Require parents who don’t want a child vaccinated to get a science lesson

[Further]

They are inalienable.

Like the right to inhale and exhale.

Which rights?????

People talk in general sweeping terms all the time, and saying inalienable rights sounds great, but what are these rights, because so far every right that has been mentioned there has been listed times when those rights don't apply.

Life - death penalty
Liberty - Jail, mental hospital
Pursuit of happiness - if you get happiness from killing puppies or peeing in elevators.

Which ones are truly inalienable?


Answer - None. These are rights that we try and preserve wherever possible. But when these rights butt up against other peoples rights or the laws of the land, then they get chipped away at. I am not saying we should mandate vaccinations right now, just saying that there may come a time, a situation, that calls for it. And if that day comes, then that will trump the importance of keeping the inalienable rights "inalienable".

 

[crandc]

Nature granted these right? Hogwash. Nature granted us typhus, tapeworms, malaria, tooth decay, gangrene. Nature did not grant property, which does not exist in nature. Nature did not grant liberty, that is a human construct. Life, I can grant, but gangrene is as alive as we are.

 

[Denny Crane]

Which rights?????

People talk in general sweeping terms all the time, and saying inalienable rights sounds great, but what are these rights, because so far every right that has been mentioned there has been listed times when those rights don't apply.

Life - death penalty
Liberty - Jail, mental hospital
Pursuit of happiness - if you get happiness from killing puppies or peeing in elevators.

Which ones are truly inalienable?


Answer - None. These are rights that we try and preserve wherever possible. But when these rights butt up against other peoples rights or the laws of the land, then they get chipped away at. I am not saying we should mandate vaccinations right now, just saying that there may come a time, a situation, that calls for it. And if that day comes, then that will trump the importance of keeping the inalienable rights "inalienable".

Define them away for yourself if you can. Try to hold your breath and see if Nature doesn't make you take a breath against your wishes.

It's an inalienable right (to breathe).

It is your right to stay the fuck away from typhoid mary or anyone else who is sick. If you give her due process, you can put her in quarantine.

You can't make her ingest anything, inject her with anything, etc., against her wishes.

 

[Denny Crane]

Nature granted these right? Hogwash. Nature granted us typhus, tapeworms, malaria, tooth decay, gangrene. Nature did not grant property, which does not exist in nature. Nature did not grant liberty, that is a human construct. Life, I can grant, but gangrene is as alive as we are.

If you believe in a woman's right to choose, the law is entirely based upon the woman's right to her body as property.

Don't be hypocritical now.

 

[Eastoff]

Nature granted these right? Hogwash. Nature granted us typhus, tapeworms, malaria, tooth decay, gangrene. Nature did not grant property, which does not exist in nature. Nature did not grant liberty, that is a human construct. Life, I can grant, but gangrene is as alive as we are.

Nature gave us the right to die, science gave us the power to be greater than a disease. But fear and ignorance try to stop that.

 

[Denny Crane]

Nature gave us the right to die, science gave us the power to be greater than a disease. But fear and ignorance try to stop that.

Nature gives us Reason to convince people to willingly do things that may be best for the community.

I find it hard to realize that people don't understand Natural Rights. It is a concept that predates the Magna Carta, signed in 1215. The King previously owned everyone and his whim was law and carried out against the citizens no matter how their Natural Rights were infringed. The King got his absolute power to rule from God.

We don't have any true monarchies any more. The Queen of England is pretty much a figurehead. Middle Eastern nations that feature kings and royal families are constitutional monarchies - the constitutions limit the power of the monarch and share it liberally with something like a parliament and court system.

The American experiment is deeply rooted in centuries of common law and common sense. The people are given the power by the Creator to rule their own lives. They grant power to the government, and not the other way around.

GOD consistently argues government grants us rights. It's just plain wrong. The only way the government can grant us rights is at the point of a gun. No thanks.

The concepts of Natural Rights are embedded not only in our Constitution, but in numerous treaties and international laws.

 

[Further]

Define them away for yourself if you can. Try to hold your breath and see if Nature doesn't make you take a breath against your wishes.

It's an inalienable right (to breathe).

