(May 3, 2017 at 3:19 pm)FatAndFaithless Wrote: Ugh, C_L's decision had nothing to do with 'denying scientific evidence.' You're so quick to grab onto anyone else who might've had made the same decision for themselves. The fact that you view the HPV vaccine as a 'money grab' wavers kinda close to the wack anti-vax stuff, but I still wouldn't call you an "anti-vaxxer" because you've had and have had for your children other vaccines.
Not sure what your fascination is with the label though. I personally think you and C_L made the wrong decision in not getting vaccinated, but neither of you seems to be dealing in the crazy ignorance and distrust for the scientific method that has come to characterize the anti-vaccination movement (and is what most people mean when they use the term 'anti-vaxxer'). Though, the whole 'preventing the disease with your behavior' strays close to some antiquated religious and social ideas that I find rather stupid. You don't stop wearing a seatbelt just because you really, really trust the driver.
Why is the decision wrong? It seems to me that you're trying to have your cake and eat it too - saying that someone who goes against the scientific evidence is wrong for doing so, and yet not denying scientific evidence.
