If your child is not vaccinated, they should be barred from attending public school

[Fisherking]

Pointless really. No one is going to change the mind of someone who thinks they are right.

This applies equally to both parties.

I see both sides of the issue. The desire for security overcomes you and you submit to the arguments of the state. While the other side seeks to maintain exception for their own reasons.

I simply oppose the use of coercion and ultimately, violence to compel other to my will.

[drone]

Let's go with a car analogy here:

You have the right to drink alcohol beverages, you cannot drive on public roads while doing so as you become a threat to others. You have the right to refuse vaccines for your children, why should you be allowed to endanger other children in a public school setting?

[HoreTore]

Pointless really. No one is going to change the mind of someone who thinks they are right.

This applies equally to both parties.

I see both sides of the issue. The desire for security overcomes you and you submit to the arguments of the state. While the other side seeks to maintain exception for their own reasons.

I simply oppose the use of coercion and ultimately, violence to compel other to my will.

When one sides argument is bonkers, there is no middle ground.

They have no reason for their actions, and so we can safely ignore them. This in no way turns into a 'slippery slope' and starts affecting situations where there are real arguments.


I'd say the arguments against compulsory education are far stronger than anti-vaxxers - but we cheerfully ignore those and force their kids to school.

[Fisherking]

When one sides argument is bonkers, there is no middle ground.

They have no reason for their actions, and so we can safely ignore them. This in no way turns into a 'slippery slope' and starts affecting situations where there are real arguments.


I'd say the arguments against compulsory education are far stronger than anti-vaxxers - but we cheerfully ignore those and force their kids to school.

My objection is ethical but you all seem to see the issue as only religious retards trying to avoid it.

Other have their own reasons not to comply.

http://www.nvic.org/nvic-vaccine-new...ccination.aspx

[HoreTore]

My objection is ethical but you all seem to see the issue as only religious retards trying to avoid it.

Other have their own reasons not to comply.

http://www.nvic.org/nvic-vaccine-new...ccination.aspx

I am not mainly speaking of people refusing on religious grounds, I am mainly speaking of those idiots you linked to. They have no arguments of merit, and can be safely ignored as the loonies they are.

[Fisherking]

I am not mainly speaking of people refusing on religious grounds, I am mainly speaking of those idiots you linked to. They have no arguments of merit, and can be safely ignored as the loonies they are.

Whether their fears are real or imagined makes no fundamental difference. Parents in the US are alarmed at the unexplained rise in autism. They feel the risk to their children is greater than the benefits offered by the vaccines. Science has not explained the rise and there is a seeming coloration between certain vaccines and the malady.

If you don’t understand the position, especially when they have a child with it, then you have no understanding of human nature, and obviously no children of your own.

[Tellos Athenaios]

Whether their fears are real or imagined makes no fundamental difference.

It does when balance needs to be struck between the imagined and disproven on the one hand, and the proven and demonstrably disastrous on the other...

Parents in the US are alarmed at the unexplained rise in autism. They feel the risk to their children is greater than the benefits offered by the vaccines. Science has not explained the rise and there is a seeming coloration between certain vaccines and the malady.

Except that there isn't.

If you don’t understand the position, especially when they have a child with it, then you have no understanding of human nature, and obviously no children of your own.

Actually that very same argument applies to denying the unvaccinated access to public space. We've gone full circle and are back to Lemur's original thread about this.

[HoreTore]

Whether their fears are real or imagined makes no fundamental difference. Parents in the US are alarmed at the unexplained rise in autism. They feel the risk to their children is greater than the benefits offered by the vaccines. Science has not explained the rise and there is a seeming coloration between certain vaccines and the malady.

If you don’t understand the position, especially when they have a child with it, then you have no understanding of human nature, and obviously no children of your own.

These are the kind of non-arguments we can safely ignore.

The link between autism and vaccination is non-existent, and any parent who believes so deserves a slap in the face and a vaccine shot in their kids. It is precisely because of idiotic arguments like these that I support mandatory vaccination of children.

Children should not be forced to face certain danger because of their parents irrational fears over non-existent threats.

[Papewaio]

I thought the link to increased autism was likely to be increased age of parenthood, less children and more diagnosis.

Now that is a hypothesis and not a fact and if I was to make life or death decisions based on an untested idea then that would be wrong.

Not all ideas have equal merit. Nor do all ways of life have equal outcomes.