Vaccination/Immunization -- Why is there a problem?

windsock · 01-28-2019, 04:55 PM

First impression: **** IFLS

DwnWthVwls · 01-28-2019, 04:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by elphenor

this is only half true

still at risk are children too young to be vaccinated and those with severe immune deficiency

that's why these outbreaks occur not only among the unvaccinated

Yeah, that's fair those cases exist, but I'm still willing to take that trade off.

Quote:

Originally Posted by windsock

Maybe forceful vaccination for children shouldn't be mandatory but refusal by the parents to vaccinate their children (especially if they're genetically disposed to disease, although ultimately as kids they're inherently vulnerable) should be classified as child abuse.

Correction: it should be child abuse if the child gets sick.

Why only if? So if you don't feed your kid or if you let them play in traffic that's cool, as long as they don't get hurt?

DwnWthVwls · 01-28-2019, 04:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by windsock

First impression: **** IFLS

Ive never even heard of IFLS. I just recently heard about this vaccine fine and grabbed the first link I saw.

windsock · 01-28-2019, 06:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

Why only if? So if you don't feed your kid or if you let them play in traffic that's cool, as long as they don't get hurt?

I said if because if all anti-vaxxers had to do was not vaccinate their kids to get legal charges, that's basically the same outcome as if there were forced vaccinations- ultimately vaccinating your kids would be mandatory but with just more steps.

I believe in the liberty (however much I may find it retarded) of anti-vaxxers not to undergo vaccination as I support many other liberties of the populous. So if you want to not vaccinate your kid go right ahead (again however much I may find it retarded), but if your child becomes sick and/or infects other children your should be held responsible under the law. That's just my take.

I think your equivalency is a bit loose but for the record I do not think it would be cool to let your children play in traffic. But we're talking specifically legal bindings here so ultimately I have no say in what a parent does with their children, though I still believe they should incur the severe penalty and punishment if and when their child meets their demise.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

Ive never even heard of IFLS. I just recently heard about this vaccine fine and grabbed the first link I saw.

It was the big, hip science page with obnoxious pseudointellectuals on Facebook a while back. I don't know what it's about know but I certainly haven't lost my disdain from the bygone days.

The Batlord · 01-28-2019, 06:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by windsock

I said if because if all anti-vaxxers had to do was not vaccinate their kids to get legal charges, that's basically the same outcome as if there were forced vaccinations- ultimately vaccinating your kids would be mandatory but with just more steps.

I believe in the liberty (however much I may find it retarded) of anti-vaxxers not to undergo vaccination as I support many other liberties of the populous. So if you want to not vaccinate your kid go right ahead (again however much I may find it retarded), but if your child becomes sick and/or infects other children your should be held responsible under the law. That's just my take.

I think your equivalency is a bit loose but for the record I do not think it would be cool to let your children play in traffic. But we're talking specifically legal bindings here so ultimately I have no say in what a parent does with their children, though I still believe they should incur the severe penalty and punishment if and when their child meets their demise.

So you don't think people have the right to make others ill but you do think they have the right to expose them to illness?

windsock · 01-28-2019, 06:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dharma & Greg

So you don't think people have the right to make others ill but you do think they have the right to expose them to illness?

I think anti-vax should be actively discouraged, much as it is now, but I don't think it should be legally forbidden. I do think however you should face repercussions if your choices invariably harm your or others' offspring, as I said before.

WWWP · 01-28-2019, 07:15 PM

At my work we won't serve families that don't vaccinate their children (without a legitimate health concern), and the majority of our schools, public and private, will not accept unvaccinated children. Just today I had to tell a mother she couldn't get childcare funding through us because she refused to vaccinate her kindergartner. She was like "the schools won't take her and daycares won't take her... what am I supposed to do, homeschool her?" No dude the answer is just vaccinate your god damn children.

OccultHawk · 01-28-2019, 09:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls

Vaccines are not necessary medical procedures. Also, if you're vaccinated you don't have much to worry about, they are only hurting each other with their stupid thoughts. It'd be different if vaccinated people were at high risk, and even then I don't think I could get behind forceful injection.

Herd immunity, scientist

OccultHawk · 01-28-2019, 09:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by windsock

Maybe forceful vaccination for children shouldn't be mandatory but refusal by the parents to vaccinate their children (especially if they're genetically disposed to disease, although ultimately as kids they're inherently vulnerable) should be classified as child abuse.

Correction: it should be child abuse if the child gets sick.

Neglect is abuse

**Frownland** · 01-28-2019, 09:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by windsock

I believe in the liberty (however much I may find it retarded) of anti-vaxxers not to undergo vaccination as I support many other liberties of the populous.

I agree, let's move the compulsion element to the private sector where they can be more effective. Because **** supporting dangerous **** in the vague name of freedom.