Gay Marriage vs. Vaccination

[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.

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.

Very true. Many towns have noise ordinances. I doubt it's a hard dispute to settle.

Does forcing someone to attend school infringe on others' rights?

I don't know. Probably falls under that group of laws that "promote the general welfare." I do know that when I visited Ogden once with my father, and we went to the ward he grew up in, among the very ancient members of that ward who remembered him, the one who remembered him best was the truant officer. Pretty unconstitutional old dude I guess.

Does forcing someone to use a seat belt infringe on others' rights? Etc.
Which side is right? Why?

Personally I hate the bell that nags you to buckle your seat belt in the car. I usually keep the seat belt buckled underneath me so I don't have to listen to it. And I really enjoy driving my 1970 F100 -- which blessedly has no such nag device. And in which I am far more likely to die. I don't think seat belt laws are constitutional at all. But it's also true that seat belts have saved many lives. So you tell me if it's a good law or not.

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?

No. What I've noticed is a lot of people claiming we force people to vaccinate their children in this country. I think it's true that in some places in this country, some vaccinations are mandatory. Whatever that means. But the "force" claim? I can't imagine it. I can't imagine, if you didn't want your newborn vaccinated for PKU if they still do that, or MMR or anything else, anybody showing up and holding you and your child down while they forcibly vaccinate. Maybe it's happened. But I bet it hasn't.

[KMCopeland]

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.

I don't want it to have any power over my body. And because I choose to participate in society, and benefit from that participation, I consent for it to have some reasonable controls over me and so do you.


There are laws against use of certain drugs control your body. Public drunk laws give the government control over your body. The police have all kinds of legal power over your body. Laws against drinking & driving give the government control over your body. Seat belt laws give the government control over your body. Public decency laws give the government control over your body. Proposed laws against abortion are proposals to give the government a huge amount of control over women's bodies.

Mandatory vaccination may very well give the government control over your body. But unless you object to all government control over your body just as strongly, you don't have much of an argument.

[JohnnyL]

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.

I don't want it to have any power over my body. And because I choose to participate in society, and benefit from that participation, I consent for it to have some reasonable controls over me and so do you.


There are laws against use of certain drugs control your body. Public drunk laws give the government control over your body. The police have all kinds of legal power over your body. Laws against drinking & driving give the government control over your body. Seat belt laws give the government control over your body. Public decency laws give the government control over your body. Proposed laws against abortion are proposals to give the government a huge amount of control over women's bodies.

Mandatory vaccination may very well give the government control over your body. But unless you object to all government control over your body just as strongly, you don't have much of an argument.

You might find the thread on punishments interesting.

[JohnnyL]

Does forcing someone to attend school infringe on others' rights?

I don't know. Probably falls under that group of laws that "promote the general welfare." I do know that when I visited Ogden once with my father, and we went to the ward he grew up in, among the very ancient members of that ward who remembered him, the one who remembered him best was the truant officer. Pretty unconstitutional old dude I guess.

Does forcing someone to use a seat belt infringe on others' rights? Etc.
Which side is right? Why?

Personally I hate the bell that nags you to buckle your seat belt in the car. I usually keep the seat belt buckled underneath me so I don't have to listen to it. And I really enjoy driving my 1970 F100 -- which blessedly has no such nag device. And in which I am far more likely to die. I don't think seat belt laws are constitutional at all. But it's also true that seat belts have saved many lives. So you tell me if it's a good law or not.

So it's a good law, but you don't like to obey it. OK... First, your definition is "good = promote general welfare". Now it's "good = saves lives." Those are broad definitions... Would it not be good to force everyone to not drink alcohol, not smoke, not drive at all, actually; not allow homosexuals and diseased people to have sex, especially unprotected; not allow homosexual parents; not do much of anything?? Who would determine what's "good"?

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?

No. What I've noticed is a lot of people claiming we force people to vaccinate their children in this country. I think it's true that in some places in this country, some vaccinations are mandatory. Whatever that means. But the "force" claim? I can't imagine it. I can't imagine, if you didn't want your newborn vaccinated for PKU if they still do that, or MMR or anything else, anybody showing up and holding you and your child down while they forcibly vaccinate. Maybe it's happened. But I bet it hasn't.[/quote]
Oh, it's happened plenty of times. Been there, done that. Many times it's been by force, many times it's been done behind the back. I guess LittleLion was right in his "evil" thread--some people, some of us, must experience it directly before we can start to understand... Like the FB pro-police guy who got arrested in NY for a very weak interpretation on knives...

