Mandatory Vaccination Battle Heats Up in California
When Dr. Richard Pan’s bill, AB 2019, was debated in a public hearing before California’s Senate Committee on Health, Dawn Richardson, Director of Advocacy for the National Vaccination Information Center (NVIC), showed up to explain why she and her organization opposed the bill. If the bill is enacted into law, Richardson says, it will in effect forced mandatory vaccinations onto children even when their parents have decided it’s in their best interest to deny them. Under current law, parents may file a “personal belief exemption” which allows their children to attend public school without vaccinations. But under Pan’s bill, a doctor must sign off on the parents’ decision first, and most of them won’t.
The idea is that the government has a vested interest in making sure that the parents are making the right decision, have full and complete information before making that decision, and consequently...
I'm going to step out here and assume there is someone who wants to and can think out there in internetland.
what is a virus?
it is not a living organism on its own. it does not have its own cell.
it is often simply DNA (genetic information).
it can insert itself into DNA of animal or human cell.
sick monkeys have lots of infections, well that's the point.
sometimes monkeys are sick because people give them germs, because we call that science.
the monkey has to get sick so a sample of his kidney, etc can be used to replicate the virus in his cell.
problem is that his cell has other viruses in it too, cuz he's sick.
and a monkey.
SV-40 effects discovered in polio shot and rhesus monkye cells in 1959 by Dr. Eddy, when they were injected into hamsters.
go look it up. gives great irony to this story.
now, I'm not sure what viruses are in those aborted fetal cells -- I've got to imagine they are there too, since viruses are common to humans, and aborted fetuses are humans.
so once we all can name which actually is the human and which is the monkey, then we are getting somewhere.
Jim Lincoln wrote: One would hope a daughter isn't sexually active until she is married, but perhaps the only way to guarantee that is to have them wear chastity belts? --- But, Mike, thanks for asking the question, I wouldn't have done a little Internet looking, if you hadn't asked the question.
Chastity belts? Is that how you protect the girls in Nebraska?
From the website:
"Alta Charo, professor of law and bioethics at the University of Wisconsin, Madison: "Given that the moral objections to requiring HPV vaccination are largely emotional, this source of resistance to mandates is difficult to justify. Since, without exception, the proposed laws permit parents to refuse to have their daughters vaccinated, the only valid objection is that parents must actively manifest such refusal.
Ah, another professor expert out of liberal U of Wis-Madison complaining about emotionalism, when it the purveyors of fear-based emotionalism want mandatory vaccinations for all the girls. The powers mandate everything out of their own feelings of not letting the "active" ones get singled out. And this lady lies, for if the state say the vac nust be given for school to be entered, the parents in fact cannot opt out. That is the issue.
One would hope a daughter isn't sexually active until she is married, but perhaps the only way to guarantee that is to have them wear chastity belts?
Arthur Caplan, bioethicist at the University of Pennsylvania wrote: Yes. The data show that the vaccine is safe and effective. Mandates ensure money is there to pay for access. And mandates still permit people to opt out if they don't want their child vaccinated, as we have for all other 'mandates' — a fact somehow lost in the ignorant comments from GOP candidates about HPV vaccines [last night].
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- I don't have to approve or disapprove anything the state does, the only time one is to disobey the state if they stop you worshiping Christ or try to stop you spreading the Gospel. ---
So Jim, some States are considering making the HPV vaccine mandatory for 11-12 year old girls, before they be allowed to attend school. Would you be a genuine Christ worshipper if you allowed the State to administer this vaccine to your daughter, for no other reason than they feel she's going to be sexually active and subject to HPV?
Jim, yes in fact it was the flu shot. He was 18 months old. Beautiful shinning red head, already using words and knew most of his main colors. They gave him two flu shots 1 month a part. Within the next 30 days he wound up with a vacant stare and never made eye contact. He had lost his language as well. My son has been a bigger blessing than I can explain with common words and I love him dearly. God has truly blessed my wife and I beyond measure. However, while there is so much MONEY involved with the health care in this country, I'll make up my own mind what my son needs and doesn't need.
Rowler, thank you for the kind words. They mean more than you could know...
jpw, the best thing for sick children is to stay home from school, Parents or children should stay away from church whichever of them are sick.
Don't want to have your children vaccinated? fine do as in the past when there were no vaccinations, quarantine them. Foolish to say vaccines don't work, Polio and smallpox prove that they do, in fact people don't have to have smallpox vaccines apparently because it is apparently eradicated in the world. Have all vaccines been safe, no, as an the article, Vaccine Cleared Again as Autism Culprit an early whooping cough vaccine -- wasn't.
I don't have to approve or disapprove anything the state does, the only time one is to disobey the state if they stop you worshiping Christ or try to stop you spreading the Gospel.
BOB, Jim is not going to have a biblical or a scientific reference.
