If you refuse to bathe your children, they could be taken from you, worldview be damned.
There is nothing harmful from taking a bath... there are no people running around saying, "don't take baths, you could end up sick or worse!"
If you choose to feed your children raw foods that are full of bacteria, they could be taken from you.
What, like raw milk? That is a sorry state of affairs that the government wants to try and ban stuff like that. While I don't care for it personally, people have been drinking it since the dawn of time.
Ok, something less out there... How about an apple? That is a raw food full of bacteria... or a watermellon, those are loaded with bacteria...
You cannot engage in harmful behavior affecting your own children or behavior that has negative consequences for everyone else, which is what refusing to be vaccinated does.
How about parents who let their kids watch TV 8 hours a day and don't teach them anything? That is harmful to society when they grow up to be unproductive members of society collecting welfare checks.
Perhaps we need government mandates of how long kids can watch TV before they are "made" to go play outside?
You cannot engage in harmful behavior affecting your own children or behavior that has negative consequences for everyone else, which is what refusing to be vaccinated does.
I'm well aware that Jenny McCarthy is an idiot who shouldn't be listened to...
That doesn't invalidate the concerns over all medication that has various side effects...
I have no problem taking medicine when it is needed, but I think we way over medicate people in this county, just look at the liberal use of antibiotics...
Or worse, the use of drugs like Ritalin and Lithium in our kids...
Parents that choose to not have their children vaccinated despite mountains of evidence that vaccines are safe and effective are being reckless.
Mountains of evidence, eh? So that is why there is a federal government program to compensate victims of vaccines? Without it, drug companies wouldn't even make them and the production would have to be nationalized because they don't want the risk or liability?
I suppose you also think parents who don't take their kids to see a doctor are also "reckless" and should have their kids taken away from them?
Perhaps the government should start requiring X amount of hours of reading every day, or kids must eat 5 apples a week, or you lose them.
Where does it stop?
---
Short of physical abuse, how a parent raises their children is up to that parent. Good or bad, the very LAST people who should have a say is any government. The risk of a few kids being raised poorly is minor compared to the risk that the government starts issuing child licenses and taking mass numbers of kids away.
Do I think parents who let their kids watch TV all day suck? Yes I do... but I don't think I should tell them how to be parents.
If you choose as an adult to not get vaccinated, that is your choice but that doesn't mean the rest of us should have to suffer because of your choice.
Well, you're just going to have to deal with it then, won't you?
The grand irony is that you want to force kids who go to public schools to get vaccinated, yet even if you win, your kids will be at the mall, on airplanes, at the movies, with both kids and adults who have not been vaccinated.
You're suggesting a solution that doesn't actually accomplish much, gives the government lots more power, infringes on other people's religious freedoms, and for what? So you "feel better"?
Unless you are a doctor, or epidemiologist, what you're really saying is you want to argue that your uneducated opinion is as valid as centuries of medical knowledge.
I don't, for one second, think my opinions carry the same weight or are as valid as the doctors at the CDC.
I respect the work they do, I'm quite sure they are no fools.
But at the end of the day, I have the freedom to choose my own health care, if I don't want to go to the doctor when I'm sick, that is my right.
Why are all of you in such a hurry to hand more power over to a large government that will just use it against you? Do none of you study history?
The problem is that parents can simply fill out an exception form in lieu of getting their kids vaccinated, and that's what needs to be done away with.
No, it shouldn't... and if you don't understand why, then you're the one who needs to study some history...
You want to hand over to government the power to forcibly inject whatever they want into all kids. That is all kinds of stupid...
The irony is, I'm vaccinated and I get the point of them, but that isn't the government's choice to make... Just because people want it in large numbers, doesn't matter... We don't live by mob rule, yet you want it...
The only reason on the exception form should be if they can't get the vaccine for medical reasons (e.g. allergic to it), which must be accompanied by a physician's signature (a real physician, not a naturopath or chiropractor).
"A Jehovahâ(TM)s witness died shortly after giving birth to twins because her faith prevented her from having a blood transfusion.
Emma Gough, 22, began haemorrhaging but because her beliefs did not allow her to receive blood she slipped into unconsciousness and died.
As she suffered severe blood loss and her life ebbed away, medical staff urged her husband, Anthony, and her parents, all of whom follow the same faith, to overrule her decision and allow a transfusion which could have saved her, but they refused."