[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.

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?

What point? That Obama's father was a Sunni Muslim as was his step-father? If there's a point there I sure missed it. If you're talking about his circumcision is the same thing as vaccination point, I did respond to that non-point. Several times.

[AI2.0]

No use arguing this. The liberals run the government and they are passing the laws. They will have gay marriage (because they like it) and they will eventually force all Americans to be vaccinated(because they have a green light through government mandates through Nationalized healthcare); that's because our representatives in Congress have put the Gov. in charge of our health care.

Do Americans really think the government is going to just sit back and let them get diseases that the gov. will then have to pay for to treat? Of course not. The Government will eventually force vaccinations on all citizens, and they also won't care whether or not they are safe, because who are the people going to complain to if they have bad reactions or problems? The United Nations?

There is no one to complain to when the Government is in charge. This is only going to get much worse.

[KMCopeland]

Does forcing someone to attend school infringe on others' rights?

I don't know. Probably falls under that group of laws that "promote the general welfare." I do know that when I visited Ogden once with my father, and we went to the ward he grew up in, among the very ancient members of that ward who remembered him, the one who remembered him best was the truant officer. Pretty unconstitutional old dude I guess.

Does forcing someone to use a seat belt infringe on others' rights? Etc. Which side is right? Why?

Personally I hate the bell that nags you to buckle your seat belt in the car. I usually keep the seat belt buckled underneath me so I don't have to listen to it. And I really enjoy driving my 1970 F100 -- which blessedly has no such nag device. And in which I am far more likely to die. I don't think seat belt laws are constitutional at all. But it's also true that seat belts have saved many lives. So you tell me if it's a good law or not.

Would it not be good to force everyone to not drink alcohol, not smoke, not drive at all, actually; not allow homosexuals and diseased people to have sex, especially unprotected; not allow homosexual parents; not do much of anything?? Who would determine what's "good"?

Determining what is good is an individual choice, based on individual morality.

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?

No. What I've noticed is a lot of people claiming we force people to vaccinate their children in this country. I think it's true that in some places in this country, some vaccinations are mandatory. Whatever that means. But the "force" claim? I can't imagine it. I can't imagine, if you didn't want your newborn vaccinated for PKU if they still do that, or MMR or anything else, anybody showing up and holding you and your child down while they forcibly vaccinate. Maybe it's happened. But I bet it hasn't.

Oh, it's happened plenty of times. Been there, done that. Many times it's been by force, many times it's been done behind the back.

If it has, that's very wrong. I would think the parents of that child would have a strong, actionable case against whoever did it. I sure wouldn't take it lying down. Did they?

[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?

What point? That Obama's father was a Sunni Muslim as was his step-father? If there's a point there I sure missed it. If you're talking about his circumcision is the same thing as vaccination point, I did respond to that non-point. Several times.

Responding =/= invalidating a point, or showing how his argument is illogical. ;)

[JohnnyL]

... your newborn vaccinated for PKU if they still do that, or MMR or anything else, anybody showing up and holding you and your child down while they forcibly vaccinate. Maybe it's happened. But I bet it hasn't.

Oh, it's happened plenty of times. Been there, done that. Many times it's been by force, many times it's been done behind the back.

If it has, that's very wrong. I would think the parents of that child would have a strong, actionable case against whoever did it. I sure wouldn't take it lying down. Did they?[/quote]
Oh yeah, most get as far as the 17-year old cancer girl. And the civil forfeiture grandma who got her house taken away after reporting people selling drugs on the corner of her front lawn. And all those especially who do after-the-fact rights cases. The situation is best controlled at the very first step, not at the goal line.
You will get a few cases in a few situations with a few judges that might let a case go. At least, these people might win a few cases--especially before the appeal overturns some of them.

