Should not vaccinating your child be a criminal offence?

Started by Coveny, November 29, 2017, 10:19:03 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Baruch

Quote from: Gilgamesh on December 03, 2017, 12:58:59 AM
Okay.

Instance:

Parent does not want their child vaccinated. Child also does not want to be vaccinated.

What do?

Put child in foster care, and vaccinate child (unless valid health reasons not to).  Life isn't about freedom, but necessity.  Eat today or starve.
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Baruch

Quote from: aitm on December 03, 2017, 08:39:39 AM
Considering a woman was just convicted of swearing at her 16 yr old son, she should get prison time on the rock.

I lipped off to my mom, at that age.  She knocked me to the floor with a right hook slap.  So jail both of us?  Or put teens in British Navy for a few years ;-)
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Blackleaf

Quote from: Gilgamesh on December 03, 2017, 12:58:59 AM
Okay.

Instance:

Parent does not want their child vaccinated. Child also does not want to be vaccinated.

What do?

A child does not have the mental faculties to give consent. They're just going to do what their parents tell them to do. The responsibility is on the parent to make the right decision. When science says that a treatment is good for a child's health and has little to no risks, and when the risks for not having the treatment does carry greater risks, the decision should be clear. Parents who choose to opt out anyway are guilty of abuse.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville--

Hydra009

Quote from: Coveny on December 01, 2017, 11:57:26 PM
It's a strawman to say my position is "they're no longer needed".
1) strawmanception (hint: I quoted you directly as saying there's less need to get vaccinated, that's the position I'm criticizing)

2) I notice absolutely no defense of your bizarre position that germs are the exception to the "my freedom ends at your nose" credo.  Why am I not surprised.  If I were in your shoes, I'd change the subject, too.  But if I were in your shoes I would've never carved out such an irrational position in the first place.

Hydra009

In these sorts of discussions, I've noticed that the rationale for refusing vaccination is either played down or ignored and instead the focus is on anti-vaxxers' "rights" to refuse medical treatment for their safety and for others' safety.  Why is this?  Supposedly, anti-vaxxers have a good rationale for doing what they're doing.  You'd think they could win the argument on that basis.  Yet the focus is on rights, not rationale.

It's a bit like walking in on a pedo caressing a minor and the pedo screams that his right to privacy has been unduly infringed.  Is that the conversation we should be having?

Gilgamesh

Quote from: Blackleaf on December 03, 2017, 11:39:26 AM
A child does not have the mental faculties to give consent. They're just going to do what their parents tell them to do. The responsibility is on the parent to make the right decision. When science says that a treatment is good for a child's health and has little to no risks, and when the risks for not having the treatment does carry greater risks, the decision should be clear. Parents who choose to opt out anyway are guilty of abuse.

A child absolutely DOES have the mental faculties to decide whether they want a foreign substance injected into their body or not. If both the child and the parent say no, then it should not happen. Any government that would do it by force, and then jail the parent, is a government that must be met with force itself.

Quote from: Hydra009 on December 03, 2017, 12:32:17 PM
In these sorts of discussions, I've noticed that the rationale for refusing vaccination is either played down or ignored and instead the focus is on anti-vaxxers' "rights" to refuse medical treatment for their safety and for others' safety.  Why is this?  Supposedly, anti-vaxxers have a good rationale for doing what they're doing.  You'd think they could win the argument on that basis.  Yet the focus is on rights, not rationale.

It's a bit like walking in on a pedo caressing a minor and the pedo screams that his right to privacy has been unduly infringed.  Is that the conversation we should be having?

Because it's not a matter of whether anti-vaxxers are right, you dolt. And I'm not even an anti-vaxxer.

What it is a matter of is this; everyone has the right to bodily autonomy. Nobody but ones own person gets to decide what substance goes into ones own person. End of.


Hydra009

Quote from: Gilgamesh on December 07, 2017, 09:09:11 PMBecause it's not a matter of whether anti-vaxxers are right, you dolt. And I'm not even an anti-vaxxer.
Too kooky for you?  I guess everyone has standards, no matter how low those standards are.

QuoteWhat it is a matter of is this; everyone has the right to bodily autonomy. Nobody but ones own person gets to decide what substance goes into ones own person. End of.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/anti-vaccine-measles-outbreak-worst-in-decades-america-minnesota-somali-a7720976.html

Soo...okay because bodily autonomy?  (p.s. - did you check with the victims and find out what they decided?)

Blackleaf

Quote from: Gilgamesh on December 07, 2017, 09:09:11 PMA child absolutely DOES have the mental faculties to decide whether they want a foreign substance injected into their body or not. If both the child and the parent say no, then it should not happen. Any government that would do it by force, and then jail the parent, is a government that must be met with force itself.

