Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 41 of 41

Thread: The principle that sustains compulsory vaccination is broad enough to cover sterilization

  1. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by amy31416 View Post
    Of course she comes into contact with these other people, but I'm not quite as concerned now that she's vaccinated and she's bigger and stronger. I still take precautions and observe and act while her immune system continues to evolve...but knowing that so many more people don't vaccinate makes me more vigilant--and she doesn't go to a store and play with other children there. She plays at a park with other children that I know. She doesn't go to church and I've never had anyone other than immediate family members responsible for her in my absence. When she was under 10 lbs and unvaccinated, and when she was under one year of age and hadn't had the time to develop and for me to evaluate her "sickly" factor--I kept her away from other people who weren't vetted. That's my responsibility.

    At this point, she's only in contact with other children who are vaccinated.

    And why would you disregard "herd immunity?" Vaccines are safe for me, my parents, my family, my husband, his family--not a single person has had an adverse reaction. My father did have lifelong minor issues after getting through whooping cough as a child though. My husband is deathly allergic to fish--so she won't have any until I get a full battery of tests run.

    I protect her from immediate threats, and that includes people who aren't vaccinated because, as you should know, vaccines aren't 100% effective. I don't risk her life to make a point, to be a rebel or to have a political stance. What you do is okay by me, but is it really asking too much for those who choose not to vaccinate to inform other parents so they too can make a choice?

    I understand that there's a possibility that vaccination may not be an acceptable risk to some people--why would those who don't vaccinate not understand that your unvaccinated child may not be an acceptable risk to me? I think it's because they think they're superior and know better. And to that I say--piss off.
    I'd only disregard it, in order to suss out just how, on a personal, one on one basis, effective you might think any particular vaccine may be.

    But everything else mentioned is parental "due diligence" and personal choice that, I'm sure everybody can agree, is up to each family.

    This has been my stance all along, that as long as there is no government force, or the threat thereof, in making these decisions, that everything else is matter of personal choice, beliefs, and research.



  2. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  3. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by donnay View Post
    Who is accusing you here? Guilty conscience, maybe?

    No? Why would I have a guilty conscience?

    You're the one who said that ANYONE who says/suggests that unvaccinated individuals carry diseases and make others sick are indirectly pushing for compulsory vaccination. You're characterizing an entire set of people, one that I'm included with, so of course I'm going to come to my own defense, especially when it's not a position I hold that you've claimed "anyone" with "X" has.



  4. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  5. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Fox McCloud View Post
    Really Donnay, really? Not only is that a HUGEEE stretch in logic, but a number of have explicitly said we're not for mandatory vaccines. Intentionally mischaracterizing our positions on serves to make you even less credible to some of us or people like us.


    Even Ron Paul talked about this from a "personal responsibility angle".

    The logic you're using is effectively this "Bob said that that man didn't get medical treatment because he had no health insurance; Bob is indirectly pushing for single-payer/mandatory health insurance/health subsidies." It's poor logic and a big leap; unless someone specifically states that they're for mandatory vaccinations (which there may very well be, but don't count me for a few others amongst that group), don't characterize us in that light or put words in out mouth.
    Is it really all that much of leap now? It cannot be, as it serves as the causation for implementing whatever agenda further and further along. It follows Hegelianism. And as to your example, is that not in-fact the exact reasoning which lead to substantiating the case for Obamacare/ACA? It is a the natural process of unheeded incrementalism (i.e., mission-creep).

    For a further example, compare the FEMA (i.e., DHS) of a decade ago to the DHS of today, wasn’t the meddling of the former virtually unheard of in our daily lives and now the latter can barely go a single day without injecting itself in your private affairs.

    ETA:

    Further, from a philosophical point-of-view, while you and others may not be in personal favor of mandated vaccinations, you do believe that being vaccinated is the socially responsible choice (just that is should be left an individual’s preference); however, if it were to be made a mandate, it would be more likely than not that you would not find it personally offensive and would never fight in an effort to repeal such a mandate. It is only logical that since such a decree would be supportive to your own underlying social beliefs it wouldn’t affect your personal inconveniences or concerns; so railing against it provides those, such as yourself, no personal benefit or interest. This is how tyranny in government functions, it counts on tipping the scales more in favor of whatever political agenda than against it, once that has been accomplished reestablishing the balance between competing political perspectives becomes more and more difficult with the passing of time.
    Last edited by Weston White; 04-19-2014 at 07:29 PM.
    The object of life is not to be on the side of the majority, but to escape finding one’s self in the ranks of the insane.” — Marcus Aurelius

    They’re not buying it. CNN, you dumb bastards!” — President Trump 2020

    Consilio et Animis de Oppresso Liber

  6. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Weston White View Post
    Is it really all that much of leap now? It cannot be, as it serves as the causation for implementing whatever agenda further and further along. It follows Hegelianism. And as to your example, is that not in-fact the exact reasoning which lead to substantiating the case for Obamacare/ACA? It is a the natural process of unheeded incrementalism (i.e., mission-creep).

