Vaccinations at Gunpoint
- Thread starter mAlice
- Start date
Larry Gude
Strung Out
After reading the link, I am opposed to this and shocked.
But, not really shocked. If we see ourselves as having the right to force one another to put helmets on our kids, seat belts on one another, tell one another what we can and can't ingest, all in the name of safety, isn't this inevitable?
twinoaks207
Having Fun!
If I were deliberately searching for an example of propaganda I could not have found a better example. This article was full of inflamatory language and emotional appeals, along with a viewpoint so slanted that there appeared to be nothing vertical involved. It also contained inaccuracies.
To the contrary, there is indeed a law in Maryland that requires that children be vaccinated against certain infectious diseases before entering the public school system. The complete text of this law can be found HERE. Because the state has a vested interest in ensuring that infectious diseases are not spread via a vulnerable group of our population (young children) and then to others in the families (very easily done with young ones who haven't yet learned to cover their mouths or protect others from their sneezing,etc.), these laws were put in place in concert with school requirements.
There are provisions for waivers included in the regulations. Two of my children have such waivers because of allergies and adverse reactions.
Speaking only of one of the schools that I am involved with in PG County, the majority of the children who were missing required vaccinations were immigrant children who came to us from countries where those diseases are more prevalent than they are in the US. Personally, I appreciate not having to worry if that coughing child has tuberculosis and will it spread to me.
I do not condone fear-mongering as an acceptable way of enacting policy change. Unfortunately, many people will fall for the propaganda in that article.
Edit: I forgot to mention that long before things got to the point that the Attorney General et al had to step in, there were multiple, multiple parent contacts to attempt to get the children vaccinated. MULTIPLE!!!
Edit: I forgot to mention that long before things got to the point that the Attorney General et al had to step in, there were multiple, multiple parent contacts to attempt to get the children vaccinated. MULTIPLE!!!
Last edited:
glhs837
Power with Control
You want a public education, then accept that there are conditions to enrolling your children in them. Just like accepting that there are rules that govern how I drive on the public's roadways. I fail to follow those enough, and I will also be herded at gunpoint.
Dont want to inoculate your child? Then private school if you can find one or homeschool. Your right to wave your non inoculated child stops where my kids breathing space begins.
Dont want to inoculate your child? Then private school if you can find one or homeschool. Your right to wave your non inoculated child stops where my kids breathing space begins.
mAlice
professional daydreamer
I think this is probably the best approach, however, that will not keep these kids away from yours. They will still in in public area's. Playgrounds, stores, movie theatre's...with that said, if one child has the vaccines, then there should be no concern about catching the illness from a child who isn't vaccinated, correct?
libertytyranny
Dream Stealer
there are children who are too young to be vaccinated, too sick to be vaccinated, have allergies, etc etc. Also, if exposed all vaccines are not 100% therefore they rely on others to be vaccinated as well to reduce the likelyhood of coming into contact with the disease.
This is a tough one. I for one, am fully pro vaccine. My child has recieved, and will continue to recieve all vaccines (with the exception of the roto because she was breastfed and chicken pox because that one's dumb) However, I think I should have the absolute right to decide what is injected into my child. Unfortunately this means that right must be extended to the stupid masses who don't bother to properly inform themselves. So we get nutters who, despite all evidence to the contrary, still believe there is an autism link..who will refuse to vaccinate their children. A few people doing this, and it is really no big deal..once it becomes a large enough contingent, though, and we can see the possibility of experiencing diseases we had mostly eradicated in the states.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
You can choose to not drive and no one will care. At all. You choose to home school and there are obstacles galore.
At the end of the day, if we take the position that we have the right, the absolute right to force practices for health reasons then there is no end. Not helmets, not smoking, not what you eat, not what you listen to, read, watch, wear, faith. Obamacare. Social Security. There is NO end to the 'public health' argument. Am I my brothers keeper?
Governments role is one of infrastructure and basic safety rules be it driving or standards or financial regulations. When we cross over into the personal, we've gone too far. Government SHOULD make the case for why you should have this vaccination or that one and then go about trying to talk you into it based on science and reason. Same for seat belts, bike helmets, fatty foods and cigarettes and saving money and insurance.