Breathing is not a right, it's our biological system. So those on an iron lung don't have the same rights as you or I? You have read glorious prose elucidating the meaning of life, and I think you have taken those words to be too ridged. And I am really not tying to catch you on anything when I ask for you to list what these inalienable rights are, I can't think of one right that truly is inalienable. These are terms that are thrown around frequently but not analyzed often. It's a beautiful idea to think we have certain rights given by our creator/nature, but they are only rights in so far as we choose not to tamper with them. And for each example I can think of, there are times in which we accept that we tamper with those rights. SO, either we do a totally shitty job at subscribing to the ideals of "inalienable rights" or we accept that rights are not divine, but are an agreed upon norm which we try not to tread on too much.

It is your right to stay the fuck away from typhoid mary or anyone else who is sick. If you give her due process, you can put her in quarantine.

You can't make her ingest anything, inject her with anything, etc., against her wishes.

The point is there are possible situations when talking about hundreds of millions of Americans, or billions around the world, where there is not time and/or resources to quarantine infected people. And, the point of inoculating is to make sure they do not play host to a growing and mutating pathogen witch could turn into devastation. On your way into America, you are tested for TB and other health concerns because we dont want an epidemic. And if an outbreak occurred, that can harm innocent people. With TB, easily treated nowadays, one in four deaths in England around 1815 were from it. We don't need to worry about TB anymore, but we do need to worry about what has yet to present itself. The one certain thing with viruses, bacteria, prions and other pathogens, they mutate, and on occasion a real bad ass bug will emerge.

 

[RR7]

Wait so we wouldn't have the time or resources to quarantine infected people, but we'd have the time and resources to give EVERYONE else a vaccine shot?

 

[Further]

Nature gives us Reason to convince people to willingly do things that may be best for the community.

I find it hard to realize that people don't understand Natural Rights. It is a concept that predates the Magna Carta, signed in 1215. The King previously owned everyone and his whim was law and carried out against the citizens no matter how their Natural Rights were infringed. The King got his absolute power to rule from God.

We don't have any true monarchies any more. The Queen of England is pretty much a figurehead. Middle Eastern nations that feature kings and royal families are constitutional monarchies - the constitutions limit the power of the monarch and share it liberally with something like a parliament and court system.

The American experiment is deeply rooted in centuries of common law and common sense. The people are given the power by the Creator to rule their own lives. They grant power to the government, and not the other way around.

GOD consistently argues government grants us rights. It's just plain wrong. The only way the government can grant us rights is at the point of a gun. No thanks.

The concepts of Natural Rights are embedded not only in our Constitution, but in numerous treaties and international laws.

I actually take it a step further. We choose to call something a right and to hold that up as virtuous. But, there is nothing inalienable about those rights. I don't say government gives those rights, I say society does. society forms govt, society creates the norms, society elevates certain values over others. These values may not exist in a different society. If they are not routine in all environments, then they are not inalienable.

 

[Further]

Wait so we wouldn't have the time or resources to quarantine infected people, but we'd have the time and resources to give EVERYONE else a vaccine shot?

There may be gestation periods where we don't know who is or is not infected. Those periods could be days, weeks or years. But a solid bioinformatics system and the proper analysts should be able to map general populations and likelihoods of outbreaks.

 

[Further]

By the way everyone, this is not my area of expertise, I just got a wild hair up my azz to respond to everyone and turn this subject into some science fiction thriller of a thread.

 

[magnifier661]

I think parents have a choice to eat Taco Bell

 

[magnifier661]

By the way everyone, this is not my area of expertise, I just got a wild hair up my azz to respond to everyone and turn this subject into some science fiction thriller of a thread.

Admit it! You are in love with me!

 

[Further]

Admit it! You are in love with me!

No, but a threesome where you took a break wouldn't be all bad.






EDIT: Yes

 

[Denny Crane]

I actually take it a step further. We choose to call something a right and to hold that up as virtuous. But, there is nothing inalienable about those rights. I don't say government gives those rights, I say society does. society forms govt, society creates the norms, society elevates certain values over others. These values may not exist in a different society. If they are not routine in all environments, then they are not inalienable.

Rights aren't what your sphincter twitching tells you they are.

I mean no offense, but your definitions are arbitrary. Like the kings of old. As in, to suit your agenda.

I don't want any part of it, but you would force your will on me? I wouldn't force my will on you.

 

[Further]

Rights aren't what your sphincter twitching tells you they are.

I mean no offense, but your definitions are arbitrary. Like the kings of old. As in, to suit your agenda.

I don't want any part of it, but you would force your will on me? I wouldn't force my will on you.

If I were to force my will on you, it would be to save both our lives, especially mine.

