Gay Marriage vs. Vaccination

[shadow]

And the measles vaccine isn't harmful and dangerous.

Along those same lines, the measles virus isn't harmful or dangerous.
But injuries and in rare instances death occurs from having the measles.
But according to Merck, the manufacturer of the MMR, the vaccine can cause injuries and in rare instances even death. That's on the vaccine label. Yep, it even says death. Your doctor is supposed to go over that with you.

I'm not sure why you say the vaccine isn't harmful and dangerous when the vaccine label lists almost two pages of negative side effects.

[KMCopeland]

KMC, if you want to mandate vaccination to reduce disease then why not mandate male circumcision as that reduces disease spread as well?

Oh for heaven's sake fiannan. Do you have a one-track mind or what.

[samizdat]

I don't think anyone should use physical force on anyone's children to make them get vaccinations. I do think there's a good constitutional argument for not allowing them to attend school without vaccinations, because it protects other people from the diseases they may spread around if they are un-vaccinated.

This makes sense.

No it does not. You are still saying nonvaccinated spreading a diseases to vaccinated. Which can't happen. They could only spread to other non vaccinated kids. And that would be there choice.

But if you look at other country's that don't have or force vaccinations. They have had the same decline in disease as the vaccinated country's dew to normal human immunities that have build up as a normal coarse of nature. Survival of the fittest.

So it dosent make much sense to discriminate aginst those who choose not to pump Mercury and other weird non natural substances into their children at a young age tell they are old enough to make their own choices about getting the shots or not.

Non-vax can spread a disease to an already-vax. It doesn't happen very often < 10 percent. But it can happen. I like my odds of 95 percent protection over 0 percent protection. And where I live vaccines are free, another aspect in favor that doesn't really exist in the states.

But that is my personal choice. To each their own. But I do say this: Don't vaccinate before the recommended age and don't make the dosings too close. And avoid flu shots like the plague.

[Ezra]

So if already vac can get a disease from a non vac then they could get the disease from a vac person who got the disease.

Let's say a vac person Travels to another country and gets a diease and brings it back. Spreads it to other vac people.

If this is a possibility. Then why not make all travel from one country to another illegal as it could thwart the efforts of the vaccinations anyways.

That way everyone can sleep at night knowing that they will never get a disease.

Crap let's make it to where no one can travel state to state. Protect everyone.


If it's not limited to non vac people spreading disease. Just how far should we go in taking away freedoms to ensure others won't get sick?

And is it worth it if 100% garentees of no diease means that you have no medical choices would you do it?

[samizdat]

So if already vac can get a disease from a non vac then they could get the disease from a vac person who got the disease.

Let's say a vac person Travels to another country and gets a diease and brings it back. Spreads it to other vac people.

If this is a possibility. Then why not make all travel from one country to another illegal as it could thwart the efforts of the vaccinations anyways.

That way everyone can sleep at night knowing that they will never get a disease.

Crap let's make it to where no one can travel state to state. Protect everyone.


If it's not limited to non vac people spreading disease. Just how far should we go in taking away freedoms to ensure others won't get sick?

And is it worth it if 100% garentees of no diease means that you have no medical choices would you do it?

Countries already prohibit travel from country to country if you don't have the proper vaccinations.

The MTC mind you the MTC vaccinates people that haven't had the proper vaccionations BECAUSE THE COUNTRIES REQUIRE IT FOR ANYONE COMING THERE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

If you want to kill missionary work outside of the USA, don't vaccinate.

And in Mexico we have experience with this with the Swine Flu. There was virtual martial law declared when the Swine Flu Epidemic happened 6 years ago, in Mexico City. Two weeks later the problem was solved. They went to martial law because the people didn't understand what to do.

If only the people understood what to do the government wouldn't come swooping in like it does. Knowledge is power.

[davedan]

Vaccines: You should not be forced to take a vaccine if you don't want to.