    For a further example, compare the FEMA (i.e., DHS) of a decade ago to the DHS of today, wasn’t the meddling of the former virtually unheard of in our daily lives and now the latter can barely go a single day without injecting itself in your private affairs.

    ETA:

    Further, from a philosophical point-of-view, while you and others may not be in personal favor of mandated vaccinations, you do believe that being vaccinated is the socially reasonable choice (just that is should be left an individual’s preference); however, if it were to be made a mandate, it would be more likely than not that you would not find it personally offensive and would never fight in an effort to repeal such a mandate. It is only logical that since such a decree would be supportive to your own underlying social beliefs it would affect you no personal inconveniences or concerns, so railing against it provides those, such as yourself, no personal benefit or interest. This is how tyranny in government functions, it counts on the tipping the scales more in favor of whatever political agenda than against it, once that has been accomplished reestablishing the balance between competing political perspectives becomes more and more difficult with the passing of time.

    Bingo, you said it much better than I and that's what concerns me about these pro-vaxxers.
    “The spirits of darkness are now among us. We have to be on guard so that we may realize what is happening when we encounter them and gain a real idea of where they are to be found. The most dangerous thing you can do in the immediate future will be to give yourself up unconsciously to the influences which are definitely present.” ~ Rudolf Steiner

  7. #35
    People, we cannot force immunizations or sterilization on anyone. If we say this is ever okay, we become vulnerable ourselves. The same people who advocate this point of view want to wipe out everyone who disagrees with them, so we become targets.
    #NashvilleStrong

    “I’m a doctor. That’s a baby.”~~~Dr. Manny Sethi

  8. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    You have apparently failed to grasp the primary results of vaccination.

    If you are vaccinated against pathogen X, you presumably have developed immunity to it. Having developed said immunity, you are in the main impervious to developing whatever diseases associated with pathogen X. That does NOT mean that you cannot be a carrier, either long term or short.

    For example, though you are strongly immune to pneumococcus, it is virtually certain that you carry the pathogen in your lungs every day of your life. The reason you do not develop pneumonia is that your immune system is strong and trained to defend against the bacterium.

    Even if your body kills off all of a given pathogen, you may still be a temporary carrier by virtue of coming into contact with it. You touch a door handle or some other object with which many other hands have made contact. You are now a carrier, like it or not. You may not develop disease, but having shaken hands with another may well introduce enough of the bug to infect them, too.

    Given all this, it is the unvaccinated person who has the most to fear If you carry a bug against which you are immune, it is an easy matter to transfer pathogens from yourself to one who is unvaccinated. Such a person may do the same, but what do you care if you are already immune?

    As you can see, something does not track in the reasoning of the paranoid pro-vacciners. They appear to view the subject 180* out of phase with reality.





    Why would your children be vulnerable if they have been vaccinated, unless the process is itself not quite what some would have you think?



    And under the circumstances YOU cite, the state of having been vaccinated would have helped your child ZERO and may in fact have endangered her more.




    Perhaps, but not of the brands you here suggest.




    And you think that this could not change almost over night? Surely you cannot be that naive.




    Flawed example. Rabies vaccines are administered REACTIVELY, not proactively. One does not run off to the doctor and get their child vaccinated with a preventative rabies vaccine. They get the series after having been bitten. If one waits too long, all the rabies vaccine on the planet will not be able to help you. Also, chances of survival are low, but most definitely not nil.
    Good responses.

    I am always amazed at how scared the vaccinated are of the unvaccinated.

    If vaccinations really worked, why worry?
    There is no spoon.

  9. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by amy31416 View Post
    Go take some damned science classes, I'm not your teacher.
    Good grief woman, you respond to a reasonable and respectful posting as if I'd jumped up on your kitchen table, whipped out my impressive member, and proceeded to piss in your cornflakes. What's up with that?

    And just for future reference, you might want to reconsider the recommendation when you don't know a person's background. I have 4 (four) science degrees.


    Expose yourself to diseases, that's fine by me--just leave my kid out of your crap and hang it up. I can't and don't want to force you to do anything, and you have no business trying to force me to NOT do something that is absolutely not harmful to you or to my kid, and if it weren't for vaccines I would have probably had to have 10 of them to have a couple survive to adulthood. Vaccines are part of the "training" program for the immune system--I guess you just don't like that the immunity is not built up from eating dirt in a cow pasture?
    And you accuse others of being irrational?