Put it differently, I have a cure in my blood for the terrifying dennyites disease. My blood may be taken without harm to me and be used to cure you. I say I don't wish to give you a cc of my life-giving blood. I would say it is your right in that situation to force me to give up my blood to save your life. I am not physically wronged by the loss of blood any more than the pin prick itself. You, and others in your family who also have Dennyites are cured. It would certainly be a last resort, you would ask first, then beg, then offer to buy, then offer everything you own, but eventually, my NO would stand. What do you do?

 

[PapaG]

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/what-would-wipe-out-the-flu-2012-11-30

I've never had a flu shot, and I've had the flu one time. It was 1998, and it lasted 2 days. My wife gets a flu shot every year, and has it the flu at least 4 times since I had it.

The problem with the flu vaccines is that if the incorrect virus is targeted, the shot is useless. Same as if the virus mutates in a given season.

 

[PapaG]

A flu shot is $10, but people are more scared of the needle and the side effects of the shot than the risk of getting the flu. The flu kills 1/2 million a year.

.

Culling the herd. Who is mankind to mess with natural controls of human population?

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Put it differently, there exists a cure for GODitis, which requires only money, of which I have enormous amounts. My money may be taken without harm to me and be used to pay to cure you. I say I don't wish to give you a cent of my life-purchasing money. Would you say it is your right in that situation to force me to give up my money to save your life? I am not financially wronged by the loss of money any more than I am by taking the time to say no. You, and others in your family who also have GODitis are cured. It would certainly be a last resort, you would ask first, then beg, then offer to repay, then offer everything you own, but eventually, my NO would stand. What do you do?

 

[RR7]

Put it differently, there exists a cure for GODitis, which requires only money, of which I have enormous amounts. My money may be taken without harm to me and be used to pay to cure you. I say I don't wish to give you a cent of my life-purchasing money. Would you say it is your right in that situation to force me to give up my money to save your life? I am not financially wronged by the loss of money any more than I am by taking the time to say no. You, and others in your family who also have GODitis are cured. It would certainly be a last resort, you would ask first, then beg, then offer to repay, then offer everything you own, but eventually, my NO would stand. What do you do?

Was just thinking the same thing. Sets a pretty bad precedent, no?

 

[PapaG]

Bullshit. We live in a society. We are interdependent whether Denny wants to see it or not. You don't have the right to kill another person. Or rape them (although some here think otherwise). You can't say I want to fuck someone and I have the right to and I don't care if I have to beat the shit out of her to do it. You can't drive drunk. You can't say I have the right to drink all I please, dammit, and drive 90 MPH on the freeway and screw everyone else. You do not have the right to deliberately put other people in danger. You can make up crap about jack booted thugs that doesn't exist and that no one is talking about or you can exercise some of that famous personal responsibility to act in a responsible manner. Or does personal responsibility just mean ending food stamps because children should be personally responsible for feeding themselves? And isn't it an exercise of personal responsiblity to make INFORMED decisions rather than ignorant ones?

Why do you say this stupid bullshit? Who in this community has ever advocated, let alone supported, rape??? I'm sure you make good points at times, but it seems like every rant you go on has some sort of bullshit strawman in the first few sentences, which makes the rest unreadable.

 

[PapaG]

stop antagonizing. There's more than enough silliness from the anti-vaccination line of logic.

Accusing generic members of this community of supporting rape isn't antagonizing, though.

 

[Sinobas]

Autism has a strong genetic basis, although the genetics of autism are complex and it is unclear whether ASD is explained more by rare

So...are you trying to argue that there was some magical change in people's genetics in the late 80's that caused the rates of autism to rise? It wasn't influenced by any environmental factor?

Or are you trying to argue that this is simply a matter of more diagnosis for autism? Talk to anyone who has worked with children over the last few decades, such as school teachers, and they'll tell you the numbers are an actual reflection of a change in the kids.

 

[Further]

Put it differently, there exists a cure for GODitis, which requires only money, of which I have enormous amounts. My money may be taken without harm to me and be used to pay to cure you. I say I don't wish to give you a cent of my life-purchasing money. Would you say it is your right in that situation to force me to give up my money to save your life? I am not financially wronged by the loss of money any more than I am by taking the time to say no. You, and others in your family who also have GODitis are cured. It would certainly be a last resort, you would ask first, then beg, then offer to repay, then offer everything you own, but eventually, my NO would stand. What do you do?

Bravo, I rep you sir.