The "Herd Immunity" argument is not consistent with a free society. If I desire to be immune to a particular disease, then I am free to vaccinate. If I want to assure myself that I am immune, then instead of worrying that my neighbors are or are not also vaccinated, I can have titers checked to varify the level of immunity like what we do with Hepititis B.

Gay Marriage: Civil Union should grant all the tax, medical, insurance, inheritance, benefits and penalties of any other couple.

What sets civil union apart from marriage is a licence to biologically create children. Traditional marriage is a fundamental civil rights issue. Every child is entitled to a full genetic endowment from both a male and female.

[KMCopeland]

So if already vac can get a disease from a non vac then they could get the disease from a vac person who got the disease.

Theoretically. And the probability is remote. Vaccinations are about reducing the probability of outbreaks. They have done that beautifully. They still can.

And is it worth it if 100% garentees of no diease means that you have no medical choices would you do it?

No one wants to take away your medical choices. Your freedom to catch an almost totally preventable disease, and to make it more likely your kids will, is intact. I just don't quite understand why you'd exercise it.


I've been reading about the mercury/thimerosol thing. About the claims that vaccines cause autism. My heart goes out to people whose kids were diagnosed with autism after they'd gotten vaccinated. But I'm sure neither thing is a legitimate concern. It isn't that they couldn't be legitimate concerns -- they could be. But I've read it carefully. Several times. From different sources so I could understand all the arguments. I'm pretty sure the measles vaccine is safe, and I think responsible parents should have their kids vaccinated for it.

[JohnnyL]

Non-vax can spread a disease to an already-vax. It doesn't happen very often < 10 percent. But it can happen. I like my odds of 95 percent protection over 0 percent protection. And where I live vaccines are free, another aspect in favor that doesn't really exist in the states.

But that is my personal choice. To each their own. But I do say this: Don't vaccinate before the recommended age and don't make the dosings too close. And avoid flu shots like the plague.

And vaccinated people can spread a disease to anyone. :-\

[Fiannan]

KMC, if you want to mandate vaccination to reduce disease then why not mandate male circumcision as that reduces disease spread as well?

Oh for heaven's sake fiannan. Do you have a one-track mind or what.

KMC, just remember, Obama's father was a Sunni Muslim, as was his step-father.

Oh, and the Bible says it is an everlasting covenant...

My point is that if you say a person should be forced to get vaccination to reduce the spread of disease then why not make it law that all boys upon birth be circumcised? A case could be made that this procedure is far less intrusive than forcing someone to inject something into their blood stream.

[JohnnyL]

KMC, if you want to mandate vaccination to reduce disease then why not mandate male circumcision as that reduces disease spread as well?

Oh for heaven's sake fiannan. Do you have a one-track mind or what.

KMC, just remember, Obama's father was a Sunni Muslim, as was his step-father.

Oh, and the Bible says it is an everlasting covenant...

My point is that if you say a person should be forced to get vaccination to reduce the spread of disease then why not make it law that all boys upon birth be circumcised? A case could be made that this procedure is far less intrusive than forcing someone to inject something into their blood stream.

Fiannan's point is certainly valid. Try to fight the argument on principle. What are the principles, esp. in the Constitution?

And we circle back, yet again, once more, to government's role in freedom vs. societal safety.

[KMCopeland]

KMC, if you want to mandate vaccination to reduce disease then why not mandate male circumcision as that reduces disease spread as well?

Oh for heaven's sake fiannan. Do you have a one-track mind or what.

KMC, just remember, Obama's father was a Sunni Muslim, as was his step-father.

Which has exactly what to do with what?

Oh, and the Bible says it is an everlasting covenant...

The Bible says a lot of things.

My point is that if you say a person should be forced to get vaccination to reduce the spread of disease then why not make it law that all boys upon birth be circumcised?

Because a lack of circumcision doesn't endanger the public health. Because there's no vaccination to protect you from not being circumcised. We're also not likely to have a worldwide epidemic of deadly non-circumcision. Also I have never said a person should be forced to get a vaccination. I have said it seems fair to require it before you can enroll your kids in school.