Would you suggest the government should forcibly have given her a blood transfusion anyway? Jehovah's Witnesses aren't a "new" religion, their beliefs are well known.
I hate to break it to you, but the courts have been ruling in favor of religion... While I'll personally go to the doctor, I respect your right not to. Why do you think you should be able to tell someone they have to?
The argument for vaccines is that the benefits outweigh the risks. That's a good argument for taking them. It's questionable that it's a good argument for forcing people to take them.
This right here should win the thread...
Many things are good for you... this does not follow that you should be MADE TO DO THEM AGAINST YOUR WILL...
Look at New York City and the law for the size of sodas... it is a very well intentioned idea that is simply the wrong way to run a government... and it was thrown out by the courts, as it should have been...
Freedom and liberty include the right to make poor decisions...
I'm willing to compromise, however. Don't vaccinate your kids, and they are not allowed in a school, daycare, public park or anywhere else where they may come into contact with other children.
Compromise? A public park?
What is so sad is that you were marked insightful, and your post is anything but...
Perhaps we should put a special mark on kids who haven't been injected with this crap? Maybe a yellow star on their clothes?
Do you REALLY know nothing of history? No threat of polio or measles is nearly as much of a threat as a government that you're asking for.
I don't want unvaccinated kids in my child's daycare, preschool or school. The government mandates that I take my child to school, and I have every right to expect that her safety is taken care of. That includes the threat of unvaccinated children.
The government mandates that you provide for your children's education, not that you send them to a school.
If you don't like it, you're free to homeschool your kids.
You are trying to place your burden on other people, but you have it backwards.
Personally, i think kids not vaccinated for deadly or dehabilitating diseases should be bared from attending public schools.
Yea, but you can't do that... first, since education is required (for obvious reasons), if you bar children from public school, you'd then have to pay for them to go to private school. Just imagine the uproar from the teachers unions over that!:)
But i do not support the government forcing anyone to take any medication.
Agreed, that is evil and a path that we do NOT want to go down...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something very strange happening with allergies. I've just hit 30 and when I was a kid nut allergies were virtually unheard of, nothing was done by society to control the risks, nut free food plants didn't exist (or were at best vanishingly rare). Now ~20 years later nut warning information is everywhere, nut free plants are common, schools and other institutes have policies and processes in place, airlines have nut allergy policies etc.
Either nut allergies are a lot more common, or its become a lot more common to think you have an allergy.
The latter, I think... but I really have no idea, so I make no claims...
What I WILL say is that I think this is turning back the other way... My kid's private school has reintroduced peanut butter, a totally forbidden food up until this school year. They sent letters home letting parents know and that for any kids who really do have an allergy, precautions would be taken, but since peanut butter is high in protein and a generally healthy food, it was considered a good way to bring more nutrition back into school.
I wrote the school back a letter and thanked them for doing so and being brave enough to take it on. Several other parents did as well.
And those are open to medical exceptions. What doesn't make sense is some ignorant parent who heard Blond Actor #20 say that vax r badxors run away run away! Said actor has no expertise yet the ignorant parent will potentially let his or other parents children die of measles based on hearsay from a very questionable source. That's what people are pissed about.
While that is a fair point... and yes, that blond actress doesn't in fact know what she is talking about (Jenny, we're looking at you)...
The fact is, you do not want government getting into this... freedom to make your own choices and freedom of religion is FAR more important...
History is filled with examples of what happens when you go down the other path... That is why freedom of religion is written right into our Constitution.
Then let each doctor give out some VERY limited # of vaccination excuse letters, and keep track of them.. (So someone can't go doctor shopping for a quack who happened to actually get an M.D.)
You don't understand, a letter from the doctor is not required...
Simple a signed statement of faith that due to personal beliefs, the parents do not wish to vaccinate their children...
You actually can't require a doctor be involved, due to the fact that some religions don't believe in doctors...
The only negative impact I can see to vaccination is taking away the ability of a parent to send an un-vaccinated child to school. That is a very small price to pay for herd immunity.
Sure, if you're prepared to pay for them to be home schooled, fair enough...
But we all pay taxes to have a public education system, and that system has to accommodate all sorts of kids, including those from parents who don't want to vaccinate their kids.
Not sending your children to school can land you in jail or have them taken from you for neglect. Why not vaccines.
Neither should...
If you want to home school your children, that is a parent's right.
