English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071018/ap_on_re_us/vaccine_skeptics

I'll know to remember this and make sure that when I have a kid the school makes 100% of the kids get vaccinated or the kid goes somewhere else.

religious exemptions that can cause a public health crisis or spread of disease?

absurd. I'm all for letting people worship however they want so long as they don't shove it down another's throat and realize that faith is just that faith. However when letting someone hold that belief can potentially threaten the lives and health of everyone else. thats where I draw the line.

why don't we just allow human sacrifice while we are at it?

2007-10-18 06:55:01 · 22 answers · asked by Anonymous in Business & Finance Insurance

I did not miss the point, however many people here did.

the article cites abuse of a religious exemption by people who don't believe in that religion. I'm saying that there should be no exemptions and that the idea of a religious exemption or ANY reason for that matter is just plain stupid and irresponsible.

The courts objected to a law that tailored this a little more narrowly.

I think this country's absurd blending of religion and politics is a danger to everyone in it. you want to have freedom of religion then you need to be alive first but your religious beliefs shouldnt' sacrifice the lives of others as it did in the cases also cited in the article (1991 and 2002 if I remember) where children died.

would you want to be the parent of a child who caught the measles in school and died because your neighbor wouldn't vaccinate?

2007-10-18 08:01:12 · update #1

juicy wishun:

this is not a "slippery slope" argument as the goal here is not to limit "nuisiances" it is to deal with a situation of a very real and dangerous public health crisis due to disease. We are not talking about the common cold or the regular flu here. We are talking about the narrow situation of deadly diseases.

its not all or nothing and this is not about a person being offended by church bells. This is closer to permitting human sacrifice as you are allowing people to make decisions about the health and life and deaths of others because of one's religious beliefs.

there is a line to be drawn, we have drawn it and I would even say that this is WAY over the line that was drawn. we prohibit animal sacrifice which doesn't really harm anyone, but permit this practice.

2007-10-18 08:07:38 · update #2

22 answers

my children have had all their shots but do you think that any one has the right to tell parents they must get their children vaccinated? as long as they are vaccinated before they go to public school I see no problem.
it wont be long till we have to put our children on the birth control pill when they start middle school that is were I will draw the line if/when my little one has to take the pill to go to school I will teach her at home and that is sad because home school kids miss out on a lot
edit
if your child is vaccinated they wont be getting the measles just something for you to think about

2007-10-18 07:04:03 · answer #1 · answered by hmm 6 · 1 0

Fair enough, but what about lesser consequences from religious beleifs? Should every religious observance that adversly effects another citizen be banned? Should churchs not be allowed bells because it's noise pollution? Should funeral processions be outlawed becasue of potential traffic congestion? How about banning communion with real wine, because it might impair someone just enough that they get into a crash on the ride home?

Interesting side not in reference to the article. There were riots when the polio vaccine was being administered to every child in the US. People got the idea in their heads that the shots would somehow -cause- polio.

2007-10-18 07:01:32 · answer #2 · answered by juicy_wishun 6 · 2 0

It seems that the majority of people claiming this exemption actually have no religious objection to vaccination, but they use it as the excuse the government will take. The problem is that, if one denies a religious exemption--effectively discriminating against those people who do have an actual religious objection, then who is to say that the government can't discriminate against atheists at some later date, just for being atheists? What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.

2007-10-18 07:02:31 · answer #3 · answered by Hoosier Daddy 5 · 3 0

I believe Mindbender. Why ought to we enable others to make judgements for our households? If someone chooses no longer to vaccinate because of any reason, that isn't any individual else's organization. If more suitable human beings might want to take charge of their lives and do the analyze about medical subject matters and each and everything else for that celebrate, the authorities and massive organization don't have a lot skill. And btw, i do no longer vaccinate my toddlers.

2016-10-21 09:10:10 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Religion has nothing to do with the spread of disease, so people shouldn't be able to claim religious exemptions from vaccinations, unless they're willing to quarantine their children.

2007-10-18 07:06:39 · answer #5 · answered by Subconsciousless 7 · 1 1

I'm with you completely.
If your delusional religious beliefs require you to not get vaccinations, then fine -- don't get them. But the consequences of that belief have very negative effects on the rest of society...so if that's your choice, you can't be around the rest of us and put us at risk.

It never ceases to amaze me how strongly people hold such delusional beliefs...until they desperately need a doctor. Then reality usually trumps delusional dogma, 'cause they want to live. Nuts.

Peace.

2007-10-18 07:00:07 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2 1

Yes, but in doing so I believe they are exempting their kids from public schooling.

Edit: Are you advocating we titer all the teachers to be sure their antibodies are still active? If you wanted to take down a school, for example, without hurting the kids, all you'd have to do would be find a way to aerosolize Chicken Pox. Most adults are no longer immune to it. I work in a field where I've GOT to be titered-and I'm allergic to the MMR, so if my antibodies to that fade I'm kinda screwed.

Sadly, some people are so uneducated, they think this helps them or their kids. Poor dears. What's worse, they think people like me, in research, are hiding stuff from them and lying to them.

2007-10-18 06:57:34 · answer #7 · answered by LabGrrl 7 · 2 1

The part that really chaps my @$$ is the fact that these people are risking their kids' lives for a religion that those very same kids are too f**king young to grasp let along BELIEVE in!!!

People are SO ignorant in their personal affirmation! I agree with you...if I found out that a kid in my son's school was wandering around without proper vaccines, I'd yank him out in a heartbeat.

2007-10-18 06:59:48 · answer #8 · answered by Brutally Honest 7 · 3 1

No exemptions.

Deadly communicable diseases effect everyone, not just the religious nutcase.

If your children are going to public school, vaccinate them. If you are against it, then home-school them and keep them down on the farm where they can't infect anyone.

2007-10-18 06:59:44 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 2 0

I wonder if the religious exemption was to hand-washing would it still stand...

What if the person wanted to work in a restaurant and you couldn't deny them based on their religious practices...

2007-10-18 06:57:55 · answer #10 · answered by NONAME 4 · 1 0

fedest.com, questions and answers