A case could be made that this procedure is far less intrusive than forcing someone to inject something into their blood stream.

It would be a very weak case. Then there's the fact that nobody is advocating forcing someone to inject something into their bloodstream.


There isn't a case to be made for or against circumcision because it's just like the vaccination/non-vaccination debate Fiannan. I could argue with you that you can't catch non-circumcision from someone who isn't circumcised like you can catch highly contagious diseases like measles, and you're going to bring up the fact that partners of the uncircumcised have higher rates of this or that, it's barely germane to the vaccination discussion, and it will be a yucky conversation. If it's all the same to you, I think I'd rather not.

[JohnnyL]

As an atheist put it:

"It turns out that death and disability from many childhood diseases is preventable by means other than vaccination. Vitamin A has been known since the 1930s to reduce mortality from measles by 60 percent. Vitamin D is protective against viral illness. And numerous authors and studies have shown the damaging effects of chemical antipyretics (fever lowering drugs) on the natural course of disease – a practice still sadly in widespread use in America. Better understanding of disease mechanisms, utilizing nutritional support and better scientific care of the sick child are safer alternatives to widespread vaccination.

We have forgotten that for most normal children, childhood diseases are benign. As recounted about mumps in the Iowa Department of Public Health Manual, “it is more common in infants, children and young adults. Of people who are not immunized, >85 percent will have mumps by adulthood, but symptoms may have been mild and therefore not recognized.”

At the end of the day, the issue here is one of freedom, and freedom is the freedom to choose – even if we make a bad choice. The argument that I must vaccinate my children for the good of the community is not only scientifically questionable, it is an unethical precept. It is the argument all dictators and totalitarians have used. “Comrade, you must work tirelessly for the good of the collective. You must give up your money and property for the good of the collective, and now … you must allow us to inject your children with what we deem is good for the collective.” If American’s don’t stand up against this, then we are lost. Because we have lost ownership of ourselves. Our bodies are no longer solely ours – we and our children are able to be commandeered for the “greater good.” "

[JohnnyL]

Countries already prohibit travel from country to country if you don't have the proper vaccinations.

The MTC mind you the MTC vaccinates people that haven't had the proper vaccionations BECAUSE THE COUNTRIES REQUIRE IT FOR ANYONE COMING THERE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

If you want to kill missionary work outside of the USA, don't vaccinate.

And in Mexico we have experience with this with the Swine Flu. There was virtual martial law declared when the Swine Flu Epidemic happened 6 years ago, in Mexico City. Two weeks later the problem was solved. They went to martial law because the people didn't understand what to do.

If only the people understood what to do the government wouldn't come swooping in like it does. Knowledge is power.

Samizdat,

Last I checked, NO countries required vaccinations to enter. I've traveled and lived in countries--no one has asked, or cared.

I agree that knowledge is power. Unfortunately, that power will never be made known by the govt., doctors, the AMA, pharmaceuticals, etc. In fact, many do their best to keep it hidden--after all, knowledge is POWER, and they don't want to give that up.

[Fiannan]

KMC, you really, really miss the point. Circumcision reduces the spread of various sexually transmitted diseases and may be associated with reducing cancer in the man. So if you want to reduce the prevalence of disease, and you think it is proper to ban kids from school who are not vaccinated, then using your own logic then we should ban boys from at least middle and high school who are not circumcised since they may meet girls there and have sex with them.

Also, gotta say that your statement:

The Bible says a lot of things.

perhaps gives an insight into your general philosophy.

[passionflower]

Countries already prohibit travel from country to country if you don't have the proper vaccinations.

The MTC mind you the MTC vaccinates people that haven't had the proper vaccionations BECAUSE THE COUNTRIES REQUIRE IT FOR ANYONE COMING THERE FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

If you want to kill missionary work outside of the USA, don't vaccinate.

And in Mexico we have experience with this with the Swine Flu. There was virtual martial law declared when the Swine Flu Epidemic happened 6 years ago, in Mexico City. Two weeks later the problem was solved. They went to martial law because the people didn't understand what to do.

