And we take a step back - measles return

[michal1980]

There is no argument from me against vaccination.

My issue is with civil rights.

If the government can not force a woman to carry a child to term, or force her to have an abortion, then what right does the government have to tell people they have to inject something into their bodies.

If the abortion rights issue has taught us one thing it should be that we have a basic right to control our bodies.

What this thread has thought me is that you are a moron.

Abortions directly impact the bodies of 2 people that are directly linked.

Not vaccinated has the direct impact of the bodies of everyone you come in contact with.

So yes, you should have the right to not vaccinate, if you choose to not interact with others.

 

[Texashiker]

So yes, you should have the right to not vaccinate, if you choose to not interact with others.

When do I get to stop paying taxes to help support welfare babies that could have been aborted?

When are insurance companies going to stop providing medical care to smokers so my premiums will go down?

When is the government going to round up everyone with HIV and put them on an island?

Individual liberties have a ripple affect upon society. Whether it is broken homes from drinking, cancer from smoking, welfare babies,,,, sometimes bad things happen.

What right does the government have to tell me I have to support crack babies on welfare, and then turn around and tell me I have to take a shot?

 

[child of wonder]

There is no argument from me against vaccination.

My issue is with civil rights.

If the government can not force a woman to carry a child to term, or force her to have an abortion, then what right does the government have to tell people they have to inject something into their bodies.

If the abortion rights issue has taught us one thing it should be that we have a basic right to control our bodies.

Children receive their first MMR vaccine at 12-15 months. Do they have a right not to be needlessly infected prior to their first immunization because a few crazies still cling to a debunked study linking vaccines to autism?

 

[Texashiker]

Children receive their first MMR vaccine at 12-15 months. Do they have a right not to be needlessly infected prior to their first immunization because a few crazies still cling to a debunked study linking vaccines to autism?

Should we treat parents who do not give vaccinations like child abusers?

Is not having a child vaccinated on the same lines as a pregnant woman smoking crack?

But then again, what about a parents fundamental right to raise their children as they wish?

Personally, if a child dies from a vaccine preventable disease, that is like not having the child in a car seat and it dying in a wreck.

Parents need to take responsibility for the health and welfare of the child. Avoiding vaccines is not being responsible.

 

[nehalem256]

Not really. I presume that you want to sterilise the women before they have the children? So your protecting them by stopping them from existing? And the woman still had hiv. Oh, and she's sterile as well.
With vaccination, nobodies ill and the child is alive.

See the slight difference in situations?

In both cases we are forcing medical procedures onto people to protect children from disease.

Congrats on doubling down on supporting giving children AIDS though.

 

[K1052]

There is no argument from me against vaccination.

My issue is with civil rights.

If the government can not force a woman to carry a child to term, or force her to have an abortion, then what right does the government have to tell people they have to inject something into their bodies.

If the abortion rights issue has taught us one thing it should be that we have a basic right to control our bodies.

Do you control the germs you carry? Can you selectively not give people any contagious disease that you are carrying (perhaps entirely unknowingly)? I wouldn't file that under the daily risks we take from merely being alive since it's an entirely preventable one.

The limit of personal liberty is when your actions can cause harm to others and in this case help perpetuate a serious public health risk. Not being vaccinated constitutes a significant risk to the rest of population.

The abortion argument is a red herring and has been resolved under US law by the Supreme Court. Even still the decision made by a woman only directly effects herself and the fetus, not the public at large.

 

[actuarial]

I'm not so sure.... There are two ex-coworkers who had similar issues with vaccines. They took their two year old boys to get vaccines who were perfectly normal, no issues with health or allergies. Two months after they vaccines, they started to have severe problems with digesting protein in their bodies and multiple other issues I can't recall.

Now, it could be pure coincidence but knowing two people, three kids seems rather odd to me. I hear similar stories all the time so there is a skeptic in me.

I know what you mean about being a skeptic. I knew someone and their kid started buying soft serve from the ice cream truck. A month later he drowned. Soft serve has made me weary ever since.

 

[Texashiker]

Even still the decision made by a woman only directly effects herself and the fetus, not the public at large.

