maybe the original conspiracy was trying to kill the world with polio.. and we rose up and won!
If that's the case then I mistook your analogy of standing up to public pressure in this forum for standing up to very alleged government oppression.
I think you'll agree it was a pretty easy error to make, given the photo was posted with only 'there should be more of this' to go on.
No, no it would be wrong and dishonest of me to say that the tank analogy was only in relation to this forum. Of course the analogy could be applied to standing up to a tyrannical government. See, in my view, any government that would FORCE people to be injected against their will is tyrannical as that is something I see as a crime against us under natural law. You have the right to say no to someone injecting a substance into your body against your will. By the way I think they used a tank like vehicle to bust down the door of a bikie gang's headquarters in Melbourne this week. Sorry if this Reservoirite has a closer affinity to tanks in suburban streets than you do, Wim :lol:
At face value, I don't find that view without merit.
I'd argue the act could be described as tyrannical without the government being so.
From there I guess you need to ask whether the right to say no to inoculation carries with it the waiving of government responsibility to treat the illness you've decided not to prevent.
Of course then you get into trouble with minors rights and whether they should be punished for the views of their parents.
Having said all that, I think that's the limit of our common ground on this.
I will paraphrase the situation.
"Sorry, Wim, you were not vaccinated on the grounds that it is your right under natural law to refuse mandatory vaccinations. You did not have the confidence in the serum that your Almighty, Omniscient, Infallible Government did. And now, regrettably, you have caught the disease. You'll have to just go away and die as punishment for doubting your Almighty, Omniscient, Infallible Government. And that goes for your kids too. We hope you understand."
That position doesn't really resonate with me.
I'd leave out the Almighty stuff, as it's completely irrelevant, but I agree.
We shouldn't refuse to treat people because they've made a terrible decision against all evidence.
No, the Almighty stuff is relevant. Because in my view, and the view of many others, it would not be against all evidence.
Therefore, if the government set itself in such a position as to force you to do something against your honest assessment of the evidence, they would be sort of playing God in the sense that they believe they have an infallible, omniscient view of the situation and you couldn't possibly.
Doesn't sound like the Almighty government can win.
They tell you the best way a society can protect itself from horrible diseases, and if you ignore their advice and get the disease they're still the bad guy.
Edit: You couldn't possibly what? Know inoculation protects communities from horrible diseases? You could totally possibly. In fact, you could definitely.
Imagine a Government telling people what they can & can't do!
Sounds like... I dunno... governing.
It darned well should be forced. Anyone who doesn't want to get vaccinated because of some vapid, lunatic rant should be medicare levied (or some other tax) past the eyeballs. Their selfishness & arrogance costs (in the long term) all of us, these idiots need to accept that, and accept the consequences of their actions.
I’m struggling to even determine certain positions held in this thread.
Is the basic premise (leaving aside governmental conspiracy etc) that people are better off, and at less risk, if they are not vaccinated than if they were? Is that it?
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don’t think so, so I’m not sure why it’s continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would make childhood vaccination mandatory - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them, and probably only for those vaccines that address very contagious and dangerous childhood diseases - smallpox, rubella, measles, whooping cough, etc etc. Stuff like Hep B and HPV vaccines which are generally administered to adults and treat conditions that are less contagious (sexually transmitted rather than aerially transmitted) it's probably your own call to make.
So there.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination?
Yes.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination?
Yes.
+1
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them.
So there.
Mandatory vaccination is pretty draconian in my opinion. What diseases do we need to reign in to justify such a drastic policy? We already have herd immunity without total population immunisation. Educating those who aren't convinced of the benefits is a much better option.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them.
So there.
Mandatory vaccination is pretty draconian in my opinion. What diseases do we need to reign in to justify such a drastic policy? We already have herd immunity without total population immunisation. Educating those who aren't convinced of the benefits is a much better option.
LOL.
This is exactly the point.
WE DON'T HAVE A HUGE MEASLES/MUMPS/POLIO PROBLEM BECAUSE WE VACCINATED EVERYONE FOR 30 YEARS!!!
Can't educate people who refuse to listen I'm afraid.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them.
So there.
Mandatory vaccination is pretty draconian in my opinion. What diseases do we need to reign in to justify such a drastic policy? We already have herd immunity without total population immunisation. Educating those who aren't convinced of the benefits is a much better option.
We have herd immunity at the moment, because up until probably my (mid 30s) generation were getting their childhood shots there were lots of people around who had experienced life in the presence of epidemics of polio etc in living memory, and so vaccination rates were almost 100% because every new set of parents had mothers or fathers who'd watched people die or be crippled of polio in their youth, and made damn sure that the grandkids were vaccinated.
But herd immunity is easily erodable. New parents (and grandparents) have not personally seen the effects of vaccine-preventable diseases. It somehow makes it less real. Vaccine rates are actually dropping, thanks mostly to the autism/vaccination idiots. Some places (Byron Bay is the classic example you keep hearing about) have vaccination rates way the hell below what is necessary to maintain herd immunity right now.
As for what diseases we need to jusity the policy - all the damn diseases we vaccinated for in the first place. Diptheria/measles/mumps/rubella/whooping cough/tetanus etc are still out there, the idea that as vaccination has stopped these diseases causing widespread death and misery at the moment, they're not really so bad and we can back off on the vaccines for a bit is one of the more bizarre logical leaps I've seen in a while.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them.
So there.
Mandatory vaccination is pretty draconian in my opinion. What diseases do we need to reign in to justify such a drastic policy? We already have herd immunity without total population immunisation. Educating those who aren't convinced of the benefits is a much better option.