If only the people understood what to do the government wouldn't come swooping in like it does. Knowledge is power.

Samizdat,

Last I checked, NO countries required vaccinations to enter. I've traveled and lived in countries--no one has asked, or cared.

I agree that knowledge is power. Unfortunately, that power will never be made known by the govt., doctors, the AMA, pharmaceuticals, etc. In fact, many do their best to keep it hidden--after all, knowledge is POWER, and they don't want to give that up.

-delete-

[Ezra]

They don't refuse to send you. A good freind of mine has 8 kids. They don't vacinate. 3 of his boys went on forgein missions. They wanted them to be vaccinated befor they went and they said no.

They all still were allowed to go on there missions. None got sick and all came back just fine.

Vacinarions are not required.

[KMCopeland]

As an atheist put it:

"It turns out that death and disability from many childhood diseases is preventable by means other than vaccination. Vitamin A has been known since the 1930s to reduce mortality from measles by 60 percent. Vitamin D is protective against viral illness. And numerous authors and studies have shown the damaging effects of chemical antipyretics (fever lowering drugs) on the natural course of disease – a practice still sadly in widespread use in America. Better understanding of disease mechanisms, utilizing nutritional support and better scientific care of the sick child are safer alternatives to widespread vaccination.

We have forgotten that for most normal children, childhood diseases are benign. As recounted about mumps in the Iowa Department of Public Health Manual, “it is more common in infants, children and young adults. Of people who are not immunized, >85 percent will have mumps by adulthood, but symptoms may have been mild and therefore not recognized.”

At the end of the day, the issue here is one of freedom, and freedom is the freedom to choose – even if we make a bad choice. The argument that I must vaccinate my children for the good of the community is not only scientifically questionable, it is an unethical precept. It is the argument all dictators and totalitarians have used. “Comrade, you must work tirelessly for the good of the collective. You must give up your money and property for the good of the collective, and now … you must allow us to inject your children with what we deem is good for the collective.” If American’s don’t stand up against this, then we are lost. Because we have lost ownership of ourselves. Our bodies are no longer solely ours – we and our children are able to be commandeered for the “greater good.” "

Why is it important that an atheist said it?

[KMCopeland]

KMC, you really, really miss the point. Circumcision reduces the spread of various sexually transmitted diseases and may be associated with reducing cancer in the man. So if you want to reduce the prevalence of disease, and you think it is proper to ban kids from school who are not vaccinated, then using your own logic then we should ban boys from at least middle and high school who are not circumcised since they may meet girls there and have sex with them.

A conversation about the pros & cons of requiring circumcision is only tangentially related to one about vaccination. You just like to talk about anything and everything remotely related to sex.

Also, gotta say that your statement:

The Bible says a lot of things.

perhaps gives an insight into your general philosophy.

If it does, you really are seeing things. Because it's just a simple statement, without any hidden meaning. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

[JohnnyL]

This is a true, though little known fact. No, you really don't need to be immunized in order to travel to a foreign country. But the church officially refuses to send you on a mission without vaccinations, and this may be why many LDS people believe vaccinations are actually mandatory. However, there is(last I knew) a statute in Utah law protecting people in Utah from discrimination based on whether you are vaccinated or not. I know of someone who's son was called on a mission to Switzerland, but when in the MTC,he refused the vaccinations, and the church said they would not send him. Well, his mother wrote a letter to the church quoting Utah law. Her son then went to Switzerland to serve his mission without vaccinations.

Ha ha, nothing like following govt. protocol exactly--except when it means following a law you don't like...?

They don't refuse to send you. A good freind of mine has 8 kids. They don't vacinate. 3 of his boys went on forgein missions. They wanted them to be vaccinated befor they went and they said no.

They all still were allowed to go on there missions. None got sick and all came back just fine.

Vacinarions are not required.

passionflower, Ezra:
Interesting--what years were these?

