I think this might be fairly natural, since we've obviously evolved to lose most of our body hair. I don't think we'd last long 'in the wild' without wearing clothes.
In any case, the whole natural vs. artificial debate is doomed to failure, since humans are natural creatures and therefore anything they do is, by definition, just as natural as a bird building a nest.
That's NASA for you, they'll give anything a cool name even if they're not devices at all - just lumps of tungsten. And why tungsten anyway? One suspects that it's just because tungsten is cool.
A dictionary attack could probably crack that pretty easily
I think you get something like five shots at the icloud password before it's locked out. Dictionary attacks are overrated - I can't think off the top of my head of a single online service that will just let you hammer away with thousands of unsuccessful password attempts.
I'm going to assume that you're not a psycho, though your words suggest otherwise. I imagine that should the scenario you describe ever actually occur, you would be very far from 'happy' about 'unloading into them'. And of course, if they guy in question is cooling on your floor a pool of his own blood, then there isn't actually alot for the police to solve, is there? With guys like you, we hardly need cops at all.
This is so irrational. Do you seriously believe that those advocating compulsory vaccination believe that just because they want people to be given shots?
As has been explained in multiple posts, vaccination is not 100% effective and only works properly when more than a certain number of people have been vaccinated. Vaccines slow down diseases, and if enough people are protected in this way then the disease cannot spread. Vaccination is not 100% immunity.
You clearly have an opinion on this subject. Please try to turn it into an informed opinion by reading something on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius That person? Doesn't seem likely, also I can't find any citations for your claim. It seems extremely likely to be false. I hope she doesn't decide to sue you for slander (or libel, or defamation, or whatever it's called) because I expect you would lose.
He was such a mellow baby and he fell completely off the deep end for over a week
A whole week. Goodness.
RSVP now: Chicken Pox party at my place. Sometime during K-12.
Chicken Pox isn't on the schedule in NZ, where I live. My kids all got it. They were very very miserable for more than a week, and were left with a few scars too. But in your books, that's better than a week of misery to avoid many many different diseases (mostly much more unpleasant than Chicken Pox).
Other than that point, I agree with your other points.
1) They may understand their children well, however this doesn't make them experts in medical issues surrounding vaccinations.
2) Ok. Except that many of the results of those decisions may only occur later on in the child's life, when the parents may well be dead and gone.
3) This is also suspect. Parents love and care for their children enormously (or at least, the good ones do), however this is not the same as them having the most investment in their children's well-being. In the case of vaccinations it is the other children with whom they interact that have the greatest investment.
4) Ok. Except that the 'results' of that child may include increasing the likelihood of other people getting sick. Further those results may also effect other people in myriad ways, and the parents are not legally obligated to deal with all of these.
5) Quite.
Your premises are largely false, and thus so is your conclusion. This is also why parents who refuse medical care for their children because they want to pray the disease away, end up in jail.
No-ones suggesting that we push vaccinations on you. They're suggesting that they push it on your children, and they are further suggesting that they know better than you what's good for your children. And they are right.
They're just getting understandably irritated because you're not making any sense. Nothing personal, not intended as an insult, but your argument really doesn't make sense.
I think the problem is that you're looking at the outcome of someone else's argument, and then taking a step back in their reasoning, modifying their argument, and taking a giant step forwards to some absurd conclusion (forced sterilization, forced abortion) and then framing this as a rational rebuttal.
Sorry that was a bit of a run-on sentence, but I hope you get the drift.
if a) Vaccinations are effective... b)...but only if everyone has one c) Are safer overall than the diseases they prevent are all true, then requiring people to take vaccinations seems reasonable.
And most importantly, the above argument does not further imply that the government should forcibly sterilize people.
I'm pleased you made the right decision. We had all of our kids vaccinated and those shots *do* hurt. And you haven't taken a stupid risk.
I had whooping cough once, and I can very well understand how it can kill a young child.
Good luck with the rest of the parenting journey by the way - it is fairly hard but it's worth it. Also they will apparently take care of you when you're older, but I guess we'll have to wait and see how that one turns out.
Again, the logic, if there be any, is not coming through.
Please take a moment to read through many of the comments on this thread that answer your question, including the sibling comment to mine. In short though, the answer to your question "Is there something inherent in an unvaccinated child that makes them somehow dangerous to vaccinated children" in an unequivocal 'yes'.
Quite. Parents have already been severely punished for withholding vital medical care and praying for their child instead. I really don't see the distinction between this and withholding vaccines.
The only reason that smallpox was eradicated was that the vaccines were compulsory. Perhaps they should be again.
Why are people afraid of vaccinations? Where does the fear come from? It boils down to trusting an unknown party to do something with an unknown substance to your child. The actual effect is mostly invisible - there are no instant positive effects that can clearly be seen - superficially nothing changes. If you side with the science of the unknown party you are effectively positioned against the family.
No it doesn't. It boils down to wilful ignorance and a lack of education. It also boils down to taking a free ride on other people's vaccinations.
Our office burnt down recently. Turned out that the tape backups couldn't be read by any machine other than the one that was used to write them, since the heads were slightly out of alignment. Luckily although the tape machine was melted, the drives in the servers survived the fire (which started on the opposite side of the building).
So in an ideal world media is always compatible - sometimes things don't quite work out that way.
Slashdot Mirror
boon for the non obsessive-compulsive
FTFY.
Wearing clothes,
I think this might be fairly natural, since we've obviously evolved to lose most of our body hair. I don't think we'd last long 'in the wild' without wearing clothes.
In any case, the whole natural vs. artificial debate is doomed to failure, since humans are natural creatures and therefore anything they do is, by definition, just as natural as a bird building a nest.
“cruise balance mass devices.”
