Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
You are better at logic than this.
If a sick child comes to a school where children who have not been immunized, that sick child threatens the others.
You don't get to let other families carry the risk for your stupidity. There is no risk of immunization for autism. But there is for other children if children who have been exposed to pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, etc, come to school.
Why is this a problem for you?
The point is that scientifically there is no validated risk.
The two bolded statements contradict
I get vaccinated every year for the flu and glad I do. I also get a pneumonia vaccination every 7 years and glad I do. I know for a fact that it has helped me in both categories, and has also reduced the amount of colds and bronchitis that I was plagued with prior to the pneumonia vaccinations.
Not telling anyone what to do with themselves or their children, but I hope nobody calls me crazy for taking advantage of modern medicine.
Your unimmunized child threatens every other immunized child at school.
That is how a Republican thinks. He does not want any child at risk, particularly when the overwhelming majority of physicians urge immunizations for children.
That would seem to be how rational people would view the scenario.
Alas, we are not dealing with rational people but with liberals. They live for their feelings.
I get vaccinated every year for the flu and glad I do. I also get a pneumonia vaccination every 7 years and glad I do. I know for a fact that it has helped me in both categories, and has also reduced the amount of colds and bronchitis that I was plagued with prior to the pneumonia vaccinations.
Not telling anyone what to do with themselves or their children, but I hope nobody calls me crazy for taking advantage of modern medicine.
To each his own. I do better without flu shots. I haven't even heard of pneumonia vaccine. That should be part of our great heritage, the choice to decide what is best for each of us.
Your unimmunized child threatens every other immunized child at school.
That is how a Republican thinks. He does not want any child at risk, particularly when the overwhelming majority of physicians urge immunizations for children.
Alas, we are not dealing with rational people but with liberals. They live for their feelings.
Duh, fuckbreath. I am not a republican.
Gallant Warrior is stupid: simply won't learn. No unimmunized child should come to school and threaten other children. End of story.
Gallant Warrior is stupid: simply won't learn. No unimmunized child should come to school and threaten other children. End of story.
Starker is an obtuse ass. If other children are immunized to protect against infection,where's the threat. It's all OK, since government mandate and sheeple compliance is apparently insufficient.
Because if an infected child comes to school because the parents refused to immunize him, that child is a threat to every other child who is not immunized.Gallant Warrior is stupid: simply won't learn. No unimmunized child should come to school and threaten other children. End of story.
Starker is an obtuse ass. If other children are immunized to protect against infection,where's the threat. It's all OK, since government mandate and sheeple compliance is apparently insufficient.
Immunizations do have some vastly reduced chances of infection and or damage.
There is no link between immunizations and autism.
You do not have the right to send your nonimmunized child (no DTAP) to theaten the health of others' children.
Keep yours home, home school them, and you share a disease pool all by your lonesome.
Or...send them to school after signing a legal document stating you will be financially responsible for any students who get ill from X disease brought by your child.
Immunizations do have some vastly reduced chances of infection and or damage.
There is no link between immunizations and autism.
You do not have the right to send your nonimmunized child (no DTAP) to theaten the health of others' children.
Keep yours home, home school them, and you share a disease pool all by your lonesome.
Or...send them to school after signing a legal document stating you will be financially responsible for any students who get ill from X disease brought by your child.
If immunizations are so great, how is a non-immunized or infected child a threat?
Your logic is missing large chunks here...
In 1796, Edward Jenner demonstrated that inoculation with material from a cowpox (vaccinia) lesion would protect against subsequent exposure to small pox. This began the vaccine era, although it was nearly 100 years until the next vaccine (against rabies) was introduced. In the twentieth century, many new vaccines were developed and used, with spectacular impact on the occurrence of disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared vaccinations to be one of the 10 great public health achievements of the twentieth century. [I blame Bush]
This chapter describes the impact of vaccines in dramatically reducing infectious diseases in the United States, the role of mandatory vaccination in achieving that impact, and the constitutional basis for these mandates. The chapter also briefly reviews the federal government's role in immunization practices.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/policies/downloads/vacc_mandates_chptr13.pdf
Your unimmunized child threatens every other immunized child at school.
That is how a Republican thinks. He does not want any child at risk, particularly when the overwhelming majority of physicians urge immunizations for children.
That would seem to be how rational people would view the scenario.
Alas, we are not dealing with rational people but with liberals. They live for their feelings.
GP, your brain is breaking. Any child who is not immunized is a threat to any other child who is not immunized. The answer: immunize all of them. Or let them be home schooled at parents' expense.
You are better at logic than this.
If a sick child comes to a school where children who have not been immunized, that sick child threatens the others.
You don't get to let other families carry the risk for your stupidity. There is no risk of immunization for autism. But there is for other children if children who have been exposed to pertussis, diphtheria, tetanus, etc, come to school.
Why is this a problem for you?
The two bolded statements contradict
Duh-uh! If the other children have been immunized, thay are protected. The only unprotected children are those of other parents who have chosen to take this risk. If your Kid's are immunized, what's your gripe? Don't you trust your government?
Immunizations do have some vastly reduced chances of infection and or damage.
There is no link between immunizations and autism.
You do not have the right to send your nonimmunized child (no DTAP) to theaten the health of others' children.
Keep yours home, home school them, and you share a disease pool all by your lonesome.
In 1796, Edward Jenner demonstrated that inoculation with material from a cowpox (vaccinia) lesion would protect against subsequent exposure to small pox. This began the vaccine era, although it was nearly 100 years until the next vaccine (against rabies) was introduced. In the twentieth century, many new vaccines were developed and used, with spectacular impact on the occurrence of disease. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) declared vaccinations to be one of the 10 great public health achievements of the twentieth century. [I blame Bush]
This chapter describes the impact of vaccines in dramatically reducing infectious diseases in the United States, the role of mandatory vaccination in achieving that impact, and the constitutional basis for these mandates. The chapter also briefly reviews the federal government's role in immunization practices.
http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/policies/downloads/vacc_mandates_chptr13.pdf