I respectfully disagree.

What kind of life can a crack whore homeless mother provide for a child that will be born addicted to drugs?

Studies show children born with fetal alcohol syndrome are born with mental stability and violence issues.

Why should society run the risk of a crack baby growing up to be a serial killer, or a violent criminal? For the sake of public safety lets force all drug addicted mothers to have an abortion.

The right to control our bodies is a basic human right.

 

[WelshBloke]

In both cases we are forcing medical procedures onto people to protect children from disease.

So all medical procedures are the same, and all diseases are the same?

Because if not your argument is total rubbish.

Congrats on doubling down on supporting giving children AIDS though.

I'm not sure if this is a fail attempt to elicit an emotional response or not, or if you really have a problem reading or understanding text. It might be helpful if you could explain how you reached this conclusion.

 

[nehalem256]

So all medical procedures are the same, and all diseases are the same?

Because if not your argument is total rubbish.

Of course all diseases are not the same. But I think HIV and measles are in the same class; if anything HIV is a worse disease.

Either forcing medical procedures on people is wrong or it isn't. Certainly abortion say is not any more dangerous than injecting people with live viruses.

So you cannot say abortions for crack whores is wrong, but forced vaccinations are a-okay.

I'm not sure if this is a fail attempt to elicit an emotional response or not, or if you really have a problem reading or understanding text. It might be helpful if you could explain how you reached this conclusion.

You are clearly defending the right of women to infect their children with AIDS using the argument that its their children so its not a public issue.

 

[Exterous]

The limit of personal liberty is when your actions can cause harm to others and in this case help perpetuate a serious public health risk. Not being vaccinated constitutes a significant risk to the rest of population.

Exactly. People arguing/deciding against vaccinations are forcing their views on people who cannot defend themselves against the diseases. Freedom should not mean someone else must be forced to bear the risk of death or disease. A free society is not one where a select non-elected few get to decide what risk everyone else is required to endure

 

[K1052]

I respectfully disagree.

What kind of life can a crack whore homeless mother provide for a child that will be born addicted to drugs?

Studies show children born with fetal alcohol syndrome are born with mental stability and violence issues.

Why should society run the risk of a crack baby growing up to be a serial killer, or a violent criminal? For the sake of public safety lets force all drug addicted mothers to have an abortion.

The right to control our bodies is a basic human right.

http://www.nizkor.org/features/fallacies/red-herring.html

 

[Texashiker]

<snip>

The argument is people do not have the right to put others at risk.

So lets start testing every child for violent genetic markers. If genetic testing shows the fetus may be violent later in life, abort the child.

Lets round up everyone with HIV and Hep C and deport them to an island.

Life prison sentences for drug addicts.

Someone drinks and drives, life time prison sentence.

Its all about keeping the public safe,,,, right?

 

[surfsatwerk]

Real question is, should we forcibly vaccinate toasters against AIDS that they may contract from their gay life partners.

 

[fskimospy]

The argument is people do not have the right to put others at risk.

So lets start testing every child for violent genetic markers. If genetic testing shows the fetus may be violent later in life, abort the child.

Lets round up everyone with HIV and Hep C and deport them to an island.

Life prison sentences for drug addicts.

Someone drinks and drives, life time prison sentence.

Its all about keeping the public safe,,,, right?

I'm quite certain that you can tell the difference between executing someone and forcing them to get a vaccine that almost always has zero side effects.

As with all things in life, the severity of the action is balanced against the benefit to society. That's one of the fundamental basis for all of US law.

 

[JimKiler]

Should we treat parents who do not give vaccinations like child abusers?

Is not having a child vaccinated on the same lines as a pregnant woman smoking crack?

But then again, what about a parents fundamental right to raise their children as they wish?

Personally, if a child dies from a vaccine preventable disease, that is like not having the child in a car seat and it dying in a wreck.

Parents need to take responsibility for the health and welfare of the child. Avoiding vaccines is not being responsible.

Don't the schools already do that if you kid has ADHD and you do not give him drugs, drugs that we do not know the long terms effects of.

