Not exactly sure why they’re jumping on the anti vaccine movement. While they may be able to lock up the relatively small number of rabid anti vaccine voters, this doesn’t seem to be an issue that can help them or the Republican Party in the general election.
While I don’t think either Paul or Christie will be the nominee, i assume they’re hoping that locking up a small number of rabid anti vaxers might help them finish higher in a very crowded Iowa caucus.
Well, in a sense they’re right. Vaccines should be optional. What are we going to do, send the police around to people’s houses and force them to get shots?
However, there should be consequences. For example, non-vaccinated children should not be able to enroll in any school anywhere. Or be accepted to daycare. Non-vaccinated adults should be turned down on job applications for certain types of positions, such as teachers, nurses, doctors, etc.
Why do you assume they are going for anti-vax voters?? Seems to me they are more Libertarian type stances, at least in Paul’s case, and really don’t have anything to do with anti-vaxers, per se.
I assume any words coming out of their mouths are politically motivated. “Vaccines should be optional” is the current dog whistle for the anti vax crowd these days.
It’s also the battle cry of the Libertarian and anti-government involvement crowd, so I don’t think you should assume that they are anti-vaxers or that this is their target audience. I don’t know about Christie, but I’d say Paul is definitely going with his Libertarian roots on this one.
I could be wrong though…maybe they are anti-vaxers. I don’t plan to vote for either, nor do I think they have any shot at a nomination, so it’s largely academic to me.
Vaccines should be optional is an entirely rational position held by probably the vast majority of the populace.
Honest question: is there any jurisdiction in the US or elsewhere, where vaccinations are mandatory in the sense that there is some legal penalty for not having your children vaccinated?
In Missouri, and I presume other states, vaccinations are required in order to enroll in public schools. Is Rand Paul, or anybody else in a position of power, advocating that public schools should not be allowed to make vaccinations a condition of enrollment?
I’m not sure if the Missouri law applies to private schools. My kids are in day care. Their day care does require vaccinations, but I don’t know if that’s just their policy or a legal requirement.
I think it’s more Paul than Christie, honestly, if you look at their statements. Christie’s was equivocal. Paul’s wasn’t.
Christie has since walked back his comments and said every child absolutely should be vaccinated.
Saw that on the Nightly news tonight, too lazy to dig up a cite.
Rand Paul’s father Ron is completely anti-vaccine, and makes no bones about it. I assume that Rand is merely following in those footsteps, especially since Rand is basically lying about vaccines causing mental disorders.
Vaccinations for Measles and Diptheria are required by law in Singapore.
I am not familiar with the law, but on casual reading the penalty appears to be a fine of up to $10k
Is he also promising abortions for some and miniature American flags for others?
How the hell did he get a medical degree?
Paul and Christie Endorse Status Quo on Vaccine Policy: Alarms sound over presidential hopefuls unwillingness to strap children to tables and administer government mandated innoculations.
search on Rand Paul vaccinations and you’ll get a ton of hits with this
[quote from CNN]
(http://edition.cnn.com/2015/02/02/politics/rand-paul-vaccine-effects/index.html)in bold:
**Paul, who is an ophthalmologist, also asserts that he’s heard of cases where vaccines have caused “profound mental disorders.”
“I’ve heard of many tragic cases of walking, talking, normal children who wound up with profound mental disorders after vaccines,” Paul said. “I’m not arguing vaccines are a bad idea. I think they’re a good thing. But I think the parents should have some input.”**
Sure sounds like he’s pandering to anti-vaccinators and libertarians. For some of you not up on the debate, “parents have some input” and “agree with vaccination on a relaxed schedule” are the anti-vaccinator code phrases for “maybe and/or never.” And I’ve heard usually isn’t something backed up by science.
Folks live in a society. You don’t want to vaccinate your child, then there are consequences such as not being able to enroll in day care or school, or work in certain environments. Heck, we have laws and consequences for driving unsafely but someone not vaccinating to protect both your own child and society at large should be a parental choice???
(Note: we all are excluding those with valid medical reasons for not getting vaccinated.)
Cite?
Paul? Sure. He’s always been the voice of libertarianism. But Christie?
And seeing as Christie walked it back after an outcry, I think it’s safe to say his comment was politically motivated. Sure, maybe he was just ignorant, but if he’s sure enough to say it aloud like that, why would he be so quickly convinced otherwise?
Maybe the question should be put to Paul: did you ever receive an MMR vaccine in your life?
There’s a part of me that wishes the reporter who asked the question had obvious, if unidentified rash on their body that the Senator notices just before answering the question. 
Good to see somebody stepping forward to represent the pro-polio side of the issue.