As for vaccines, you REALLY don't want to get into the business of having the government forcible inject stuff into everyone. A very shallow study of history will tell you why that is a REALLY bad idea...
The really sad thing is that people will post back and forth about this change and that change that we should make.
Close coal power plants, build more electric cars, install more LED light bulbs...
None of it matters... not a single bit of it...
Why? Because over the next 30 years, the four nations that make up BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) will increase their output by about as much as the US produces today.
---
The United States of America could cut our output by 100%, we could all go back into caves... and it wouldn't make any difference, in 30 years our entire output will be replaced by other people.
---
The only real possible solutions are those that work worldwide, it doesn't take very many people ignoring them to make the entire effort pointless.
---
I'm open to suggestions that actually might lower the global total output by 50% over the next 50 years... Not reduce the increase, but actually lower the global total from today.
Because if you aren't reducing the global total, then you're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic...
Slashdot Mirror
If you refuse to bathe your children, they could be taken from you, worldview be damned.
There is nothing harmful from taking a bath... there are no people running around saying, "don't take baths, you could end up sick or worse!"
If you choose to feed your children raw foods that are full of bacteria, they could be taken from you.
What, like raw milk? That is a sorry state of affairs that the government wants to try and ban stuff like that. While I don't care for it personally, people have been drinking it since the dawn of time.
Ok, something less out there... How about an apple? That is a raw food full of bacteria... or a watermellon, those are loaded with bacteria...
You cannot engage in harmful behavior affecting your own children or behavior that has negative consequences for everyone else, which is what refusing to be vaccinated does.
How about parents who let their kids watch TV 8 hours a day and don't teach them anything? That is harmful to society when they grow up to be unproductive members of society collecting welfare checks.
Perhaps we need government mandates of how long kids can watch TV before they are "made" to go play outside?
You cannot engage in harmful behavior affecting your own children or behavior that has negative consequences for everyone else, which is what refusing to be vaccinated does.
I'm well aware that Jenny McCarthy is an idiot who shouldn't be listened to...
That doesn't invalidate the concerns over all medication that has various side effects...
I have no problem taking medicine when it is needed, but I think we way over medicate people in this county, just look at the liberal use of antibiotics...
Or worse, the use of drugs like Ritalin and Lithium in our kids...
Parents that choose to not have their children vaccinated despite mountains of evidence that vaccines are safe and effective are being reckless.
Mountains of evidence, eh? So that is why there is a federal government program to compensate victims of vaccines? Without it, drug companies wouldn't even make them and the production would have to be nationalized because they don't want the risk or liability?
I suppose you also think parents who don't take their kids to see a doctor are also "reckless" and should have their kids taken away from them?
Perhaps the government should start requiring X amount of hours of reading every day, or kids must eat 5 apples a week, or you lose them.
Where does it stop?
---
Short of physical abuse, how a parent raises their children is up to that parent. Good or bad, the very LAST people who should have a say is any government. The risk of a few kids being raised poorly is minor compared to the risk that the government starts issuing child licenses and taking mass numbers of kids away.
Do I think parents who let their kids watch TV all day suck? Yes I do... but I don't think I should tell them how to be parents.
If you choose as an adult to not get vaccinated, that is your choice but that doesn't mean the rest of us should have to suffer because of your choice.
Well, you're just going to have to deal with it then, won't you?
The grand irony is that you want to force kids who go to public schools to get vaccinated, yet even if you win, your kids will be at the mall, on airplanes, at the movies, with both kids and adults who have not been vaccinated.
You're suggesting a solution that doesn't actually accomplish much, gives the government lots more power, infringes on other people's religious freedoms, and for what? So you "feel better"?
Really?
Actually no, we all pay taxes for things we choose not to use.
Ahh, but the government also says that you HAVE to educate your children...
You can't both require kids to be educated then refuse to educate them.
You draw the line where it is obvious that the benefit far outweighs the risk.
My freedom of religion overrides that...
Or how about the third choice, raise them as we see fit.
What you're really saying is that you wish to impose your worldview on everyone else.
ISIS is calling and would like to talk to you, they are doing just that in the parts of Iraq they control.
You have NO idea, do you, of the insanity that you're actually suggesting?
Unless you are a doctor, or epidemiologist, what you're really saying is you want to argue that your uneducated opinion is as valid as centuries of medical knowledge.
I don't, for one second, think my opinions carry the same weight or are as valid as the doctors at the CDC.