 

[JTsyo]

There is no "WE". There are select individuals who have refused the vaccine, and are paying the consequence for it. Grouping those select individuals with other select individuals and attempting to form a class of people (see: "we") and then say that "we" have taken a step back by allowing this disease back into our class. Is trying to externalize problems that are otherwise completely internalized to those making the decisions for themselves and their families. Why the hell should I care? Oh right "we" took a step back right?

Aside from the very few people unable to get the vaccines but hope to free-load on the vaccination herd immunity, the problem is completely internalized to people making decisions for their children. There are other approaches that those with compromised immune systems can do to minimize their exposure instead of relying on some sort of forced vaccination scheme and resultant herd immunity to protect them.

Vaccines aren't 100% effective. Some don't take and others fade over time.

How effective is MMR vaccine?

More than 95% of the people who receive a single dose of MMR will develop immunity to all 3 viruses. A second vaccine dose gives immunity to almost all of those who did not respond to the first dose.

 

[Pulsar]

I respectfully disagree.

What kind of life can a crack whore homeless mother provide for a child that will be born addicted to drugs?

Studies show children born with fetal alcohol syndrome are born with mental stability and violence issues.

Why should society run the risk of a crack baby growing up to be a serial killer, or a violent criminal? For the sake of public safety lets force all drug addicted mothers to have an abortion.

The right to control our bodies is a basic human right.

Because it is a better option to try to place the child with loving parents who can raise them and make them a productive member of society.

At what point will you realize that your over-the-top arguments and non-sensical analogies hurt your case more than help them? You're making yourself look very foolish.

 

[Texashiker]

Because it is a better option to try to place the child with loving parents who can raise them and make them a productive member of society.

And when the child tries to kill the parents?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/MindMo...hild-fetal-alcohol-spectrum/story?id=11702840

Why bother? Why not just abort the children?

Its all in the name of public safety.

 

[hal2kilo]

I respectfully disagree.

What kind of life can a crack whore homeless mother provide for a child that will be born addicted to drugs?

Studies show children born with fetal alcohol syndrome are born with mental stability and violence issues.

Why should society run the risk of a crack baby growing up to be a serial killer, or a violent criminal? For the sake of public safety lets force all drug addicted mothers to have an abortion.

The right to control our bodies is a basic human right.

Just saying.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=...lde46v_ToYu0G0o5t3bKRjA&bvm=bv.49784469,d.cGE

 

[woolfe9998]

Well when you had major Hollywood celebrities pushing this bullshit about vaccines what do you expect? Especially when others jumped onto the bandwagon and were playing the "Oh those evil pharmaceutical companies are trying to give your kids autism for profits with these vaccines cause they are greedy" rational. The same can be said about the GMO bullshit scare that isn't actually based on any real science.

I don't disagree with you on any of this. However, if you're under the impression that anti-vacc is a phenomenon of the left, opinion polls, several of them, show that it's about even across the ideological spectrum.

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/i...-politics-of-vaccine-resistance/#.UfA3p9I3swA

http://today.yougov.com/news/2012/12/05/public-support-vaccination-remains-strong/

 

[futurefields]

Jenny Mccarthy

 

[actuarial]

Either forcing medical procedures on people is wrong or it isn't. Certainly abortion say is not any more dangerous than injecting people with live viruses.

All medical procedures children undergo are forced. They cannot provide informed consent.

 

[nehalem256]

All medical procedures children undergo are forced. They cannot provide informed consent.

Typically their legal guardians make those decisions for them.

Yoru concern would seem to be more justified if people were arguing that denying vaccines to children is a form of child abuse.

But instead they are arguing it is acceptable to force medical procedures on people because not doing so will harm society. And then hypocritically throwing a fit about forcing medical procedures on others even though not doing so will harm society.

 

[fskimospy]

All medical procedures children undergo are forced. They cannot provide informed consent.

Oh no!

CHILDREN FORCED TO INGEST BROCCOLI WITHOUT THEIR CONSENT. IT'S JUST LIKE AN ABORTION, ONLY WITH BROCCOLI. DINNER TABLE MASSACRE.