Helaman 7:4 And seeing the people in a state of such awful wickedness, and those Gadianton robbers filling the judgment-seats—having usurped the power and authority of the land; laying aside the commandments of God, and not in the least aright before him; doing no justice unto the children of men;
5 Condemning the righteous because of their righteousness; letting the guilty and the wicked go unpunished because of their money; and moreover to be held in office at the head of government, to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory of the world, and, moreover, that they might the more easily commit adultery, and steal, and kill, and do according to their own wills—

[JohnnyL]

No use arguing this. The liberals run the government and they are passing the laws. They will have gay marriage (because they like it) and they will eventually force all Americans to be vaccinated(because they have a green light through government mandates through Nationalized healthcare); that's because our representatives in Congress have put the Gov. in charge of our health care.

Do Americans really think the government is going to just sit back and let them get diseases that the gov. will then have to pay for to treat? Of course not. The Government will eventually force vaccinations on all citizens, and they also won't care whether or not they are safe, because who are the people going to complain to if they have bad reactions or problems? The United Nations?

There is no one to complain to when the Government is in charge. This is only going to get much worse.

I was with you till the 2nd paragraph. CDC, FDA, etc. have all been found of blatant fraud, to make money and further the destruction of America. Frankly, the govt. doesn't care if you live or die--they want money from you and power over you. Or they sell that to those who pay them what they want.

Helaman 7:5 Condemning the righteous because of their righteousness; letting the guilty and the wicked go unpunished because of their money; and moreover to be held in office at the head of government, to rule and do according to their wills, that they might get gain and glory of the world, and, moreover, that they might the more easily commit adultery, and steal, and kill, and do according to their own wills—

[Rose Garden]

They want money for the power it gives them. It's all about power.

[KMCopeland]

No use arguing this. The liberals run the government and they are passing the laws.

The GOP is running the government and they never pass any laws.

They will have gay marriage (because they like it)

If we have gay marriage it will be because they think it's what their constituents want. Which is sort of the way it's supposed to work.

and they will eventually force all Americans to be vaccinated(because they have a green light through government mandates through Nationalized healthcare); that's because our representatives in Congress have put the Gov. in charge of our health care.

They can't force anybody to be vaccinated. And we don't have nationalized health care, sadly enough.

Do Americans really think the government is going to just sit back and let them get diseases that the gov. will then have to pay for to treat? Of course not.

You're close to an important point: we're all in this together. Part of why refusing to vaccinate is so irresponsible is the other people you put at risk. At least now, thanks to Obamacare, taxpayers will no longer have to carry the cost for people who contract the disease they could so easily have prevented by vaccination, because those people will have health insurance that will pay for it instead. As will all the people whose health they endangered by refusing to vaccinate.

The Government will eventually force vaccinations on all citizens

The government doesn't have that power, and it's unlikely they ever will. IMO.

and they also won't care whether or not they are safe

Of course they'll care if they're safe or not. Good grief.

because who are the people going to complain to if they have bad reactions or problems? The United Nations? There is no one to complain to when the Government is in charge. This is only going to get much worse.

Hard as the fascist movement (disguised as the once-honorable and now pathetic Republican Party) has tried to remove all accountability from corporations for the damage their products do, the United States still has an justice system where you can take grievances like this. Since the 20-30 year old deregulation mania has systematically removed crucial safety regulations and oversight, we at least have the courts left to demand accountabililty from monster corporations for the damage their products do.

[Fiannan]

Hard as the fascist movement (disguised as the once-honorable and now pathetic Republican Party) has tried to remove all accountability from corporations for the damage their products do, the United States still has an justice system where you can take grievances like this. Since the 20-30 year old deregulation mania has systematically removed crucial safety regulations and oversight, we at least have the courts left to demand accountabililty from monster corporations for the damage their products do.

You really have no clue, do you KMC? Why not find "Inside Job" narrated by Matt Damon and actually watch it. When it comes to corporations and foreign policy there is no difference between Bush and Obama except Obama-tards will justify anything Obama does while most Republicans never worshiped at the feet of Bush.

As for fascism, look to your Democratic leadership and welcome their goose-stepping to the future the liberals look forward to in rapture.

[KMCopeland]

Hard as the fascist movement (disguised as the once-honorable and now pathetic Republican Party) has tried to remove all accountability from corporations for the damage their products do, the United States still has an justice system where you can take grievances like this. Since the 20-30 year old deregulation mania has systematically removed crucial safety regulations and oversight, we at least have the courts left to demand accountabililty from monster corporations for the damage their products do.

