Originally posted by spark1: The law just changed here. The law now requires parents claiming a "non-medical exemption" to either talk to a health care provider or view a pro-vaccine video on the internet. .
I'm all for that. I'd be fine with a similar thing for people considering abortions and viewing a pro life video.
I really dont see it so much as government forcing some arbitrary thing, as the people around you that you are in the society with wanting it this way. I guess I dont hol dit against them for not wanting a disease outbreak. I suppose we'd need info from polls or votes to show that.
No, They should not.. but having said that, They should be on the hook for any medical bills of any one that gets sick because of their choice.. and before anyone starts "well, Obama care everyone has insurance,,"" yes they do, but the out of pocket deductible has gone through the roof, since the passing of the affordable healthcare act If you choose to not have your child immunized, and it causes others to get sick, then you foot the co-pay and out of pocket bills of those affected..
The other question I'd like addressed is, if you choose to not have your child immunized, then the insurance company doesn't have to cover the care if they should come down with it.. seems fair..
If I don't get my pet it's shots/ect and it happens to bite someone, and they get rabies, I'm on the hook for that persons care and cost.. why should it be any different with a child..
Another correlation with legalizing recreational drug use.
In what became known as the Cutter incident, some lots of the Cutter vaccine—despite passing required safety tests—contained live polio virus in what was supposed to be an inactivated-virus vaccine. Cutter withdrew its vaccine from the market on April 27 after vaccine-associated cases were reported.
The mistake produced 120,000 doses of polio vaccine that contained live polio virus. Of children who received the vaccine, 40,000 developed abortive poliomyelitis (a form of the disease that does not involve the central nervous system), 56 developed paralytic poliomyelitis—and of these, five children died from polio.[2] The exposures led to an epidemic of polio in the families and communities of the affected children, resulting in a further 113 people paralyzed and 5 deaths
[This message has been edited by maryjane (edited 06-09-2021).]
A majority of American citizens don't resist vaccines because they're selfish. They resist them because they distrust the for-profit medical establishment and government, for good reason. The chit being put in the vaccines is highly suspect.
The Corona-hoax just turned more people against vaccines.
A majority of American citizens don't resist vaccines because they're selfish. They resist them because they distrust the for-profit medical establishment and government, for good reason. The chit being put in the vaccines is highly suspect.
The Corona-hoax just turned more people against vaccines.
I have no idea about what the Amish do concerning vaccines.
Reference the reasons American do or don't get vaccinated, There are probably some that do or don't based on your theory but, I have my doubts they all fall into the reasons you indicated. Doesn't matter to me. Everyone has a right to make their own decision. My decision comes into play when those who refuse vaccinations think they can come over and visit.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-09-2021).]
I started looking more, and was so flooded by instances of this I don't want to even post them here... Seriously, we need to wake the hell up.
I have already had two shots of the Sinovac version here in China. Since I haven’t died yet I can assume it’s not immediately deadly.
Don’t confuse the for-profit businesses with the government run entities. The Chinese (like most Asians) highly value their reputation. To lose face with a vaccine that hurts people would be a major embarrassment. If anything their vaccine is too weak.
The Chinese value the Chinese people. American government is hostile to Americans, especially White Americans. Especially right wing ones who believe in rule of law.
The Chinese value the Chinese people. American government is hostile to Americans, especially White Americans. Especially right wing ones who believe in rule of law.
You speak in absolutes, that makes you incorrect many times.
The Chinese value the Chinese people. American government is hostile to Americans, especially White Americans. Especially right wing ones who believe in rule of law.
The Chinese are nationalists first and foremost. We are split between nationalists and globalists with the most powerful being the globalists. Dems, Rinos, huge corporations all lining up with the globalists imho. Be very skeptical when you hear them criticizing China for “cheating”. China takes care of China. If we played by the same rules as China we wouldn’t have to worry about our jobs disappearing. But we play by the globalists rules and China laughs all the way to the bank.
The Chinese are nationalists first and foremost. We are split between nationalists and globalists with the most powerful being the globalists. Dems, Rinos, huge corporations all lining up with the globalists imho. Be very skeptical when you hear them criticizing China for “cheating”. China takes care of China. If we played by the same rules as China we wouldn’t have to worry about our jobs disappearing. But we play by the globalists rules and China laughs all the way to the bank.