No, they don't. Their brains are not fully developed, and that affects their ability to make decisions. Even when researchers in psychology use children as subjects, ethical guidelines dictate that children cannot give the vital informed consent for their participation. The parent gives the concent, and the child gives assent.

Parents have responsibility for making decisions for their children. And if that parent fails to make the right decision when it comes to vaccinations, that can negatively affect the child's health. Unless you're willing to allow Mormon children to have surgery without blood tranfusions, the consistent policy is that parents do not have the right to deny children necessary health care based on personal beliefs.
"Oh, wearisome condition of humanity,
Born under one law, to another bound;
Vainly begot, and yet forbidden vanity,
Created sick, commanded to be sound."
--Fulke Greville--

Hakurei Reimu

Quote
What it is a matter of is this; everyone has the right to bodily autonomy. Nobody but ones own person gets to decide what substance goes into ones own person. End of.
Measles, influenza, etc. do not respect your bodily autonomy. Once you are infected, you become a locus of disease and become a danger to others who are not immunized yet, whose immunizations did not take, or have weakened immune systems/health. We are at war against infectious illnesses, and those who do not do their duty to get immunized are humanity's traitors to the bugs.

Inter arma enim silent legÄ"s.
Warning: Don't Tease The Miko!
(she bites!)
Spinny Miko Avatar shamelessly ripped off from Iosys' Neko Miko Reimu

Hydra009

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on December 07, 2017, 10:15:56 PM
Measles, influenza, etc. do not respect your bodily autonomy. Once you are infected, you become a locus of disease and become a danger to others who are not immunized yet, whose immunizations did not take, or have weakened immune systems/health.
Yeah.  It'd be a pretty messed up to be on fire and then intentionally run towards a crowd.  That's the kind of thing you could go to jail for or even be justifiably shot for.  Doing the same with infectious diseases (many of which can spread and harm worse than any fire) and not expecting other people to be upset reveals a very strange mentality.

And the twist here is that with infectious diseases, it's not the child's choice but the parent's.  Poxy by proxy.  It's a very sick sort of parent who cares so little about the safety of their own kid and anyone who comes in contact with their kid.

trdsf

Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on December 07, 2017, 10:15:56 PM
Measles, influenza, etc. do not respect your bodily autonomy. Once you are infected, you become a locus of disease and become a danger to others who are not immunized yet, whose immunizations did not take, or have weakened immune systems/health. We are at war against infectious illnesses, and those who do not do their duty to get immunized are humanity's traitors to the bugs.

Inter arma enim silent legÄ"s.
Also, I would add that one's right to bodily autonomy does not give one the right to put others at risk.  This is a society, not a desert island, and rights to self-determination come with an equal responsibility that it not be at someone else's cost.  Other people do not deserve to be put at risk for a fellow citizen's ill-informed decisions.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan

Hydra009

Quote from: trdsf on December 07, 2017, 10:48:57 PM
Also, I would add that one's right to bodily autonomy does not give one the right to put others at risk.  This is a society, not a desert island, and rights to self-determination come with an equal responsibility that it not be at someone else's cost.  Other people do not deserve to be put at risk for a fellow citizen's ill-informed decisions.
A fine point.  Let's set all notions of morality and rights aside for a moment.  What happens when people are packed into dense cities like sardines and vaccination is not aggressive pursued?  Does anyone truly want to make this dream a reality?

Baruch

Quote from: Hydra009 on December 07, 2017, 11:28:58 PM
A fine point.  Let's set all notions of morality and rights aside for a moment.  What happens when people are packed into dense cities like sardines and vaccination is not aggressive pursued?  Does anyone truly want to make this dream a reality?

New American public action ...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qLvGnro4Cgw
Ha’át’íísh baa naniná?
Azee’ Å,a’ish nanídį́į́h?
Táadoo ánít’iní.
What are you doing?
Are you taking any medications?
Don't do that.

Johan

Quote from: Gilgamesh on December 07, 2017, 09:09:11 PM
A child absolutely DOES have the mental faculties to decide whether they want a foreign substance injected into their body or not.

So by your logic I guess we should do away with any laws that set a minimum age to buy and consume alcohol then.
Religion is regarded by the common people as true, by the wise as false and by the rulers as useful

trdsf

Quote from: Hydra009 on December 07, 2017, 11:28:58 PM
A fine point.  Let's set all notions of morality and rights aside for a moment.  What happens when people are packed into dense cities like sardines and vaccination is not aggressive pursued?  Does anyone truly want to make this dream a reality?
Also, herd immunity only works when everyone who can be vaccinated has been vaccinated.  That protects the people who cannot be vaccinated for medical reasons.

A religious objection to being vaccinated is merely stupid.  A personal liberty objection is worse: it's selfish, thoughtless and irresponsible.
"My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total, and I am not going to sit here and be an idle spectator to the diminution, the subversion, the destruction of the Constitution." -- Barbara Jordan