You didn't answer the question so I'll ask it more directly, do you deny that people who refused to have their children vaccinated played a significant role in the current outbreak of measles?

No one is talking about hazmat suits.

The use of the word force was a deliberate exaggeration to save us the trouble of having to get there slowly which i figured we would anyway

I think if the poll said "mandated" instead of forced you'd have poll results more accurately representing the only rational decision

Although if I had to decide between the extremes; no regulation whatsoever, versus forced, I know what I would be choosing

This post was edited by Bazi on Feb 10 2015 12:20pm

I take it you are big on taking away people's children when they aren't actually endangered and dont think much of people who allow their kids to play outside.

Here's a little curveball to put something in perspective.
Do you drive with your children in the car? Car accidents are the leading cause of death among children.
Measles on the other hand has killed 0 children in the US in about 10 years.
In light of these facts, are you guilty of neglect and child endangerment and should the state take away your children?


No. They're obviously more likely to contract measles when exposed to it.

Do I believe stopping an occasional minor outbreak of measles is more valuable than liberty in America? Also no, by a wide margin.
Mandatory vaccination also isnt the only way to combat measles outbreaks.


I am. you didn't answer my questions.
Liberty crushing methods are only acceptable to discuss when you like the idea or when you think it has popular support? No analogies or alternate suggestions allowed that make your pro-state anti-liberty arguments look bad?

This post was edited by cambovenzi on Feb 10 2015 12:26pm

Looks like we didn't have to go very far afterall.
Thats a very common type of comment, and not on conspiracy websites. People have equated it with neglect and abuse and brought up CPS in this very thread.


What should they do when you lethally injure someone?
Should they ban all guns and make everyone wear handcuffs? Or do you receive punishment based on the circumstances of the encounter?

The statistical significance is pretty important here. Being unvaccinated is not the same as killing someone.
The chance of an unvaccinated child in America contracting a certain disease we're discussing, spreading it to others, and then causing the death of someone else with it, is astronomically low to the point of absurdity.

Cam's theory is rather than force people to vaccinate their children against deadly disease, why not instead force everyone to wear hazmat suits that way everyone would be safe. in other words "There's a Hole In The Bucket Dear Henry Dear Henry"

forcing the vaccine would be an impossible task unless you want a door to door census type of check system, homeschoolers and religious schools that don't depend on State money wouldn't have to be compliant or keep accurate records. The honor system is the best you could hope for. there is a mandate now for public school attendance children have to present an utd. vaccine record within so many days of enrollment, and then produce it when boosters are needed.

This is inaccurate which is why the conversation is happening, chickenpox in children-->shingles in immunocompromised being just one example that is becoming increasingly clinically relevant. It just so happens the majority of citizens are vaccinated which is why preventable diseases aren't commonly spread. 1:1 transmission of preventable disease from unvaccinated to immunocompromised is pretty clear. You raise the numbers of unvaccinated and that becomes a huge problem.

Thankfully there are "astronomically" more same parents than not so we don't see this type of transmission frequently.

Cam, I would have loved to see you refuse the Polio vaccine a couple decades ago.

Do you think it is easy for the state to gain custody of a child? You have to be feeding them dog food and sending them to school covered in bruises to get an investigation. And even then the only thing that happens is a social worker helps a family in crisis get out of crisis and get the services they need. If kids are removed they go to grandmas, or aunties or uncles house temporarily until mother is able to get off the crack and put some food in the pantry. When there is no family to speak of, when mother learned to smoke crack and neglect her children from grandma and auntie isn't any better, the kid will go and stay with a family who cares as long as necessary for them to be okay, meanwhile they get to go to a nice school receive the best health care in the world, and get the education and nutrition they need. Several of my peers who are going into Children's Services are adults who have "aged out" of the system and want to put their unique experience and skills to the best use.

You really have a kneejerk reaction about government. I bet you watched ET as a kid and got freaked out by the big scary government bad guy that is so generic and used ad nauseam.

I'd love unrestricted individual freedoms too but the problens i have thoughts.

Thoughts that tell me when too much of something is counter productive.

Kind of how i think you should be free to drive as fast as you want so long as you drive under the speed limit.

Similarly you should be free to refuse to participate in healthy life style choices so long as you've had your mandatory vaccinations.

Excess liberty which permits irresponsible behaviour that endagers the health and well being of others is not acceptable. Public health and safety is priority number one and i wouldn't exactly lose any sleep over forcing you to undergo a minor inconvenience which you'd call a gross violation of your freedoms in order to prevent the resurgence of diseases which should have been virtually eradicated.