We have herd immunity at the moment, because up until probably my (mid 30s) generation were getting their childhood shots there were lots of people around who had experienced life in the presence of epidemics of polio etc in living memory, and so vaccination rates were almost 100% because every new set of parents had mothers or fathers who'd watched people die or be crippled of polio in their youth, and made damn sure that the grandkids were vaccinated.
But herd immunity is easily erodable. New parents (and grandparents) have not personally seen the effects of vaccine-preventable diseases. It somehow makes it less real. Vaccine rates are actually dropping, thanks mostly to the autism/vaccination idiots. Some places (Byron Bay is the classic example you keep hearing about) have vaccination rates way the hell below what is necessary to maintain herd immunity right now.
As for what diseases we need to jusity the policy - all the damn diseases we vaccinated for in the first place. Diptheria/measles/mumps/rubella/whooping cough/tetanus etc are still out there, the idea that as vaccination has stopped these diseases causing widespread death and misery at the moment, they're not really so bad and we can back off on the vaccines for a bit is one of the more bizarre logical leaps I've seen in a while.
It's basically saying "well we haven't had any rain on our lounge room for years, so maybe we should take off the roof for a bit and see what happens?"
I'm amazed anyone who has two brain cells to rub together even considers it. Lunacy isn't the half of it.
In fairness, there would have to be an arbitrary element to mandatory vax. I wouldn’t push for chicken pox, for example, to be mandated. But rubella, whooping cough, diphtheria, polio, measles I probably would. It isn’t only fatality rates, but also non lethal debilitating on going effects in play as well. The autism from vaccine proponents love to talk about anecdotal cases and point to lifelong ongoing issues (all of which remain totally unproven in causality ) but seem reluctant to admit the proven and known destructive effects from the viruses under discussion.
There is also the social and economic catastrophe that would be a health system having to cope with 20,000 whooping cough cases per year, or 50,000 measles reports etc etc.
I believe that society has forgotten the impact of these things and become complacent. And it will get worse as fewer people remain who actually lived through those times.
Finally, given even first world Health systems record occasional deaths (and presumably non lethal but life changing severe effects as well) then the argument that improved health care means vaccines are not needed is totally spurious.
remember when kids became crippled for life from Polio?
no? neither do I.
I'm very pro vaccination (as demonstrated earlier in this thread), but I wouldn't make it compulsory.
I would say though, that schools and kindergartens etc should have the right to refuse enrollment to children who aren't vaccinated.
I remember Meningacoccol scaring the crap out of every parent something like fifteen years ago.
Couldn't recall any anti-vaccers then.
I recall my grandpa having a friend who needed the meccano-set leg braces and a walking stick to get around due to polio. My best mates mother also had polio as a child but was lucky with very mild long term effects. It’s not that long ago really.
Is anyone actually advocating mandatory vaccination? I don't think so, so I'm not sure why it's continually bought up as point of contention. The argument is about the efficacy of vaccinations, possible side-effects, and how they are used to subdue a dissenting population.
Well, fwiw, I would - or at least mandatory for those who don't have a documented and proven (by mulitple independent doctors not named 'Dr Nick' or 'Dank'...) autoimmune or allergic condition which would make receiving vaccinations dangerous to them.
So there.
Mandatory vaccination is pretty draconian in my opinion. What diseases do we need to reign in to justify such a drastic policy? We already have herd immunity without total population immunisation. Educating those who aren't convinced of the benefits is a much better option.
We have herd immunity at the moment, because up until probably my (mid 30s) generation were getting their childhood shots there were lots of people around who had experienced life in the presence of epidemics of polio etc in living memory, and so vaccination rates were almost 100% because every new set of parents had mothers or fathers who'd watched people die or be crippled of polio in their youth, and made damn sure that the grandkids were vaccinated.
But herd immunity is easily erodable. New parents (and grandparents) have not personally seen the effects of vaccine-preventable diseases. It somehow makes it less real. Vaccine rates are actually dropping, thanks mostly to the autism/vaccination idiots. Some places (Byron Bay is the classic example you keep hearing about) have vaccination rates way the hell below what is necessary to maintain herd immunity right now.
As for what diseases we need to jusity the policy - all the damn diseases we vaccinated for in the first place. Diptheria/measles/mumps/rubella/whooping cough/tetanus etc are still out there, the idea that as vaccination has stopped these diseases causing widespread death and misery at the moment, they're not really so bad and we can back off on the vaccines for a bit is one of the more bizarre logical leaps I've seen in a while.
I'm not arguing against the importance of vaccinations, but I think it's a huge intrusion for a government to forcibly medicate their constituents. That seems the stuff of fascist regimes to me. People have a right to bodily autonomy, and mandatory vaccinations are a huge incursion on that right.
At no point have I suggested we back off on vaccinations as you and HAP have suggested. Quite the opposite - we should be supplementing existing programs, improving access and educating people regarding the benefits of immunisation.
what if we put the vaccinations in the chemtrails?
i think we should apply income controls on all this crazy 1%ers who are also anti-vaxers, clearly they can't be trusted to spend their money wisely so the government should step in and make sure they look after children properly rather than indulging their dolce, ralph, pierre and negative gearing addictions.
I know that it's a non vaccine preventable illness, but if you want to see what epidemics do there is a fine example going on in Sierra Leone/Guinea with Ebola at the moment. Heard on my way into uni that some of the commonwealth games athletes from that region want to seek asylum in Scotland/England because they are so scared of catching (and/or dying from) Ebola.
Why would we want any chance of that occurring with measles/diphtheria/whooping cough (which is especially dangerous because adults can basically carry the pertussis bacteria without any symptoms) etc?
But not only prevention, we can actually eradicate polio! If people vaccinate, poliovirus has no reservoir other than humans so as soon as 95% of people are immunized the disease won't ever return (hence we wouldn't have to vaccinate for it any more).