Forced Vaccinations to be Decided This Week
I thought this would happen. I'm just surprised it is happening this fast. The proposal was timed with the Brian Wilson (liar) reports of measles at Disneyland. Perhaps that's why. Anyway, SB277 is being debated this week at the State Capitol. This bill forces all children to be vaccinated per an extensive schedule that's in the bill (apart from the CDC schedule but based on it) and that can be modified at any time. It's already pretty extensive. It does away with religious exemptions. Even home-schooled children are subject. Any child that isn't vaccinated per the list on the bill will be classified at truant. CPS and law enforcement will be called in to take the child and vaccinate them. At that point, when do the parents see their child again? Anybody's guess.
Years ago I asked on another Objectivist forum if the members were in favor of forced vaccination. At least half were, to my surprise. The moderator of that forum chimed in with the obvious. But, I am curious what other Objectivists still think of this concept. I am pretty sure it will be enacted pretty soon. Best of luck to you and the young ones in your families.
Years ago I asked on another Objectivist forum if the members were in favor of forced vaccination. At least half were, to my surprise. The moderator of that forum chimed in with the obvious. But, I am curious what other Objectivists still think of this concept. I am pretty sure it will be enacted pretty soon. Best of luck to you and the young ones in your families.
http://tinyurl.com/nonylpp
Is that not what government agencies are for? to weed out fact from fiction.
When we can no longer trust the government, the CDC,FDA, USDA, etc,etc, and the government resorts to force - that's a problem.
I don't think that's a right/left/other argument.
It's possible that one of those unvaccinated kids will infect my kids in a public place. That's a risk of living. Freedom isn't free. Part of liberty, IMHO, is the risk that someone else's choices might incur a cost on my family.
This is *not* excuse, IMHO, to force people to vaccinate. People who accept the current evidence on vaccines can simply send their kids to a school that requires vaccination.
A few notes about the matter.
1) The range of vaccinations is large. Are we talking MMR (Measles, Mumps, Rubella) and Tetanus, or are we expanding this into HPV and Flu? What about chicken pox? What about HIV or Hepatitis B (STD)? Where does government interference STOP once it gets started? (Answer: it never does. That should be proof enough for ANY Objectivist.)
2) What about the studies that show some of the mandated vaccinations are leading to higher rates of autism? What about other various health conditions that may be unknown at the time of the vaccination that are exacerbated by vaccination? There are other reasons to allow exemptions - not just for conscience reasons.
3) A vaccination does not preclude one from getting that disease, it just preps the body to fight it off more effectively. Vaccinations are huge improvements, but not guarantees.
4) I would be interested to see the rate of incidence of non-vaccinated individuals passing along disease to others. I'm betting this is a molehill issue - not a mountain one as is being portrayed in the media.
I am against ANY kind of government-mandated medical treatment. I voluntarily vaccinated my kids for the basics and would encourage others to do the same, but I will absolutely respect others' decisions and fight for their right to disagree. Until the State can show that the parents are unfit by virtue of abuse or severe neglect (starvation, etc.), they have no say whatsoever in the matter.
Setting aside the whole government school issue, I could imagine a private day-care center requiring vaccinations to have your children participate in their program.
On the other hand, I was very troubled by the idea that home schooled children were included.
So... given that, how many people are "threatening" to everyone else because they're not up to date? And, given that we're not all dying because everyone's out of date, does that raise the question in your mind of the necessity of vaccinations?
And with the majority of the population vaccinated, you are less likely to encounter the disease.
They call it 'herd immunity'. As a significant portion of the population is immunized the odds of encountering the disease goes down so the need for individual immunity lowers. To a degree, those who don't immunize themselves are 'mooching' off of the rest of us.
Our kids get sick, none of us go anywhere except me, who goes to work, only if I have no symptoms, and am able to avoid contact with others.
If parents weren't idiots, and didn't have to send their kids to kiddie prison for 7 hours a day so they could go to work to make more money to earn their big fancy house, drive their fancy car, and have their 82" TV, rather than taking primary responsibility for raising their family, then this whole discussion may just be a moot point.
If parents took responsibility for making sure their kids had sufficient nutrition, especially Omega 3 EPA/DHA and Vitamin D, then kids would be much less suceptible to viruses, etc.
Does that mean that my answer is better and everyone should do it? No. But it goes to show, the fact that my kids rarely get any of that crap, despite never getting the flu vaccine, and still being around other kids frequently at gymnastics, and a few days a week at church events, just shows that maybe there's other ways of doing this, and maybe vaccines aren't the full story for why these diseases have become rare. Herd immunity is a good word people use on this topic, and, personally, I think it's a load of crap. Herd immunity can be gained in other ways, and very well may have by the time these vaccines came out, through nutrition, increases in health care, recognition and awareness of symptoms, etc.