Then, we are either free people who make choices, informed choices, and then live with them. Or, we are subjects and it is simply a matter of degree on any given day or issue.
glhs837
Power with Control
Well, aren't inoculations a basic safety rule for continued public health? And there are all sorts of practices we enforce for health reasons. We inspect places that serve food, and we inspect places that process food, and we inspect wells, and we inspect septic systems.
Dont confuse the individuals right to choose what medical practices they want/dont want with the publics right to choose what measures we expect folks to take to ensure they dont infect us as a whole. That's where these laws came from.
Dont confuse the individuals right to choose what medical practices they want/dont want with the publics right to choose what measures we expect folks to take to ensure they dont infect us as a whole. That's where these laws came from.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
We agree the government has a responsibility in saying 'you SHALL get this and this vaccination IF you want to go to this school."
Where I see the problem is hostility to NOT going to the public school. A friendly, persuasive government gets you to cooperate. It doesn't lock you up.
glhs837
Power with Control
I am not hostile towards it, but can see why some folks are. I really think a love of the subject makes for a much more effective teacher, and very few folks love all the varied subjects that make up a modern education.
And a friendly, persuasive government does do those things, just like a friendly, persuasive police officer. But there are folks on whom friendly and persuasive just dont work. And for those times, you need the horsepower to make the right thing happen. They real thing we are both looking for, I think, is the hope/expectation that the government knows what set of shoes to put on in differences circumstances. And that the citizens have a mechanism in place to reign it in when it crosses that line.
And a friendly, persuasive government does do those things, just like a friendly, persuasive police officer. But there are folks on whom friendly and persuasive just dont work. And for those times, you need the horsepower to make the right thing happen. They real thing we are both looking for, I think, is the hope/expectation that the government knows what set of shoes to put on in differences circumstances. And that the citizens have a mechanism in place to reign it in when it crosses that line.
Larry Gude
Strung Out
Well, I am with you in spirit. At some point, y'ah gotta lay down the law. The larger problem is one of judgment; as people are less and less responsible for their own actions via the nanny state and are suffering the corresponding loss of ability to make good judgments, so too, it seems to me, has government gotten poorer at making good policy and going about it in reasonable fashions.
So, somewhere, who is preeminent? The citizen or the government?
glhs837
Power with Control
There's the rub. Individuals are not taught they have a responsibility to society, and the folks we elect are not held to account for not making sure government is "for the people" as a whole, hell they are not held to account for much at all. We have told ourselves for so long that it's okay for politicians to lie, cheat and steal, as long as they are making the government do what we want it to.
You can choose to not drive and no one will care. At all. You choose to home school and there are obstacles galore.
At the end of the day, if we take the position that we have the right, the absolute right to force practices for health reasons then there is no end. Not helmets, not smoking, not what you eat, not what you listen to, read, watch, wear, faith. Obamacare. Social Security. There is NO end to the 'public health' argument. Am I my brothers keeper?
Governments role is one of infrastructure and basic safety rules be it driving or standards or financial regulations. When we cross over into the personal, we've gone too far. Government SHOULD make the case for why you should have this vaccination or that one and then go about trying to talk you into it based on science and reason. Same for seat belts, bike helmets, fatty foods and cigarettes and saving money and insurance.
Then, we are either free people who make choices, informed choices, and then live with them. Or, we are subjects and it is simply a matter of degree on any given day or issue.
I agree with some of this but I think you are mixing apples and oranges. I believe the government should be able to make and enforce laws that prevent me from hurting you and you from hurting me. However, they should not be able to regulate things the affect an individual. Therefore, helmets, seatbelts and fatty foods should be an individuals chioce. Smoking in public and being vaccinated for infectious diseases should be regulated to ensure the publics safety.
Last edited:
State education department licensed private schools in MD are subject to the same immunization requirements. And if the public schools may let things slide because they know nothing ever happens to them, the private schools put their license at risk and will be quite zealous in enforcing the immunization rules.
You dont want to have your kids immunized, home schooling it is.
E
EmptyTimCup
Guest
E
EmptyTimCup
Guest
Sorry NO - Private Schools are MADE to Meet all Manor of Public School Regulation - that is one
Larry Gude
Strung Out
I think we're pretty much on the same page. However, making me vaccinate my kids for small pox is something I can at least see from a scientific, factual standpoint. That's not the case with me insisting you can't smoke. I may not like the smell but, there is no scientific basis to limit you there.