The answer is simple, if all the parameters were as you have set forth, I would, without hesitation, force you to give up the money. It sounds cold, it sounds wrong, but I weigh life much heavier than money.

Jews who are devout and practice full kosher, are permitted to eat pork, or break other kosher laws, if their life depends on it.

 

[RR7]

Bravo, I rep you sir.

The answer is simple, if all the parameters were as you have set forth, I would, without hesitation, force you to give up the money. It sounds cold, it sounds wrong, but I weigh life much heavier than money.

Jews who are devout and practice full kosher, are permitted to eat pork, or break other kosher laws, if their life depends on it.

So instead of illness, let's use starvation, and the amount of people throughout the world starving. Should we just start taking by force, starting with those that have the most, to start feeding everyone in the world? You leading that pitchfork mob?

 

[Further]

A recommendation for anyone interested. Neil Degrasse Tyson has a podcast called Startalk where they look at different science issues from a new or approachable perspective. The last two episodes were "Zombie Apocolypse" parts 1 and 2. Zombies were used as analogies for viruses, so the real topic is viruses. I enjoyed part two more, but both were interesting.
StarTalk Podcast website

Zombie Apocalypse Part 1

Zombie Apocalypse Part 2

 

[Further]

So instead of illness, let's use starvation, and the amount of people throughout the world starving. Should we just start taking by force, starting with those that have the most, to start feeding everyone in the world? You leading that pitchfork mob?

I make no bones about it, I was talking about specific criteria. Most importantly, I and My Family were the ones affected. In that case, I would force a lot, be it for a vaccine or food. But I am not society. If you break down the lines of the hypothetical, the answers can change.

A society has rules. We in society make up the rules. It is for us to determine when and if we should break certain norms, like forced vaccinations. I just draw that mark at a different point than you (I'm assuming). I would also lean on all the information we can amass and all the thinkers we can tap, to find a late, but not too late, moment in the pathogen timeline to interfere in an intrusively aggressive fashion. Hopefully, that moment would be avoidable.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

So...are you trying to argue that there was some magical change in people's genetics in the late 80's that caused the rates of autism to rise? It wasn't influenced by any environmental factor?

Did I say anything like that? Your original claim is that it was all caused by vaccines. I merely pointed out by quoting Wikipedia that your claim is not accurate. Now you're claiming some vague "environmental factor". I never said there wasn't a raise. Some of that is from more accurate diagnoses. Sad to say many children with autism were labeled as retarded and locked away.

Or are you trying to argue that this is simply a matter of more diagnosis for autism? Talk to anyone who has worked with children over the last few decades, such as school teachers, and they'll tell you the numbers are an actual reflection of a change in the kids.

My step daughter has a 10 year old severely autistic son. She is also graduating Summa Cum Laude with a Masters in Education this Sunday from Portland State University. (BTW, if you would like you can PM me and I will give you her name and you can watch her graduate this Sunday. It's being broadcast on OPB.) Like I said, her son is severely autistic (meaning he is non-verbal) that diagnosis comes from OHSU. Portland Public Schools wants to label him as intellectual developmental disorder. PPS gets more funding for a student with an intellectual development disorder than they do students labeled as autistic. Either label does not translate to anymore direct services for her son but an intellectual developmental disorder means that person has an IQ below 70 and her son while non-verbal is very bright.

So to answer your questions:

Have I talked with anyone who has worked with children? Yes.

Have I talked with anyone who has worked with autistic children? Almost everyday.

Do I know about numbers that are an actual reflection of a change in children? Yes.

 

[Further]

My step daughter has a 10 year old severely autistic son. She is also graduating Summa Cum Laude with a Masters in Education this Sunday from Portland State University. (BTW, if you would like you can PM me and I will give you her name and you can watch her graduate this Sunday. It's being broadcast on OPB.) Like I said, her son is severely autistic (meaning he is non-verbal) that diagnosis comes from OHSU. Portland Public Schools wants to label him as intellectual developmental disorder. PPS gets more funding for a student with an intellectual development disorder than they do students labeled as autistic. Either label does not translate to anymore direct services for her son but an intellectual developmental disorder means that person has an IQ below 70 and her son while non-verbal is very bright.

Congrats, you and especially her mom must be over the moon with your step daughters honers and graduation.

 

[SlyPokerDog]

Congrats, you and especially her mom must be over the moon with your step daughters honers and graduation.

Thanks! We are, very proud.

Her real father can't even be bothered to show up Sunday and he lives in Pendleton.