Vaccination exemption in CA, personal down, medical up

[Ravenshire]

Keeping your own and other kids safe sounds extreme?!?

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

We're mot discussing sides of an argument that have little or no impact in reality, like the belief in gawd. We're discussing keeping the public at large from the ramifications of stupid people believing verifiably harmful agendas being pushed by celebrities.

You may believe these people are keeping their kids safe, but they aren't. And, they are putting others in harm's way! If there is a legitimate medical concern over the vaccination, a health care professional would determine that risk far better than mom and dad, even if there's a family history.

Would you be ok with a kid spraying an aerosolised poison around a school as long as it only affected 1 in 10,000 and was only fatal to 1 in 100,000? If you're not ok with that, you shouldn't be ok with a walking petri dish attending school either.

---

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

bold mine

Those would more than likely fall into the medical exemption category. I think they are talking about otherwise healthy kids whose parents don't comply with the vaccination law.

^^^THIS!!!^^^

[Rev. Rye]

BBC's answer to this is that guys didn't do oral on women until 1990s and they even pointed a particular event that popularized it which was Clinton's affair to Monica Lewinsky. Which is again nonsense because at least they have porn stars on record doing it and no one had those problems.

Okay, given that it actually ended up something of a sacrament in Taoism (apparently due to it not involving absorbing others' bodily fluids, thereby conserving and absorbing chi), I highly doubt that.

---

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them.

You'd be surprised what some people do because they seriously think they're keeping kids safer in the long run. You ever hear of To Train a Child? It's a parenting book written by a fundamentalist couple who thinks they've found the way to keep them safe and Godly. In their own words

"If you want a child who will integrate into the New World Order and wait his turn in line for condoms, a government[-]funded abortion, sexually transmitted disease treatment, psychological evaluation and a mark on the forehead, then follow the popular guidelines in education, entertainment and discipline, but if you want a son or daughter of God, you will have to do it God's way."

For the Perls, "God's Way" involves beating the crap out of them. At one point, they describe a scenario where a boy of twelve months crawls away from their father's lap. He responds by spanking him. For over 45 minutes. And this isn't treated as abuse, or even excessive, but as an exemplar to be followed. They continually treat their ideas as more or less equivalent to breaking a horse or training a dog, even though some of the things they consider normal would likely consider good parenting would still be considered animal cruelty. Three children have been killed as a direct result of their parenting advice, one of them dying after being beaten with plastic tubing for the unpardonable crime of mispronouncing a word (and she was adopted from Liberia). And her parents seriously thought that by beating her, they were, in the long run, keeping her safe, inoculating her from the toxic influence against society.

If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant.

Which is why medical exemptions exist.

[Succubus]

Also another "reason" against vaccination:

"Human papillomavirus can be transmitted non-sexually. According to Health News, HPV can't be killed by disinfectants, so there is a risk of being infected by a medical instrument or tool that harbors the virus. Also, a pregnant woman is able to transmit the virus to her unborn baby."

You need to make it clear you were quoting the article and not your opinion.

---

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

My observations over the last few months are that you seldom, if ever, take a stand on any issue. Middle of the road opinions on anything and everything. You just ask questions. You're good at it mind you.

[LadyForCamus]

Seems a bit extreme to me, imho.

Polio is pretty extreme.

Child Neglect: a deficit in meeting a child's basic needs, including the failure to provide adequate health care, supervision, clothing, nutrition, housing as well as their physical, emotional, social, educational and safety needs.

Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children are essentially refusing to provide them basic, universal protection from serious illnesses that could kill them.  It's no different than failing to buckle them up in the car, or not put a helmet on them while riding a bike. If some wacko out there sincerely believes that bike helmets cause brain cancer, do you think it's okay that they send their kid into the road without one?  I mean...they really, REALLY believe it's true.  

The right side of this discussion is the side that puts the objective health and safety of children first, before their parents' feelings and opinions.

[brewer]

If this is C_L trolling I'ma gonna LMFAO.

C_L?

[Succubus]

If this is C_L trolling I'ma gonna LMFAO.

C_L?

If CL actually says something new I'll show my arse in Hamleys toy shop.

[Whateverist]

Keeping your own and other kids safe sounds extreme?!?

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

But how far really are anti-vexers from parents who refuse medical intervention in favor of prayer?

[Rev. Rye]

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

But how far really are anti-vexers from parents who refuse medical intervention in favor of prayer?

In theory, they're not so different. That said, one does have a shitload more influence than the other.

How many celebrities do we have who use their power to advocate refusing medical intervention? And how many do we have who use it to speak out against vaccination? Note, there's been a sizable number of Christian Scientists in entertainment. There's surprisingly little evidence of the Christian Scientists in Hollywood using their fame as a platform to promote it the same way Anti-vaxxers today do. One would think that Val Kilmer, who's known to be active in his Christian Scientist congregation when he's not making movies, would find some excuse to crow about the virtues of rejecting medical care.

---

Fixed That For Ya. It kind of defeats the purpose of using a comic to comment on an issue when the file is in such a low resolution that the text can't be read. At least the "Peanuts" and "Plain Nuts" were legible.

[JamieBra]

"Human papillomavirus can be transmitted non-sexually. According to Health News, HPV can't be killed by disinfectants, so there is a risk of being infected by a medical instrument or tool that harbors the virus. Also, a pregnant woman is able to transmit the virus to her unborn baby."

You need to make it clear you were quoting the article and not your opinion.

---

That's a bit of a loaded comment.   

It seems extreme to say that parents who don't vaccinate their kids should be criminally punished with child neglect charges. For one, they think they are keeping their kids safe by not vaccinating them. If there is family history of autoimmune disorders, other immune issues, methylation issues, or if they've had a bad experience with vaccines in the past, then I can see why a parent may be hesitant. I don't agree with it, but I don't agree with all this over blown hatred towards these people either. This whole ordeal about villainizing people who are not on "our" side of an argument is where my pushback is coming from here.

My observations over the last few months are that you seldom, if ever, take a stand on any issue. Middle of the road opinions on anything and everything. You just ask questions. You're good at it mind you.

Ok I just googled other ways to be infected and thats what I found. I could paraphrase it next time.

[Amarok]

But how far really are anti-vexers from parents who refuse medical intervention in favor of prayer?

In theory, they're not so different. That said, one does have a shitload more influence than the other.

How many celebrities do we have who use their power to advocate refusing medical intervention? And how many do we have who use it to speak out against vaccination? Note, there's been a sizable number of Christian Scientists in entertainment. There's surprisingly little evidence of the Christian Scientists in Hollywood using their fame as a platform to promote it the same way Anti-vaxxers today do. One would think that Val Kilmer, who's known to be active in his Christian Scientist congregation when he's not making movies, would find some excuse to crow about the virtues of rejecting medical care.

---

Fixed That For Ya. It kind of defeats the purpose of using a comic to comment on an issue when the file is in such a low resolution that the text can't be read. At least the "Peanuts" and "Plain Nuts" were legible.

Sorry

Though I point out I could read it. I just assumed everyone else could.