You really have no clue, do you KMC?

That must be it.

Why not find "Inside Job" narrated by Matt Damon and actually watch it.

I will.

When it comes to corporations and foreign policy there is no difference between Bush and Obama except Obama-tards will justify anything Obama does while most Republicans never worshiped at the feet of Bush.

Boy do you have a bad memory.

As for fascism, look to your Democratic leadership and welcome their goose-stepping to the future the liberals look forward to in rapture.

Gibberish.

[Bee Prepared]

" Gibberish", hahaha, is that all you got? :))

[KMCopeland]

" Gibberish", hahaha, is that all you got? :))

Yes. And it's precisely the right amount. But I'm glad you're keeping me on my toes.

[Cookies]

Every time i skim past this thread my brain only sees (gay vacation)

I read "Gay vaccination" and think "Oh good, they're immunizing people against that now..." #:-s
;)

[Benjamin_LK]

Can somebody explain to me why vaccinated people care if others are unvaccinated? Can they still get the sicknesses somehow? I don't get it...

Good question. Forced me to read up on it.


Looks like they should care because some people who have been vaccinated can still get it (something like 10%-20%), some people can never get the vaccination for legitimate health reasons so they're always vulnerable, and since you don't have full immunity until you've gotten the second dose, and you don't get the second dose until you're 4 or 5 -- that leaves a lot of children at risk too.

For most vaccinations the immunity is never permanent, you need to keep on getting boosters for as long as you are both alive, and healthy enough to receive them. Even then, it's never permanent, just lasts for a term, often a few years.

[Fiannan]

People listen up. If Obama says you should get your vaccinations, any and all vaccinations, it must be right. Who can question Obama? He brought paradise to Libya, real urban renewal to Syria and has helped make our health care in America the best in the world. And yes, the unemployment rate really is 6% and there are no programs to spy on everything you do.

[Bee Prepared]

The Holy Grail for BigPharma would be to classify refusal to take a vaccine as a mental illness, which must be treated with one of their anti-psychotic drugs. The CDC and FDA are pawns and shills for Big Pharma revenues. Of course they have to say autism is not linked to vaccines or FDA,CDC,Pharmaceutical Vaccines are big money makers like cancer treatment and you cannot mess with the revolving money barrel.

I'm tired of being lied to, we don't need forced mandatory vaccinations to children just born out of the womb.... We need to re-look at this - this is America....

[JohnnyL]

In addition to the opposing principles of Gay Marriage and Vaccination, let's throw in abortion.

Roe vs. Wade:
"It's my body, and I can do what I want with it."

Vaccinations:
"It's not your body, you must vaccinate."

[KMCopeland]

In addition to the opposing principles of Gay Marriage and Vaccination, let's throw in abortion.

Roe vs. Wade:
"It's my body, and I can do what I want with it."

Vaccinations:
"It's not your body, you must vaccinate."

Or maybe:
"I believe in empowering the government to prevent women from having abortions, which would require an amount of government power, and an administrative infrastructure of such massive proportions it would make Communist China look like a pipsqueak,"

And at the same time:
"I'm mad because I have to prove my child has been vaccinated before he or she can attend public school."

[Bee Prepared]

In addition to the opposing principles of Gay Marriage and Vaccination, let's throw in abortion.

Roe vs. Wade:
"It's my body, and I can do what I want with it."

Vaccinations:
"It's not your body, you must vaccinate."

Perfect example!

[Bee Prepared]

In addition to the opposing principles of Gay Marriage and Vaccination, let's throw in abortion.

Roe vs. Wade:
"It's my body, and I can do what I want with it."

Vaccinations:
"It's not your body, you must vaccinate."

Or maybe:
"I believe in empowering the government to prevent women from having abortions, which would require an amount of government power, and an administrative infrastructure of such massive proportions it would make Communist China look like a pipsqueak,"

And at the same time:
"I'm mad because I have to prove my child has been vaccinated before he or she can attend public school."

Gibberish!

[Ezra]

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?

His youngest just got off her mission a year ago. So all would have been in the last 15 years.