I respect the work they do, I'm quite sure they are no fools.
But at the end of the day, I have the freedom to choose my own health care, if I don't want to go to the doctor when I'm sick, that is my right.
Why are all of you in such a hurry to hand more power over to a large government that will just use it against you? Do none of you study history?
The problem is that parents can simply fill out an exception form in lieu of getting their kids vaccinated, and that's what needs to be done away with.
No, it shouldn't... and if you don't understand why, then you're the one who needs to study some history...
You want to hand over to government the power to forcibly inject whatever they want into all kids. That is all kinds of stupid...
The irony is, I'm vaccinated and I get the point of them, but that isn't the government's choice to make... Just because people want it in large numbers, doesn't matter... We don't live by mob rule, yet you want it...
The only reason on the exception form should be if they can't get the vaccine for medical reasons (e.g. allergic to it), which must be accompanied by a physician's signature (a real physician, not a naturopath or chiropractor).
What about kids who don't go to the doctor?
http://scienceblogs.com/insole...
"A Jehovahâ(TM)s witness died shortly after giving birth to twins because her faith prevented her from having a blood transfusion.
Emma Gough, 22, began haemorrhaging but because her beliefs did not allow her to receive blood she slipped into unconsciousness and died.
As she suffered severe blood loss and her life ebbed away, medical staff urged her husband, Anthony, and her parents, all of whom follow the same faith, to overrule her decision and allow a transfusion which could have saved her, but they refused."
Would you suggest the government should forcibly have given her a blood transfusion anyway? Jehovah's Witnesses aren't a "new" religion, their beliefs are well known.
---
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C...
I hate to break it to you, but the courts have been ruling in favor of religion... While I'll personally go to the doctor, I respect your right not to. Why do you think you should be able to tell someone they have to?
The argument for vaccines is that the benefits outweigh the risks. That's a good argument for taking them. It's questionable that it's a good argument for forcing people to take them.
This right here should win the thread...
Many things are good for you... this does not follow that you should be MADE TO DO THEM AGAINST YOUR WILL...
Look at New York City and the law for the size of sodas... it is a very well intentioned idea that is simply the wrong way to run a government... and it was thrown out by the courts, as it should have been...
Freedom and liberty include the right to make poor decisions...
I'm willing to compromise, however. Don't vaccinate your kids, and they are not allowed in a school, daycare, public park or anywhere else where they may come into contact with other children.
Compromise? A public park?
What is so sad is that you were marked insightful, and your post is anything but...
Perhaps we should put a special mark on kids who haven't been injected with this crap? Maybe a yellow star on their clothes?
Do you REALLY know nothing of history? No threat of polio or measles is nearly as much of a threat as a government that you're asking for.
I don't want unvaccinated kids in my child's daycare, preschool or school. The government mandates that I take my child to school, and I have every right to expect that her safety is taken care of. That includes the threat of unvaccinated children.
The government mandates that you provide for your children's education, not that you send them to a school.
If you don't like it, you're free to homeschool your kids.
You are trying to place your burden on other people, but you have it backwards.
Personally, i think kids not vaccinated for deadly or dehabilitating diseases should be bared from attending public schools.
Yea, but you can't do that... first, since education is required (for obvious reasons), if you bar children from public school, you'd then have to pay for them to go to private school. Just imagine the uproar from the teachers unions over that! :)
But i do not support the government forcing anyone to take any medication.
Agreed, that is evil and a path that we do NOT want to go down...
It doesn't take a rocket scientist to see that something very strange happening with allergies. I've just hit 30 and when I was a kid nut allergies were virtually unheard of, nothing was done by society to control the risks, nut free food plants didn't exist (or were at best vanishingly rare). Now ~20 years later nut warning information is everywhere, nut free plants are common, schools and other institutes have policies and processes in place, airlines have nut allergy policies etc.
Either nut allergies are a lot more common, or its become a lot more common to think you have an allergy.
The latter, I think... but I really have no idea, so I make no claims...
What I WILL say is that I think this is turning back the other way... My kid's private school has reintroduced peanut butter, a totally forbidden food up until this school year. They sent letters home letting parents know and that for any kids who really do have an allergy, precautions would be taken, but since peanut butter is high in protein and a generally healthy food, it was considered a good way to bring more nutrition back into school.
I wrote the school back a letter and thanked them for doing so and being brave enough to take it on. Several other parents did as well.