[JohnnyL]

So, back to the thread: under the Constitution, when is it ok to force someone to do something against their will or beliefs?

And, where do we see the same arguments by the same people illogically yet conveniently using two opposite principles/ sides of the same coin to push their agenda?

Mandatory _________
school attendance
class requirements, such as reading a book
seat belt laws
drunk driving laws
judicial judgments
civil forfeiture
Social Security number in order to work, get a passport, etc.
taxes
etc.

[KMCopeland]

So, back to the thread: when is it ok to force someone to do something against their will or beliefs?

When not doing it infringes on someone else's rights. And I don't think anybody has suggested -- ever -- that people should be forced to get vaccinations.

[JohnnyL]

So, back to the thread: when is it ok to force someone to do something against their will or beliefs?

When not doing it infringes on someone else's rights.

If you play loud music, it infringes on my right to silence. If you stop me from playing loud music, it infringes on my right to play loud music.
That's on a small level. Does forcing someone to attend school infringe on others' rights? Does forcing someone to use a seat belt infringe on others' rights? Etc.
Which side is right? Why?

And I don't think anybody has suggested -- ever -- that people should be forced to get vaccinations.

You've been on all the vaccination threads, and you've never noticed that thought?

[Epistemology]

Gay marriage vs. vaccination...

Vaccination wins every time

[Rose Garden]

So, back to the thread: under the Constitution, when is it ok to force someone to do something against their will or beliefs?

And, where do we see the same arguments by the same people illogically yet conveniently using two opposite principles/ sides of the same coin to push their agenda?

I had two kids who both wanted to watch different movies at the same time a couple of weeks ago. The five-year-old wanted Anastasia. The three-year-old wanted The Little Mermaid. Two movies, one VCR and TV. I told them they could watch whichever movie they both agreed on.

So they sat their arguing over which movie they would watch. I stayed close and made sure no one hit anyone else. I made sure the older one didn't use her superior strength to push her way to the VCR and win the right to watch hers by brute strength. Otherwise, I refused to become involved. I refused to choose for them.

I've done this in the past and oddly enough, almost every time, it's the older of the two who finally gives in and allows the younger one to watch what they want. That's exactly what happened. Dang. I'm about sick of the Little Mermaid.

The proper role of government should be to make sure that no one is assaulting anyone else so that people must work problems out by mutual agreement, not brute strength. But instead you have the government acting as the one who actually is doing the assaulting. Because they have the power, whatever they want, they get, whether it is right or wrong. So often, because money is involved, they want the wrong things and those who are already at a disadvantage are placed at an even greater disadvantage.

[Fiannan]

No KMC in case you just don't get it the true theme of this thread, and even the debate over vaccination, is ultimately how much power do you want to allow the government to have over your body. You have said that the state has the right to bar unvaccinated children from school. That of course is giving the state a huge role over the family as most families cannot afford to send their children to a private school or the resources to home school.

You see, you see vaccination as a public good, and I agree. My kids are vaccinated, but whether it was the law or not never mattered. However, where does the state's right to determine what is good and what is required are issues that should be discussed. You fail to see the connection between mandatory circumcision and vaccination - apparently you are not into public health that much as a study. However, the case can easily be made for mandating male circumcision on the same exact grounds the pro-vaccine crowd uses for their point of view. And if circumcision can reduce disease spread within the general population then why not? Tell me your philosophical grounds for making a difference between it and mandatory shots.

And then which shots would you mandate KMC? There are those who believe Gardacil should be mandated, yet we do not have a clear picture of the side effects on reproductive health. My daughters will not get that one for sure. What about flu shots? I only had one in the last 20 years because I had to spend a lot of time in central China in the middle of flu season. The rest of the time I have resisted it and not caught the flu. My wife got the H1N1 vaccination and got really sick. My children caught it and displayed symptoms for less than half a day. I remember though that there were people saying it should be mandated.

So which shots KMC? There are vaccinations for a lot of illnesses, have you received all of the shots? You never know what you might catch KMC.