At the risk of being tagged with one of your all purpose catch phrases (public Petri dishes, kiddy prison) you make your decisions and I'll make mine. If your decisions commits your kids to kiddy home prison, that’s your decision. Make it and live with it. Quit your griping about something that is in the public good with, admittedly some bad results. Per Spock; "The good of the many outweighs the good of the few".
If it wasn’t for vaccinations we’d still have the worry and sometimes pain of polio, German measles, etc. Just because you disagree doesn't make me an irresponsible parent. That's just your opinion and like belly buttons, everyone has one.
Cars cause thousands of deaths every year. So should we protest against and ban them? Call them Urban Assault Vehicles? Tag anyone that drives irresponsible?
I personally think what our culture does today is asinine, but I don't go around like these liberals saying that everyone has to do it my way, even though I think it's best and see the benefits. Which brings me to the point about the whole vaccination thing, that these guys are doing, namely, "thou shalt or else".
By quoting Spock, are you saying his statement is correct?
I agree completely with the science, but mooching is too harsh a word. They're exercising their freedom to make bad decisions in a way that may possibly incur a cost to others. That's the price of liberty IMHO.
If we make the argument they should forgo their rights for our benefit, they can rightly see us as moochers.
This is another variation on the classic problem of free market solutions to problems that government is often used for. Another example would be a private police. If 90% of the people in a neighborhood pay for a police presence to protect them, the other 10% are made safer without expense.
Some deal with this issue by getting the government to force them to contribute. Obviously I don't like that answer.
Since I don't want to use gov't to force them to contribute, I view it as a cost of freedom, which as the cliche goes, isn't free.
Anyway, so glad you followed the truth!
BRAVO!
The last part of your comment is inspirational.
Thank you.
I would have liked to have heard your conversation... so he lost the debate.
You would seem to have an incredible courage.
I am glad that you found your way and was guided with the philosophy of Ayn Rand. What a beacon in the darkness.
However, our government has granted immunity to vaccine manufacturers from being sued since 1985. Those harmed by vaccines must go through a government-run special "vaccine injury court." Government lawyers (i.e., taxpayer-funded lawyers) defend the vaccines. The court's fund is composed of "taxes" paid by each person who receives a vaccine. Only a fraction of the people with vaccine damage ever receive compensation, and it often takes many years. This is crony capitalism as its most extreme.
For the government to first shield vaccine makers from normal liability, and then talk about mandating vaccines, can't be said to remotely resemble a free market. For those who acknowledged in the other post that Ann Marie Cox was wrong to use government to force people to behave a certain way, I hope they won't flip-flop on the issue of vaccines. Either Big Daddy government knows best... or else it doesn't.
Very interesting points.
I had no idea of this "underbelly" of the government/vaccine manufacturers...
Makes me think. If you mandate vaccines and there is a negative reaction, cripple, deform, compromised in any manner from ever being "normal", even death, then the government should have to compensate, period.
Some on this forum seem to think "the science is settled" on this issue, but I wonder how deeply they've looked into it themselves--not just taken the word of their pediatrician--but really, honestly looked into it. There is a woman named Barbara Loe Fisher, whose work on the issue is very thorough, and whose videos on the subject are seriously worth watching. This is her organization:
http://www.nvic.org/about/barbaraloefish...
Can ANYONE ELSE on the planet openly state that "Hey, we should go to Bob & Mary's house, take away their kids, and perform medical procedures on them" with immunity?
We know the answer, but...
Except.
Let's ask the kids too. A baby cannot make any valid decisions about his future - all he can do is drool. But a 14 year old kid can give input in a divorce case as to which parent he wants to live with and a girl who is under 18 can get pregnancy counseling without her parents' knowledge.
So I think that if EITHER the parent or the child want vaccination, then vaccination it is! If BOTH parent and child disdain vaccinations, then the only one who has a right to make them to do this is a group which has entrance requirements and which they freely decide they want to join.
Jan
They can suggest it, sure. But you cannot deny them. The ADA would have a field day with this one if it was related to disabled people.
I am biased in favor of vaccinations, but I draw the line at forcing people to have them. Schools are a hotbed of diseases and if there is no threshold for acceptance into them you fail at keeping contagious diseases from propagating through society.
Incidentally, this could also apply to 'work'. I do not know of any company outside of healthcare or biotech that requires vaccinations. Do you?
Jan
I don't know of any companies that require vaccinations. Except the military.
I thought of this on the way home: I don't have any children (and it is unlikely that would ever do this). Would you think that it would be fair for me to receive a school voucher? One that could be used for any government service, say?
Jan
I argued that for 20 years and never won it. Everyone seemed to be pretending not to understand my point!
Jan
Jan
Honestly we're getting to the point where we can educate children better than public schools can in 1/4 the time with online schools. Take classes at your local library if you have to if you don't have a computer, etc...
So, should you receive a school voucher? You shouldn't have to pay for schools to begin with. That's my take. Charities started schools long long ago to pay for the kids who couldn't afford it, and it worked remarkably well considering the limitations at the time.
