We should have a right to decide what happens to our body without interference from the state.
Wait, what? You know that HIV is different from the flu right?Lets say you do not get the flu vaccine, get sick, go to work, infect someone with HIV/AIDS, that person dies.
Should you be put on trial for manslaughter?
image removed
Wait, what? You know that HIV is different from the flu right?
Getting a flu vaccine or not has nothing to do with HIV.
Isn't the spread of disease what this thread is about?
Someone does not get the flu vaccine, infects someone who is immune compromised, that person dies, should the vector for disease be punished?
Seems comparable to drinking and driving.
As for punishing people for being vectors,
If you can prove all that then, yes they should be charged with Manslaughter.
This seem backwards, why not make the children who have chickenpox stay home, instead of the children who don't have it?
Also, if we don't punish children by denying them access to school when their parents violate immigration laws, why do we punish children by denying them access to school when their parents make a legal medical decision?
This seem backwards, why not make the children who have chickenpox stay home, instead of the children who don't have it?
Also, if we don't punish children by denying them access to school when their parents violate immigration laws, why do we punish children by denying them access to school when their parents make a legal medical decision?
Is society ready to put people in prison for not getting vaccinated?
Probably not too far from now, yes. We put people in jail because they were carriers of typhoid and got people sick who later died. If you know you could get someone sick and did not take reasonable steps to prevent it, then I dont see why you would not be held liable in some way.
Society is filled will laws like this.
Because diseases can be infectious long before it's symptomatic?
NY Times article said:a federal judge has upheld a New York City policy that bars unimmunized children from public school when another student has a vaccine-preventable disease
But it is control over what goes in your body. If you can argue that you have an absolute right to not put something in your body and then do something that causes a danger to others because of it, then surly you must also argue that you have the absolute right to put something in your body and then do something causes danger to others because of it.
But the law isn't making them stay home until after the disease has become symptomatic in another student.
You are being obtuse.
The key words here are knowingly and recklessly endangering others. You can be guilty of manslaughter for making a ham sandwich if the circumstances fit that description.
In other words, the government can tell people what they must do to their bodies.
This is one step from other crimes against humanity such as forced sterilizations.
We need to be careful when the government has the right to enforce certain medical procedures up its citizens.
No, you're being hypocritical as usual. This is your modus operandi here. Vociferously argue your various anti-gay, anti-birth control, anti-vaccination, anti-abortion views in the forums but claim you actually hold the contrary point of view when called out. You're like that guy who hasn't learned that anything that follows, "I'm not racist, but. . . " is probably going to be bad.
Time and time again you've argued here against vaccinations out of 'concern.'
Pertussis vaccine may not stop spread of disease
Flu vaccine not as effective as some laymen thought
900 students in Ottawa suspended for lack of vaccinations
Pediatricians get more firm when parents refuse vaccines
Pregnant nurse fired for not taking flu vaccine
etc, etc, etc.
Do you really think we have such poor memories? Every vaccination thread you participate in has the exact same pattern:
"First off, let me say I'm not anti-vaccine, but. . . "
and then you go into how vaccines are unreliable and anti-freedom and other bullshit arguments so we should all be concerned about vaccination. This thread is no different than any of the other concern troll vaccination threads you've infested.
You do not have to knowingly do harm. If you are a restaurant and you mistakenly serve someone something that kills them because the food was tainted because of your restaurant's actions, you are liable.
If you do it knowingly but did not intend to directly kill someone, it only makes it worse.
Do you really think we have such poor memories? Every vaccination thread you participate in has the exact same pattern:
"First off, let me say I'm not anti-vaccine, but. . . "
and then you go into how vaccines are unreliable and anti-freedom and other bullshit arguments so we should all be concerned about vaccination. This thread is no different than any of the other concern troll vaccination threads you've infested.
The government does not force people to get vaccines.
Really?
http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/WaterCooler/story?id=3880578
Maryland to parents, vaccinate your children or go to jail.
How about this little thing called civil liberties? Where people have control of what goes into their bodies?
That link is not forced vaccinations, it is vaccinate or don't go to a public school.
"But if parents continue to be recalcitrant, they face up to 10 days in jail and a $50 a day fine."
You can deny it all you want. The truth is courts are suppressing civil rights.
No school, 10 days in jail, $50 a day fine,,, what's next?
Maybe report to the local police department for reeducation?
Not for failure to vaccinate, but for truancy from school. They have the option of finding another school for their children that does not require vaccinations.
Wearing a seat belt doesn't guarantee that you won't die in a car crash, but society requires that people wear seat belts because they increase the odds that you'll escape an accident alive, and with no or less severe injuries.I am not anti-vaccine.
You are trying to create conflict where there is none.
And?
There are numerous studies showing modern vaccines are not as strong as those gave in the 1970s.
There are numerous articles showing full vaccinated children catching diseases that are "supposed" to be vaccine preventable.
For some reason you seem to be debating against the facts.
The only reason why you call me a troll is because you can not handle the truth. You can not handle that someone who is pro-vaccine would dare utter a word against vaccines. People who debate civil liberties versus mandatory vaccines "must" be anti-vaccine.
You are mad because I do not fit your pigeon hole assumptions.
Wearing a seat belt doesn't guarantee that you won't die in a car crash,
Not smoking cigarettes doesn't guarantee that you won't get lung cancer, emphysema, and/or heart disease,