I figured you'd agree with me. As to cheating, all nations cheat, lie and steal. A man on talk radio says if he has to be ruled over, as we are, he'd rather be ruled by the Chinese nationalists.
quote
Originally posted by Hudini: The Chinese are nationalists first and foremost. We are split between nationalists and globalists with the most powerful being the globalists. Dems, Rinos, huge corporations all lining up with the globalists imho. Be very skeptical when you hear them criticizing China for “cheating”. China takes care of China. If we played by the same rules as China we wouldn’t have to worry about our jobs disappearing. But we play by the globalists rules and China laughs all the way to the bank.
Originally posted by blackrams:You speak in absolutes, that makes you incorrect many times. Rams
And you have yet to prove your own charge.
American values are on display at our embassies this month on the same flag pole as the US flag. Our open borders are our values. Funding terrorism is our values.
I would say no, they should not be "forced" to immunize their child.
but on the flip side, should other peoples children be forced to be around the non immunized child?. Like at school for example. And i don't mean just Covid. I mean for all the immunizations for childhood diseases and such. Like the ones likely most here had when they where little kids.
Don't want to immunize your child, your choice, then stay home, keep your kid away from other people.
[This message has been edited by Jonesy (edited 06-11-2021).]
I would say no, they should not be "forced" to immunize their child.
but on the flip side, should other peoples children be forced to be around the non immunized child?. Like at school for example. And i don't mean just Covid. I mean for all the immunizations for childhood diseases and such. Like the ones likely most here had when they where little kids.
Don't want to immunize your child, your choice, then stay home, keep your kid away from other people.
You bring up an excellent point. Many people villainize vaccines and yet, as has been proven time after time, vaccine after vaccine it's normally those who are not vaccinated that spread the viruses. That's precisely why school boards/districts and government entities require certain vaccinations prior to admission into a school. Measles was pretty much eliminated but sprang up again in some locations because the folks in those communities decided to not get their children vaccinated.
As someone else has said, choices have consequences. They also have rewards. Don't want to get a vaccination, that's fine by me but doing so may have consequences.
If you don't want your kid around unvaxxed people, maybe you should keep your kid at home? You don't have a higher degree of rights. Even suggesting what you have suggested indicates you don't support American freedoms unless they do what you want. That's called tyranny.
If you don't want your kid around unvaxxed people, maybe you should keep your kid at home? You don't have a higher degree of rights. Even suggesting what you have suggested indicates you don't support American freedoms unless they do what you want. That's called tyranny.
It seems the people have spoken, well at least one of them. Unfortunately, the majority tend to rule. Didn't suggest I was one of the majority now did I.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-11-2021).]
Why would it matter if non-vaccinated kids go to school with vaccinated kids?
I'm not really qualified to answer that question but, I believe the "threat" of no school for non-vaccinated children is simply a means to get all children attending school vaccinated. Either that or, the vaccines in question are not as effective as hoped for.
May or may not necessarily be the same thing but, during the COVID-19 Pandemic, my wife and I have had three different people come to our home and visit for lengthy stays that tested positive. Due to the different variations circulating the globe, we and our COVID doc were not sure our Moderna vaccinations would protect us from whatever variant these guests were carrying. Ironically, all three were strong anti-vaxers. Thankfully, all three survived and apparently, our vaccinations did protect us. Our COVID Research doc did monitor us more closely for the next month though.
Rams
[This message has been edited by blackrams (edited 06-12-2021).]
Rivero covered a report yesterday that for people under the age of 50, your risk of death is higher from the shot than from Covid 19. Might have been regarding only one of the makers.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 06-12-2021).]
If you don't want your kid around unvaxxed people, maybe you should keep your kid at home? You don't have a higher degree of rights. Even suggesting what you have suggested indicates you don't support American freedoms unless they do what you want. That's called tyranny.
You couldn't be more incorrect..
Actually if my theoretical kid was vaccinated, he would have a higher degree of rights. Yes! The school requires vaccinations for childhood diseases in order for my child to attend said school. They want to limit the spread of disease within their buildings to protect the people within them. You dont want to vaccinate your kid? Fine! Your choice, but you freely GIVE UP your right to be part of that schools society. Its really that simple. No one is infringing on your freedom, but your gonna have to deal with the consequences of your free choice. In this particular example, you give up your child's right to attend public schools. Your right isn't taken from you, you chose to abandon that right with freedom of choice. As the old saying goes, your freedoms only go as far until they negatively effect someone else's.
In order to have a thriving society, certain institutions must be in place, in order for institutions and society to work, certain rules must apply. Keeping the spread of disease to a minimum is one of the basic needs any society from any era of human civilization must contend with.
You believe in traffic laws do you not? Or do you believe people should be able to drive as fast as they want, and do anything they wish while on the public roads? Because... Freedom.
Or say you invite me to your home. I show up wearing boots dripping in dog crap. And you stop me from entering, and tell me to take my dog crap covered boots off first. Well screw you pal! Your infringing on my freedom to walk around with dog crap on my boots. Who the hell are you to tell me i cant come in YOUR house with crap all over my boots? Why? Because you have a rule about entering your home without crap on my boots? Why should i have to conform to that? Your infringing on my rights! Well its your property right? So you have the right to make up any rules, laws, or regulations you want on your property as you see fit right? Well same with the schools. They are funded and paid for by the local society, the local society wants to keep their children safe and healthy while inside said schools, so they make up rules to do that. Don't follow said rules, you don't get to participate. Its not a difficult concept to understand.
Tyranny? lol.. No my friend, not even close. Tyranny would be forcing you to get vaccinated with threat of violence or imprisonment or something like that.. Saying you can't enter a building unless vaccinated, isn't tyranny, its just a rule. Just like you not letting me into your home with dog crap all over my boots. You may want to rethink your personal idea on what Tyranny actually is..
Part of being a society is having to live, and work together, living together in states, cities, towns. Large amounts of people in small geographical areas, in buildings, ect.. The potential spread of any disease is high. Want to be part of said society, well part of that is taking responsibility to minimize that. Vaccines are a proven, and safe way to do that.
No vaccine is 100% fool proof, we also know that, but a 90% effective vaccine or even 80% is much better than no vaccine at all. So even if vaccinated, some people will still get sick, but if you had no vaccinations, then eventually EVERYONE will get sick. Look what happened with the measles like Rams mentioned. The disease was all but eliminated from society, but then you get a small section of people who refuse the vaccine, and what happens? An outbreak happens. A deadly disease that we haven't had to deal with for decades, makes a very quick comeback. Which can also even put people who are vaccinated at risk. Like i said, no vaccine is 100%, so there would still be a section, although smaller, of vaccinated people who could get the disease anyway because the non vaccinated people caused an outbreak. But the vaccinated people would have a higher chance of surviving said disease. Put it this way, if you had to sit next to someone with a deadly disease everyday, that you were vaccinated for, but there was still a 10% to 15% chance you could catch the disease, would you want to sit next to that person? Probably not.
What you are proposing or arguing for is not Freedom sourmash.. It's Anarchy.
No society is 100% "free".. Nor should it be. Ours may be the closest any society has come, but its not 100% free, we have things call laws and rules and regulations for a reason, they take away certain "freedoms" so society doesn't destroy itself. Because long past human history has shown, if you let humans do anything they want, society dies.
Want to be part of society? Well there are lots of other people in that society, not just YOU! So your gonna have to follow the rules like everyone else. Otherwise, you have the full freedom to stay in your home, and be as "free" as you want.
Now we can argue about what rules, laws and regulations are "fair" or "not fair" and we can also argue about who makes vaccines and wear they come from, those are all good questions and should always be asked and critiqued. But those are totally different issues.
[This message has been edited by Jonesy (edited 06-13-2021).]
Originally posted by Jonesy: You couldn't be more incorrect..
Actually if my theoretical kid was vaccinated, he would have a higher degree of rights. Yes!
Yes, because you believe in tyranny based on PERSONAL beliefs but not personal liberties that we're founded under. Only your opinion matters. Not God given rights. Not Constitutional rights. Collectivism is your safe place.
quote
The school requires vaccinations for childhood diseases in order for my child to attend said school. They want to limit the spread of disease within their buildings to protect the people within them. You dont want to vaccinate your kid? Fine! Your choice, but you freely GIVE UP your right to be part of that society. Its really that simple. No one is infringing on your freedom, but your gonna have to deal with the consequences of your free choice. In this particular example, you give up your child's right to attend public schools. Your right isn't taken from you, you chose to abandon that right with freedom of choice.
That doesn't even qualify as a house of cards. That's a communist hologram. You aren't talking about volunteering to give up freedoms.
1) you support a tiered system of rights. All government enforcement is enforced by men with guns. 2) if there are mandates, that isnt a choice. Where there is forced compliance, there is tyranny. 3) there are religious and even medical exemptions being removed, creating more tyranny. 4) a person doesn't have the choice to not fund schools, so that isn't freedom either. 5) you support tyranny and removal of choice and freedoms.
medical for-profit corporations lobby government officials to institute regulations forced on your children. You support this $y$tem of enriching the corruption.
quote
In order to have a thriving society, certain institutions must be in place, in order for institutions and society to work, certain rules must apply. Keeping the spread of disease to a minimum is one of the basic needs any society from any era of human civilization must contend with.
The illegals aren't vaccinated or even here legally. They hold back citizens in the class, not advance them. They reintroduce extinct (in America) diseases. Their families typically are a vast drain on the economy and bring violent crime with them.
You want to focus on forcing legal citizens to comply with edicts.
quote
You believe in traffic laws do you not? Or do you believe people should be able to drive as fast as they want, and do anything they wish while on the public roads? Because... Freedom.
Traffic laws? Some, no. Irrelevant non-sequitur. Traffic laws don't force unGodly matter into human bodies at the end of a gun muzzle.
Your point is that we're forced to drive. We aren't. Your point is that we're forced by other laws so all laws have to be enforced regardless of legality.
Your argument is that there limited government is anarchy. It isn't.
quote
Part of being a society is having to live, and work together,
Your examples show you support huge government intrusion into different facets of human existence. You're a big government, big corporation supporter.
quote
living together in states, cities, towns. Large amounts of people in small geographical areas, in buildings, ect.. The potential spread of any disease is high. Want to be part of said society, well part of that is taking responsibility to minimize that. Vaccines are a proven, and safe way to do that. No vaccine is 100% fool proof, we also know that, but a 90% effective vaccine is much better than no vaccine at all. So even if vaccinated, some people will , and what happens? An outbreak happens. A deadly disease that we haven't had to deal with for decades, makes a very quick comeback.
Those exact statements are labeled racist and don't reflect our values. Walls don't protect people, is the claim. It's the illegals in your class room bringing resistant diseases back. They recklessly administer medications and create resistant disease.
quote
What you are proposing or arguing for is not Freedom.. It's Anarchy.
False. Herd immunity is real.
quote
Ours may be the closest any society has come
That's total bullchit. And you're arguing to move farther into collectivism. We aren't free by a long stretch compared to other societies. Go make a post on social media that isn't approved by some cyber-god, on an internet that you pay for them to exist on. Go in public and claim only biological women have a uterus to grow a child with. Go obtain a permit for a rally that wants to protect all of our history. When you get violently attacked, the men with guns will allow your rights to be violated in the most violent terms. If you try to defend yourself the men with guns will jail you and take all your assets. Exercise your free speech 2 decades prior as a teen and your employer might fire you so that a Black mob doesn't come threaten their lives with violence. Disagree with the mob and get your right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness violated. Don't wear a useless mask that can't stop the size of a Covid particle any more than pants can stop a fart and see how free we are.
quote
Want to be part of society? Well there are lots of other people in that society, not just YOU!
You've already stated that this is about YOU and making someone else comply to your beliefs instead of you being the one who has to be the one to live with his own decisions.
You have an opinion contrary to freedom and refuse to be the one to live under it.
I demand to be part of the society we were formed under in principle. Not this false one you support.
quote
So your gonna have to follow the rules like everyone else. Otherwise, you have the full freedom to stay in your home, and be as "free" as you want.
False. Some don't have to abide the rules and that's the system you prefer. That's been my point all along.
quote
Now we can argue about what rules, laws and regulations are "fair" or "not fair" and we can also argue about who makes vaccines and wear they come from, those are all good questions and should always be asked and critiqued. But those are totally different issues.
You aren't very savvy or experienced with God given freedoms recognized by our Declaration and Constitution. You like to just make up arguments that aren't presented. "Fair". Try again.
[This message has been edited by sourmash (edited 06-13-2021).]