One of the other considerations re not paying for schools is the difficulty in tracking. In order for me to legitimately not pay, the gov has to know who has kids and what ages they are...but we are pretty much 'there' anyway...
Jan
My future ex being a LPN helped--even encouraged the same child health protection outlook my parents had.
Every child deserves common sense protection from diseases.
I cannot comprehend the religious mindset of a parent who would not protect their kids from any given horrendous disease with a vaccination.
I'm a Christian, but I'm not going to handle a rattlesnake to prove it. Or put kids in jeopardy.
Being ordered to dope kids up with stuff like Ritalin is another subject.
Now I draw a line. Not an Obama line. A dino line.
That's assuming that we didn't have unvaccinated illegals streaming across the borders.
Now it's a heck of a lot more.
It would be ironic if the Dimocrap dream of one party rule touched off a pandemic far worse than the Bubonic Plague. .
I wear my seat belt too, because it is a good idea, but the seat belt law is stupid...except for minors.
Not sure about this one. Not getting vaccinated is dumb, and just puts more burden on others. Not sure about a law.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact...
Consistently amazed by the knee jerk hostility toward "illegals" from outside the US here in the Gulch, while more accurately questioning many "illegal" activities done here (in the US) - assuming not being done by an already "illegal".
With the hundreds of illegals infiltrating our borders from countries that do not have adequate possibilities for sufficient health care on any level much less in schools and you want to point a finger at some possibility of a "traveling rich kid"?
If your child was attending a school that had continuous arrivals during the year of "illegals" and there was an outbreak of something like measles or smallpox, you would concentrate on somebody's rich kid that travelled extensively? Really?
I don't see it as, and I quote you: "a knee-jerk" hostility toward 'illegals'... here in the Gulch", instead I consider the inclusion or mention of "illegals" as a primary and legitimate concern since they arrive from countries that do not have access to general vaccinations and these early age diseases are left to run their course in the general population. I would call this an obvious concern and intelligent assessment of the situation and not a "knee-jerk" reaction.
However, there are "exceptions" to any majority factor. On that I would agree.
the way the school operated my child would not be there. Poor premise.
Regardless based on actual facts the US immunization is no better:
From the link:
"Here’s how the countries compare to the United States over the four most recent years of data, according to the World Health Organization:
United States: 92 percent (2010); 92 (2011); 92 (2012); 91 (2013)
Mexico: 95 (2010); 98 (2011); 99 (2012); 89 (2013)
El Salvador: 92 (2010); 89 (2011); 93 (2012); 94 (2013)
Guatemala: 93 (2010); 89 (2011); 93 (2012); 85 (2013)
Honduras: 98 (2010); 95 (2011); 93 (2012); 89 (2013)
As you can see, in most years, the other countries had better vaccination rates than the United States, though there was a sudden decline in 2013 in every country but El Salvador. Still, these are fairly high vaccination rates, making it much less likely that illegal immigrants from these countries are a source of the outbreak. "
My example was hypothetical and in line with the discussion.
How am I to interpret your opening sentence, since you just stated, and I quote you, "Why would I put my child in a school with continuous arrivals of illegals?" Then do you have a problem with a school due to the fact it accepts illegals? So you would take your child out of a school that accepted illegals? Help me see my, as you state, "poor premise", so that I might understand your seeming contradictions.
Your statistics, while they are not current, do not pertain to the recent outbreaks. While the U.S. has almost eradicated certain of the childhood diseases in question, other countries (including those in your statistics) have not, especially among the poor (large part of population).
My issue with your previous comment, as I stated in my previous response, is that I do not agree that the mention of illegals by Gulch members is a "knee-jerk hostility towards illegals", as you state. Instead, I find most members comments on "illegals" pertinent to the issues at hand and confirmed by State and local communities around the U.S. (Even if the Federal Government tries to placate these statistics).
It is OK that we disagree.
After that it goes to the Assembly, who will pass it. So, for the first time in our history we will have REAL forced medical treatment in America. (not "suggested" or "required") Once this gets passed here in California get ready. Because, it's rolling east from here...
http://themomstreetjournal.com/2015/04/1...
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-bYAQ-ZZ...
I have been involved in the study of vaccines and developmental disorders for about a decade now. I've been involved, firsthand, in studies by the biggest developmental disorder research group in the world and have learned a great deal about vaccines. Let me tell you that a vast majority of people have absolutely no clue what they are talking about regarding vaccines - not a clue in the world. Frankly, it scares me to see that. What good is informed consent when nobody's informed?
So, start another thread to debate whether or not vaccines are completely safe and effective. This thread is about force, as applied by government, to subject citizens to medical treatment. If you think that deciding if your government should apply force depends on whether or not you agree with the premises...check your premises.
Thanks,,,
Your alternatives is to find a private school that doesn't require them, home school, or start your own private school which can advertise that vaccinations are not required -- if a lot of people agree with you, you'll have lots of students.
http://www.naturalnews.com/049320_Suzann...
Load more comments...