Oh, this is funny. Cessandra, cite, please? It appears that your knowledge of constitutional law is about as comprehensive as your knowledge about vaccinations. :rolleyes:
To the extent education is a right in some places and instances (education is not a federal right, and is protected only by some state constitutions), it ain’t just your kid’s right, it is the right of all the other children in that classroom.
And if your child’s exercise of religious freedom interferes with those other student’s right to an effective and safe education, your religious right loses. To give a simple (and absurd) example, even if your religious beliefs required females under the age of 18 to be topless during daylight hours, your 16 year old daughter is not going to be allowed to attend highschool with her boobs hanging out. She will be a distraction to the class and will detract from the education of the other students. Either she clothes herself or she gets homeschooled.
Your child presents a more serious potential to disrupt the other students’ education - if your child is in the classroom, the other students’ chances of getting sick or dying has increased. Being sick or dead makes it harder to get a diploma. So your kid should be out of the classroom.
Many people did a lot of reading and decided to invest in Enron because Venus was in Cancer.
And this is evidence of what? My sister and brother-in-law are both pediatrician, and would shoot me if I decided I wasn’t going to vaccinate my (hypothetical) kids.
Do two pediatricians beat a nurse? Or is your resort to anecdote a tacit acknowledgement that that you have jack to base your decision on but a mystical belief in pseudoscience and a breathtaking callousness about the health of the children you expose your child to?
I still have you beat on anecdotal evidence, two pediatricians to a pediatrician and a nurse.
To turn the question around, why do you fail to question the writings of the quacks you so unblinkingly believe? My “unquestioning” acceptance of the medical wisdom is based on two things: (1) the statistics demonstrating the massive drops in the incidence of measles, whooping cough, rubella, mumps, etc. since vaccination became wide-spread, and (2) the fact that the scientific method has been demonstrated to work over the past 5 centuries.
What has also been demonstrated over the centuries is that there are quacks in every profession - and always suckers who believe their piffle, to their own detriment.
“If you don’t get your children vaccinated, they could get sick or die.” Damn that CDC!!
Jesus Christ, and you claim you have read and are knowledgeable on this issue.
Yet you apparently do not know that vaccines are not a profitable product for pharmaceutical companies - just about all of them are off-patent and the profit margins are low because it is a commodized, mass product. Indeed, without government subsidy, most pharmaceutical companies would stop making them.
Try reading books with facts in them.
What does this mean, that if I disagree with the government once, I have to disagree with them all the time? Or do I have your permission to analyze the government’s motive in determining whether they are being untruthful or not?
And the government has no motive to lie on this issue. Your proferred conspiracy theory, er, explanation, is that the government lies because the pharmaceutical lobby tells them to. But, as I noted, Big Pharma doesn’t make money on vaccinations, so that argument is road-kill.
Yes. And…?
Sorry, no can do. I have to accept it; I don’t have to respect it. Why would you want me to ‘respect’ something that I think is amazingly selfish and dumb.
Good for you. But, chile, you decided to defend an indefensible decision in Great Debates. You want to avoid condemnation for your foolish actions, don’t proudly speak of them in Great Debates.
Suddenly, your child is not vaccinated because of particular medical problems. Throughout this thread, your position is that you were against vaccination. If you are in favor of vaccinations except where there are contradictions, why are we having this debate?
I’ve never disputed that; I’m not HennaDancer, trying to impose anything on you. Vaccinate, don’t vaccinate, I don’t care. What I do care about is that, if you don’t vaccinate, you don’t threaten the health of other children by your decision. So keep them out of my schools.
Fine. KEEP YOUR KIDS OUT OF MY SCHOOLS. Whatever else you do is up to you.
Honey, you made two major factual errors in this post alone. That is evidence of your lack of education on this issue. BTW, kindly point out where I have degraded you.
And, again, I have not one tried to deny you any freedoms. I have no problem from a legal perspective with your decision. I would like to prevent you from depriving other children of the right to good health and education. That’s called being a defender of freedoms, not an attacker of freedoms.
Sua