And those are open to medical exceptions. What doesn't make sense is some ignorant parent who heard Blond Actor #20 say that vax r badxors run away run away! Said actor has no expertise yet the ignorant parent will potentially let his or other parents children die of measles based on hearsay from a very questionable source. That's what people are pissed about.
While that is a fair point... and yes, that blond actress doesn't in fact know what she is talking about (Jenny, we're looking at you)...
The fact is, you do not want government getting into this... freedom to make your own choices and freedom of religion is FAR more important...
History is filled with examples of what happens when you go down the other path... That is why freedom of religion is written right into our Constitution.
Then let each doctor give out some VERY limited # of vaccination excuse letters, and keep track of them.. (So someone can't go doctor shopping for a quack who happened to actually get an M.D.)
You don't understand, a letter from the doctor is not required...
Simple a signed statement of faith that due to personal beliefs, the parents do not wish to vaccinate their children...
You actually can't require a doctor be involved, due to the fact that some religions don't believe in doctors...
Well, many people choose alternative medicine, such as fruit juice diet, to "treat" their cancer. The outcome is always predictable.
Such actions cannot be prevented because there are many causes. Ignorance, marketing, stupidity, desperation are just a few.
Perhaps one of the causes is: "I don't want to go through all the cancer treatment, and this will either work or it won't, and I'm ok with that..."
Some people would rather die than go through cancer treatment. That is their right.
If it was provable, maybe not getting vaccinated and spreading diseases could lead to civil or criminal negligence charges.
You and Hitler would get along just fine... that line of thinking is pure evil...
more responsible and community spirited parents had their children vaccinated.
Keep in mind that when you phrase it like that, you shut down all dialog...
You're putting out there a statement that says that any parent who doesn't vaccinate is not responsible.
There is no where to go with the conversation, you've already insulted the other side.
The only negative impact I can see to vaccination is taking away the ability of a parent to send an un-vaccinated child to school. That is a very small price to pay for herd immunity.
Sure, if you're prepared to pay for them to be home schooled, fair enough...
But we all pay taxes to have a public education system, and that system has to accommodate all sorts of kids, including those from parents who don't want to vaccinate their kids.
Not sending your children to school can land you in jail or have them taken from you for neglect. Why not vaccines.
Neither should...
If you want to home school your children, that is a parent's right.
As for vaccines, you REALLY don't want to get into the business of having the government forcible inject stuff into everyone. A very shallow study of history will tell you why that is a REALLY bad idea...
Again, why would a company that is increasing making a larger percentage of its sales outside the U.S. want to be part of that?
China and India are going to be far larger markets in the long run, do we really want to be pushed aside faster?
I know a lot of Americans think we're the center of the world, but we really aren't.
It will? I didn't read anything about the law requiring US corporations to reinvest in jobs and infrastructure.
In fact, what I read is that Obama thinks that if Apple builds an iPad in China and sells it in Australia, that the U.S. government should get a cut.
Why would Apple which to be a US corporation at that point?
What exactly is their "fair share"?
That term doesn't actually say anything, other than perhaps warm fuzzy feelings...
So if Apple builds iPads in China and sells them in Australia, you think the U.S. Government should get a cut?
If so, why would Apple want to remain a U.S. based company again?
The really sad thing is that people will post back and forth about this change and that change that we should make.
Close coal power plants, build more electric cars, install more LED light bulbs...
None of it matters... not a single bit of it...
Why? Because over the next 30 years, the four nations that make up BRIC (Brazil, Russia, India, China) will increase their output by about as much as the US produces today.
---
The United States of America could cut our output by 100%, we could all go back into caves... and it wouldn't make any difference, in 30 years our entire output will be replaced by other people.
---
The only real possible solutions are those that work worldwide, it doesn't take very many people ignoring them to make the entire effort pointless.
---
I'm open to suggestions that actually might lower the global total output by 50% over the next 50 years... Not reduce the increase, but actually lower the global total from today.
Because if you aren't reducing the global total, then you're just rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic...
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/E...
How many PDAs were sold in the 90s? How many iPads did Apple sell last MONTH?
How many Android tablets were sold last WEEK?
The Newton was a nice idea, but the wrong product at the wrong time. 13 years later, it was ready... called the iPad, and a wild success...
And to be clear, the smartphone and the tablet are really the same thing, in different sizes...