That's NASA for you, they'll give anything a cool name even if they're not devices at all - just lumps of tungsten. And why tungsten anyway? One suspects that it's just because tungsten is cool.
A dictionary attack could probably crack that pretty easily
I think you get something like five shots at the icloud password before it's locked out. Dictionary attacks are overrated - I can't think off the top of my head of a single online service that will just let you hammer away with thousands of unsuccessful password attempts.
Should everyone be allowed to drive cars?
No.
and I'll happily unload into them
I'm going to assume that you're not a psycho, though your words suggest otherwise. I imagine that should the scenario you describe ever actually occur, you would be very far from 'happy' about 'unloading into them'.
And of course, if they guy in question is cooling on your floor a pool of his own blood, then there isn't actually alot for the police to solve, is there? With guys like you, we hardly need cops at all.
The colorado shooter would have killed people even if he had to grind up the potassium nitrate and charcoal himself to make primitive hand grenades.
Doubtful. More likely he would have blown his own arms off.
...for every nonexistent Yorkshire Terrier I'd had to chase out of my back garden I'd have millions.
Worse even than that, are the sites that insist on pimping their app before they'll let you through to their site. IMDB, for instance.
Sophisticated troll?
This is so irrational. Do you seriously believe that those advocating compulsory vaccination believe that just because they want people to be given shots?
As has been explained in multiple posts, vaccination is not 100% effective and only works properly when more than a certain number of people have been vaccinated. Vaccines slow down diseases, and if enough people are protected in this way then the disease cannot spread. Vaccination is not 100% immunity.
You clearly have an opinion on this subject. Please try to turn it into an informed opinion by reading something on the subject.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kathleen_Sebelius
That person? Doesn't seem likely, also I can't find any citations for your claim. It seems extremely likely to be false. I hope she doesn't decide to sue you for slander (or libel, or defamation, or whatever it's called) because I expect you would lose.
He was such a mellow baby and he fell completely off the deep end for over a week
A whole week. Goodness.
RSVP now: Chicken Pox party at my place. Sometime during K-12.
Chicken Pox isn't on the schedule in NZ, where I live. My kids all got it. They were very very miserable for more than a week, and were left with a few scars too. But in your books, that's better than a week of misery to avoid many many different diseases (mostly much more unpleasant than Chicken Pox).
Other than that point, I agree with your other points.
1) They may understand their children well, however this doesn't make them experts in medical issues surrounding vaccinations.
2) Ok. Except that many of the results of those decisions may only occur later on in the child's life, when the parents may well be dead and gone.
3) This is also suspect. Parents love and care for their children enormously (or at least, the good ones do), however this is not the same as them having the most investment in their children's well-being. In the case of vaccinations it is the other children with whom they interact that have the greatest investment.
4) Ok. Except that the 'results' of that child may include increasing the likelihood of other people getting sick. Further those results may also effect other people in myriad ways, and the parents are not legally obligated to deal with all of these.
5) Quite.
Your premises are largely false, and thus so is your conclusion. This is also why parents who refuse medical care for their children because they want to pray the disease away, end up in jail.
No-ones suggesting that we push vaccinations on you. They're suggesting that they push it on your children, and they are further suggesting that they know better than you what's good for your children. And they are right.
I don't know - is there a gun in the glovebox of your car metaphor?
Why yes, that's exactly what he means.
Now, when did you say you were leaving?
They're just getting understandably irritated because you're not making any sense. Nothing personal, not intended as an insult, but your argument really doesn't make sense.
I think the problem is that you're looking at the outcome of someone else's argument, and then taking a step back in their reasoning, modifying their argument, and taking a giant step forwards to some absurd conclusion (forced sterilization, forced abortion) and then framing this as a rational rebuttal.
Sorry that was a bit of a run-on sentence, but I hope you get the drift.
if ...but only if everyone has one
a) Vaccinations are effective...
b)
c) Are safer overall than the diseases they prevent
are all true, then requiring people to take vaccinations seems reasonable.
And most importantly, the above argument does not further imply that the government should forcibly sterilize people.
Do you see?
I'm pleased you made the right decision. We had all of our kids vaccinated and those shots *do* hurt. And you haven't taken a stupid risk.
I had whooping cough once, and I can very well understand how it can kill a young child.
Good luck with the rest of the parenting journey by the way - it is fairly hard but it's worth it. Also they will apparently take care of you when you're older, but I guess we'll have to wait and see how that one turns out.
Please don't derail the discussion by bring up gun ownership.
Again, the logic, if there be any, is not coming through.
Please take a moment to read through many of the comments on this thread that answer your question, including the sibling comment to mine. In short though, the answer to your question "Is there something inherent in an unvaccinated child that makes them somehow dangerous to vaccinated children" in an unequivocal 'yes'.
Quite. Parents have already been severely punished for withholding vital medical care and praying for their child instead. I really don't see the distinction between this and withholding vaccines.
The only reason that smallpox was eradicated was that the vaccines were compulsory. Perhaps they should be again.
Why are people afraid of vaccinations? Where does the fear come from? It boils down to trusting an unknown party to do something with an unknown substance to your child. The actual effect is mostly invisible - there are no instant positive effects that can clearly be seen - superficially nothing changes. If you side with the science of the unknown party you are effectively positioned against the family.
No it doesn't. It boils down to wilful ignorance and a lack of education. It also boils down to taking a free ride on other people's vaccinations.
Our office burnt down recently. Turned out that the tape backups couldn't be read by any machine other than the one that was used to write them, since the heads were slightly out of alignment. Luckily although the tape machine was melted, the drives in the servers survived the fire (which started on the opposite side of the building).
So in an ideal world media is always compatible - sometimes things don't quite work out that way.
do I just use my third hand ...?
That's not a hand...