and scientific consensus on the impropriety, inefficacy, and detriments of practices that seek to change a person’s sexual orientation or gender identity, commonly referred to as “conversion therapy.” .... We emphasize the dangers of sexual orientation and gender identity change efforts, particularly for youth, which include increased risk of anxiety, depression, decreased self-esteem, social withdrawal and isolation, homelessness, substance abuse, and suicidality.
I am happy to see the Revelations 11:18 quote. I liked your post because of that.
While I think believing God wants you take care of the Earth is a good motivator, I do not think it is necessary to be appreciative of the Earth and wanting it to stay 'healthy'. If nothing else, I wager self preservation and quality of life ought to be a powerful motivator to keep the planet healthy.