"germ-free children" is a modern concoction, not based in any kind of moral or spiritual reality.
Scientifically, the human body has billions of beneficial organisms living in the digestive tract, for instance.
By irradicating all germs, you would be irradicating life itself. It is kind of the pre-genetic darwin era of "life is just chemical processes" kind of thing--- such is the mind of reductionism.
The best way to have a germ free world is to live life behind a sanitized tv screen.
Jim Lincoln wrote: Well, first of all, I'm not an official of Indian Hills Community Church or an official voice for IHCC....Where in the Bible does it say you can fly in an airplane? drive a car? even in antiquated Bibles? Certainly let germ-free children in Church....
Jim...#1)You quote IHCC quite often so I just thought you might have a sermon link to explain your comments..."Apparently people's dog's get better attention in getting their shots, then some really strange parents won't give their children."...not attacking, just asking. #2)"....antiquated Bibles?" Not sure where that came from but "antiquated" or not I've heard some parents scriptural references for not vaccinating. I was just looking for some references that says they are wrong?
jpw wrote: I'm still wondering how injecting aborted fetal cell lines, mercury, formaldehyde, and aluminum directly into my blood is anything other than an abomination. (then there's the cells of organs of sick and infected monkeys and dogs -- this is modern man being healthy)
..and if you don't give all that trash to your children some may consider you to be guilty of child abuse. What a mad world.
I'm still wondering how injecting aborted fetal cell lines, mercury, formaldehyde, and aluminum directly into my blood is anything other than an abomination. (then there's the cells of organs of sick and infected monkeys and dogs -- this is modern man being healthy)
Jim Lincoln wrote: --- Mike of NY, you should be quite happy even though the State(s) have a vested interest in healthy, law-abiding children who hopefully grow up that way, usually loath to step in usually because of the expense, into situations which would be good if they had.
Some States are considering making the HPV vaccine mandatory for 11-12 year old girls, before they be allowed to attend school. Do you approve of this as well, for the sake of the State's vested interest in "healthy, law-abiding children"?
Barry from KY wrote: My 10 year old has autism, and regardless what the claims are, I feel and will always believe the shots he received are responsible.
One of the medicinal problems I experienced early on in life was an allergy to penicillin. Later on in life I developed a disease called Crohn's disease. The first two medications which they gave me for this I had violent reactions too. Thus one thing I have discovered is that man really has no idea what side effects to expect from his medical chemicals which he experiments with on every human being.
God be with you, your family and your child Barry.
Barry I am sorry to hear about your son. I do know the power of concomitant variations. I got the flu right after a flu shot, and it was several years before I got another flu shot. Did the flu shot cause the problem? There may be a greater chance of it not causing it, but I still didn't get flu shots for awhile. Anyway, an interesting article from the NY Times, Vaccine Cleared Again as Autism Culprit.
In fact I would warn people who have really bad reactions to head colds even to think what they will go through when they go from a small church with few children to a large one like IHCC, you are going to have more colds in a short period of time then perhaps that you ever had before! The kids really bring those sort of things in. I have to say now though, after having been exposed to every cold virus known to man, and perhaps not known to him, I have been usually very cold free through the years after the first several at IHCC.
If a person or his kids are sick, don't go to church until you're over it!
My 10 year old has autism, and regardless what the claims are, I feel and will always believe the shots he received are responsible. Once he lost his language and his social skills we immediately stopped the rest of his shots and he will never get those or any other shots!!!
Well, first of all, I'm not an official of Indian Hills Community Church or an official voice for IHCC, sometimes I guess I have to remind people that, and the opinions I express are my own.
Where in the Bible does it say you can fly in an airplane? drive a car? even in antiquated Bibles? Certainly let germ-free children in Church. However, the parents have a responsibility for taking care of their children. The state as many of you seem to forget is a secular one, one which has been strongly influenced by Judeo-Christian tradition. When parents will not protect their children someone or something will step in to fill the vacuum, and guess what it will be the State. Now there is a great deal of latitude for even letting wackos commit child abuse, such as the state stepping in with the likes of JW's and having their children get blood transfusions if needed or other medical treatment. Usually, the State is too late and then just prosecutes the wackos for killing their children.
Mike of NY, you should be quite happy even though the State(s) have a vested interest in healthy, law-abiding children who hopefully grow up that way, usually loath to step in usually because of the expense, into situations which would be good if they had.
From the article: "The idea is that the government has a vested interest in making sure that the parents are making the right decision, have full and complete information before making that decision, and consequently mandates that parents have that “medical conversation” before filing the exemption."
The "right decision" meaning if the parents decide against the government's "vested interest," they must not have sufficient information to make such decision, and need be talked into agreement. The idea that the children are on loan from God to the parents, not to the government, never crosses the minds of those who invariably defend government.
COMMENTS | 
beaver: "
mike
maybe you'd like to pick a more suitable adjective.
my, my,..."
