d2jsp
Log InRegister
d2jsp Forums > Off-Topic > General Chat > Political & Religious Debate > New Zeland Forces Jabbed Blood On Baby
Prev1234567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll
Views: 419Replies: 64Track Topic
Member
Posts: 3,046
Joined: Oct 1 2021
Gold: 1,979.01
#31
Dec 8 2022 06:38pm
Quote (Plaguefear @ Dec 8 2022 01:23pm)
I have a child, and i do what is best for her, like vaccinations.
Your post is putrid.
Any parent that puts political ideals ahead of their childs health should have that child taken away.
These parents were willing to let a baby die for non scientific reasons and deserved prison time on top of what they got.


My post is putrid. But it is an exact analog of your belief system. You celebrate that the state can rip kids away from their parents with really any justification at all at this point. What's worse, me posting about it ironically, or you actively voting for it and opining that it becomes accepted reality?
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
#32
Dec 8 2022 06:49pm
Quote (Plaguefear @ Dec 8 2022 01:44pm)
See what i mean though, the right see a zygote as life but the moment it is born they are willing to let it die for the cause.
How is this not just abortion with extra steps?


Explain how not letting their child get jabbed is letting it die.

If anything, I think not letting the child get jabbed is great for her health.
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
#33
Dec 8 2022 06:51pm
Quote (Thebarba @ Dec 8 2022 04:38pm)
My post is putrid. But it is an exact analog of your belief system. You celebrate that the state can rip kids away from their parents with really any justification at all at this point. What's worse, me posting about it ironically, or you actively voting for it and opining that it becomes accepted reality?


Plaguefear
doesn't believe in human rights and by extension, parents' right to have custody of their own children. Which isn't surprising, he came from a land that has a long tradition of human rights violations. It's in his blood.
Member
Posts: 27,048
Joined: Dec 21 2007
Gold: 14,569.69
#34
Dec 8 2022 07:24pm
Quote (JessiWan @ Dec 8 2022 04:49pm)
Explain how not letting their child get jabbed is letting it die.

If anything, I think not letting the child get jabbed is great for her health.


Did you pay attention to the OP or read the comments at all?
If so you need an education. If not please do so before making stupid comments
They withheld the surgery therefore causing undue danger to the kid. Over Q BS about gene therapy

This post was edited by theCrossbones on Dec 8 2022 07:24pm
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
#35
Dec 8 2022 07:31pm
Quote (theCrossbones @ Dec 8 2022 05:24pm)
Did you pay attention to the OP or read the comments at all?
If so you need an education. If not please do so before making stupid comments
They withheld the surgery therefore causing undue danger to the kid. Over Q BS about gene therapy


And who decides "undue" danger? That's right, the very same entity that has the authority to take away the child.

You honestly don't see the conflict of interest here?
Member
Posts: 9,694
Joined: Apr 7 2006
Gold: 330.00
#36
Dec 8 2022 07:31pm
Quote (Thebarba @ 9 Dec 2022 00:38)
My post is putrid. But it is an exact analog of your belief system. You celebrate that the state can rip kids away from their parents with really any justification at all at this point. What's worse, me posting about it ironically, or you actively voting for it and opining that it becomes accepted reality?



The law in most countries mandates that the doctors have to do what they can to save the child. When the child’s life is at risk there is no choice, by law.

And parents do not have the right to make choices that risks their children lives. The rights of the child comes first.
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
#37
Dec 8 2022 07:33pm
Quote (AyeCaramba @ Dec 8 2022 05:31pm)
The law in most countries mandates that the doctors have to do what they can to save the child. When the child’s life is at risk there is no choice, by law.

And parents do not have the right to make choices that risks their children lives. The rights of the child comes first.


If they are merely holding out for un-vaxxed blood, they are not risking the child's life.

It depends on how urgent the child needs the surgery.
Member
Posts: 9,694
Joined: Apr 7 2006
Gold: 330.00
#38
Dec 8 2022 07:34pm
Quote (JessiWan @ 9 Dec 2022 01:31)
And who decides "undue" danger? That's right, the very same entity that has the authority to take away the child.

You honestly don't see the conflict of interest here?



You truly cannot be that stupid. The doctors and the court have the best interest of the child at heart. Not only is that clear from the case, it’s also clear by New Zealand law. Similar laws exist in most developed countries
Member
Posts: 9,694
Joined: Apr 7 2006
Gold: 330.00
#39
Dec 8 2022 07:35pm
Quote (JessiWan @ 9 Dec 2022 01:33)
If they are merely holding out for un-vaxxed blood, they are not risking the child's life.

It depends on how urgent the child needs the surgery.



As always, you didn’t bother reading anything other than headlines and echo chamber shit
Member
Posts: 22,264
Joined: Aug 17 2021
Gold: 1,546.83
Warn: 30%
#40
Dec 8 2022 07:40pm
Quote (AyeCaramba @ Dec 8 2022 05:34pm)
You truly cannot be that stupid.


Hehe. I see that you are losing your cool.

Quote

The doctors and the court have the best interest of the child at heart.


The court is part of the government. If it gets to decide what's necessary for the child and whether the child should be taken away, then there is a conflict of interest.

Quote

Not only is that clear from the case, it’s also clear by New Zealand law. Similar laws exist in most developed countries


Laws can be wrong.
Go Back To Political & Religious Debate Topic List
Prev1234567Next
Add Reply New Topic New Poll

© 2003-2026 d2jsp  Contact