    Wow... that is pretty impressive.

    Of course even a vaccinated person can become a carrier, but it's for a far shorter duration and much less likely.
    This is incorrect. There are people who are vectors, yet are wholly immune to the bug in question. This is also true in other animals. For example, I had a cat who was positive for feline leukemia virus, yet lived to a ripe old age. She was, however, capable of infecting other cats.

    Mary Mallon, better known as Typhoid Mary, was an asymptomatic carrier of the typhoid fever pathogen.

    And survival chances without the rabies vaccine ARE nil without massive medical intervention. I initially wrote "practically" nil, but that's not true. You will die from rabies without hardcore medical intervention, and I'm not talking about smoking some pot, eating garlic and getting acupuncture. If I'm wrong, prove it.
    You appear to have conveniently and completely ignored my point about rabies vaccines. To my knowledge there are no preventative vaccines for rabies. You do not go to the doctor, get a vaccine, and develop immunity to rabies. You are given a series of injections (between 1 and about 14 depending on the basis on which the vaccine was developed) in response to having made contact with the virus. It was a minor point and yet you seem to have gone to some pain to respond in a way that is inconsistent with what I initially wrote. Why?

    At any rate, the issue is not whether they work - clearly some do and some... well, let's just say the jury is still way out. The issue was that of force and your tone and choice of words were not suggestive of an unequivocal respect and recognition of individual prerogative, and it was very definitely indicative of a lack of proper understanding of the relationships between those with immunity and those without. One can speak apparent volumes through implicit language and that is how you came off. If you say you did not intend it that way, I will certainly accept you on your word. Whatever this apparent race may be, I have no horse in it.
    freedomisobvious.blogspot.com

    There is only one correct way: freedom. All other solutions are non-solutions.

    It appears that artificial intelligence is at least slightly superior to natural stupidity.

    Our words make us the ghosts that we are.

    Convincing the world he didn't exist was the Devil's second greatest trick; the first was convincing us that God didn't exist.

  10. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by tod evans View Post
    Me, me, me!

    So long as we start with kops, DA's, judges and politicians...
    And people who try to persuade you to change your opinion in public, right?
    I'm an adventurer, writer and bitcoin market analyst.

    Buy my book for $11.49 (reduced):

    Website: http://www.grandtstories.com/

    Twitter: https://twitter.com/LeviGrandt

    Facebook page: https://www.facebook.com/grandtstori...homepage_panel

    BTC: 1NiSc21Yrv6CRANhg1DTb1EUBVax1ZtqvG

  11. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    Good grief woman, you respond to a reasonable and respectful posting as if I'd jumped up on your kitchen table, whipped out my impressive member, and proceeded to piss in your cornflakes. What's up with that?

    And just for future reference, you might want to reconsider the recommendation when you don't know a person's background. I have 4 (four) science degrees.




    And you accuse others of being irrational?

    Wow... that is pretty impressive.



    This is incorrect. There are people who are vectors, yet are wholly immune to the bug in question. This is also true in other animals. For example, I had a cat who was positive for feline leukemia virus, yet lived to a ripe old age. She was, however, capable of infecting other cats.

    Mary Mallon, better known as Typhoid Mary, was an asymptomatic carrier of the typhoid fever pathogen.



    You appear to have conveniently and completely ignored my point about rabies vaccines. To my knowledge there are no preventative vaccines for rabies. You do not go to the doctor, get a vaccine, and develop immunity to rabies. You are given a series of injections (between 1 and about 14 depending on the basis on which the vaccine was developed) in response to having made contact with the virus. It was a minor point and yet you seem to have gone to some pain to respond in a way that is inconsistent with what I initially wrote. Why?

    At any rate, the issue is not whether they work - clearly some do and some... well, let's just say the jury is still way out. The issue was that of force and your tone and choice of words were not suggestive of an unequivocal respect and recognition of individual prerogative, and it was very definitely indicative of a lack of proper understanding of the relationships between those with immunity and those without. One can speak apparent volumes through implicit language and that is how you came off. If you say you did not intend it that way, I will certainly accept you on your word. Whatever this apparent race may be, I have no horse in it.
    There is a preventive vaccine for rabies. People who work around animals likely to have rabies use them. What do you think they give dogs and cats?

    You couldn't look that up?

    I'm well aware of typhoid Mary and other asymptomatic carriers, though I'm not sure what you think she has to do with vaccines considering that it's a bacteria transmitted mostly from poop, and is prevented by good hygiene or treated by antibiotics.

    I get pissed off because people believe stupid $#@!, and specifically why do you think I'm irrational? Because of my guess that you want me to build my child's immune system by playing in cow $#@!? I do believe in natural immune response, however, I'm not going to risk my kid because some idiots think polio is just a test and if it doesn't kill her, it'll make her stronger. The more a pathogen resides in a person, the more opportunity it has to mutate. These mutated versions are likely to evolve and overwhelm those who have been immunized. And while your kitty with the feline leukemia may have lived to be old, what if I don't want my cat to have that disease? You think I'm a jerk because of that?

    I simply want to know if your kid hasn't been vaccinated, so I have a choice--and my choice will be that she can't hang out with your kid. So what? I'm protective of her because I don't want her to die and I don't want her to have permanent problems from a serious disease.

    And I truly doubt your "member" is impressive to anyone but yourself. Weirdo.

    Just out of curiosity, what are your 4 (four) science degrees in? I really don't think you understand the points I'm trying to make, and that may be a failure on my part to communicate, my frustration with those who promote the "anti-vaccine" viewpoint or those who simply believe any damn thing that a conspiracy site has fed them, while disregarding everything else.

  12. #40
    bump///



  13. Remove this section of ads by registering.
  14. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by osan View Post
    You have apparently failed to grasp the primary results of vaccination.

    If you are vaccinated against pathogen X, you presumably have developed immunity to it. Having developed said immunity, you are in the main impervious to developing whatever diseases associated with pathogen X. That does NOT mean that you cannot be a carrier, either long term or short.

    For example, though you are strongly immune to pneumococcus, it is virtually certain that you carry the pathogen in your lungs every day of your life. The reason you do not develop pneumonia is that your immune system is strong and trained to defend against the bacterium.

    Even if your body kills off all of a given pathogen, you may still be a temporary carrier by virtue of coming into contact with it. You touch a door handle or some other object with which many other hands have made contact. You are now a carrier, like it or not. You may not develop disease, but having shaken hands with another may well introduce enough of the bug to infect them, too.

    Given all this, it is the unvaccinated person who has the most to fear If you carry a bug against which you are immune, it is an easy matter to transfer pathogens from yourself to one who is unvaccinated. Such a person may do the same, but what do you care if you are already immune?

    As you can see, something does not track in the reasoning of the paranoid pro-vacciners. They appear to view the subject 180* out of phase with reality.





    Why would your children be vulnerable if they have been vaccinated, unless the process is itself not quite what some would have you think?



    And under the circumstances YOU cite, the state of having been vaccinated would have helped your child ZERO and may in fact have endangered her more.




    Perhaps, but not of the brands you here suggest.




    And you think that this could not change almost over night? Surely you cannot be that naive.




    Flawed example. Rabies vaccines are administered REACTIVELY, not proactively. One does not run off to the doctor and get their child vaccinated with a preventative rabies vaccine. They get the series after having been bitten. If one waits too long, all the rabies vaccine on the planet will not be able to help you. Also, chances of survival are low, but most definitely not nil.

    I fully understand your logic, but it has a faulty basis. Most of your argument is centered around vaccines being something that makes us immune for the duration of our lives. I feel confident you know well this is not true, but didn't seem to factor that in.

    Vaccines are given mainly to children and elderly, the two groups most prone to contagions, as well as lower chances to build natural immunities. Those are also the two groups people in the medical field try very hard to keep immunized. People also keep falsely using this, "It's my children who'd be at risk, not yours'!" argument, when it is not true. Firstly, these people can very well be inadvertently providing breeding grounds and transportation to these infections. Secondly, while an infected child would not really pose much threat to my child, they would have just turned my child into a possible death sentence for people. Worse case scenario here, but if it was proven that my mother died because someone decided they were Neo in the Big Pharma matrix, and in their quest to avoid (at least the basic) common sense vaccines, they might not like the price that choice would cost. But I wouldn't be the only sumbitch burying someone.

    I completely agree that people have a right to live their life with their body how they see fit. But that coin flips both ways.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


Similar Threads

  1. The American History Of Compulsory Vaccination and its Ties to Eugenics
    By Created4 in forum Personal Health & Well-Being
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-27-2023, 05:38 AM
  2. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 03-14-2015, 05:39 PM
  3. Replies: 3
    Last Post: 10-06-2014, 04:58 PM
  4. Why not cash for sterilization?
    By RonPaulMall in forum Political Philosophy & Government Policy
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 04-28-2014, 04:08 PM
  5. Self sterilization
    By tod evans in forum Open Discussion
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-17-2014, 05:26 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •