|
Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today. |
2nd June 2011, 11:18 AM | #361 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
Without a specific scientific reason to do so, and just tossing autism around as an excuse, yes it is.
But more importantly, many antivaxxers use the "just asking questions" approach to make their views more palatable. And I'm still waiting for your response on immunizing infants against Rubella. |
2nd June 2011, 11:46 AM | #362 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
|
2nd June 2011, 12:00 PM | #363 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
|
__________________
|
|
2nd June 2011, 12:11 PM | #364 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
|
2nd June 2011, 01:50 PM | #365 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
Here's another question you've ignored. It was from 000063 (if that is his/her real name):
Quote:
|
2nd June 2011, 06:39 PM | #366 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
|
2nd June 2011, 06:46 PM | #367 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
|
You don't actually care about whether vaccination causes autism. You've just latched onto this bogus issue as a club to beat "Big Pharma" (whatever the hell that is, anyway) with. That's the only rational explanation as to why a mountain of evidence and answers to every question asked (within the reasonable parameters of comprehensible English) has been waved off as propaganda and "lies". As has been pointed out, you've got a belief and you're not interesting in learning anything or educating yourself in the least. We pay attention to facts and evidence here, we don't divine our ideas based on hunches pulled out of our own rectums. What purpose does any of your participation in this thread serve?* It's certainly not to educate (not that a position of invincible ignorance is ever going to teach anybody anything except how not to do something.)
This person is a perfect example of that bizarre school of thought among some left-wing simpletons that considers it ok for profit to be made on some goods and services (food, automobiles, sheetrock, etc.) but not on others (medicine, armaments, etc.). The reasoning behind this seems to be as basic as "I just don't like it." *This is a rhetorical question. Look it up. |
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar "Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk. |
|
2nd June 2011, 07:04 PM | #368 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
|
2nd June 2011, 07:13 PM | #369 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
|
2nd June 2011, 07:17 PM | #370 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,831
|
|
2nd June 2011, 07:44 PM | #371 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
|
|
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar "Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk. |
|
2nd June 2011, 08:09 PM | #372 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
|
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
2nd June 2011, 09:06 PM | #373 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 10,415
|
Quote:
Edit:
Quote:
|
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig |
|
3rd June 2011, 12:54 AM | #374 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
I don't think he's ever expressed concern that Autism creates the vaccines. I'm not sure how that would even happen.
Clayton have you figured out why we vaccinate babies yet? |
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
3rd June 2011, 03:04 AM | #375 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
Let's try this Clayton.
I'll just repost the post you are ignoring, that makes it easier to respond. I don't understand what point you are making here. Where are you getting these "10 year old girls who haven't already become immune"? And how is this an either/or? Are you saying we are withholding vaccines from an at-risk group to immunize infants? Your statement makes no sense. |
3rd June 2011, 03:21 AM | #376 |
Penultimate Amazing
Join Date: Jun 2007
Location: Norway
Posts: 10,415
|
Quote:
|
__________________
"He's like a drunk being given a sobriety test by the police after being pulled over. Just as a drunk can't walk a straight line, Trump can't think in a straight line. He's all over the place."--Stacyhs "If you are still hung up on that whole words-have-meaning thing, then 2020 is going to be a long year for you." --Ladewig |
|
3rd June 2011, 04:48 AM | #377 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 07:15 AM | #378 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
|
An exemption is: "The process of freeing or state of being free from an obligation or liability imposed on others."
If an exemption is not universally applied or universally available it is not an exemption it is an exception. NJ allows only 2 "exemptions" 1) medical and 2) religious. Philosophical difference is not an exemption. If you care to nick pick and parse words... great. When exemptions are not allowed just because you don't want your child to take it... it is mandated plain and simple. http://www.state.nj.us/health/cd/doc...vaccine_qa.pdf |
3rd June 2011, 07:31 AM | #379 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
There is no nit and pick here. Your son is allergic, that is a medical reason for an exemption. You said no exemptions were available. Unless you care to show us these facts you're so adamant about us providing showing no exemption was available, you lied.
If you don't want to vaccinate your kids for philosophical reasons, don't send them to public schools or move to a state that allows it. |
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 07:33 AM | #380 |
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Cair Paravel, according to XKCD
Posts: 34,249
|
That's obviously wrong, by definition. If an exemption is universally applied, then the obligation or liability isn't "imposed on others". An exemption can only exist if it isn't universal. A universally applied exemption is simply the absence of obligation.
Just going back to where this question of exemptions or exceptions started, before your bizarre hissy fit where you claimed you were being ordered to kill your own child, you commented that: Such a case would obviously be covered by exemption 1), medical. Dave |
__________________
There is truth and there are lies. - President Joseph R. Biden, January 20th, 2021 |
|
3rd June 2011, 08:04 AM | #381 |
The Terrible Trivium
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Nethescurial
Posts: 8,096
|
So you don't actually know and certainly don't actually care whether or not vaccines cause Autism. But you rail against vaccination because you, for some reason, think it's bad.
...Even though you don't know or care whether or not they actually harm the children. Can someone please explain this to me? |
__________________
"The only thing you can do easily is be wrong, and that's hardly worth the effort." - Norton Juster, The Phantom Tollbooth |
|
3rd June 2011, 08:30 AM | #382 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
Rubella is a mild disease in children.
Rubella is a danger to unborn babies carried by mothers who catch Rubella while pregnant. The people who are in danger, will suffer serious consequences from Rubella, are women of child bearing age. There is a test to determine if a person is immune to Rubella. At 10 years old, before child bearing age, girls would be tested. If they were not immune they would receive the vaccine. There is no need for every baby or any baby to receive Rubella vaccine. |
3rd June 2011, 08:45 AM | #383 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
No, Clayton, you give the babies the vaccine so that the babies don't get sick and pass it on to the mothers who might be pregnant.
|
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
3rd June 2011, 08:49 AM | #384 |
Critical Thinker
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 470
|
Pregnant women (or rather, their fetuses) are most at risk, from what I have read, because the disease passes to the fetus and causes very serious problems.
Immunity for Rubella lasts about 18 years. Pregnant women like me (who were not exactly expecting to get pregnant) might find their immunity wore off 20 years ago, and the vaccine for Rubella will not be given to pregnant women, since it is a live vaccine. http://www.nhs.uk/chq/Pages/1104.asp...CategoryID=137 And where will pregnant women most likely come into contact with Rubella? Other people's children. More appropriately, other people's unvaccinated children. So you take your little unvaccinated 6-year-old offspring to the local diner. He's just got a mild rash -- nothing for YOU to be concerned about -- and he sneezes on me. Thanks. You've just put me and my fetus at risk. As a pregnant woman and a tax-payer I have a right to go to school, work, dinner, the grocery, etc. So don't tell me I should just stay home for 40 weeks or wear a mask and a hazmat suit whenever I step out my door, for fear of all the Jenny McCarthy mommies and their unvaccinated brats. (Although I'm sure with your attitudes towards "women's lib" that's exactly where you'd rather see me.) |
3rd June 2011, 09:10 AM | #385 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
Think of the old saying "you're going to eat a pound of dirt before you die." I don't know every one of the vaccines a toddler gets before 2 years old but I do know that the MMRV diseases don't present the danger that a disease such as polio does.
The WMD lie proves that the American public can be BLATANTLY lied to in order to fulfill an agenda. And that the American public, including its elected officials will do absolutely nothing to reverse the consequences of that lie EVEN EVEN EVEN as our precious soldiers, our precious children are killed almost daily. Hasn't the CDC lied to the public many times without consequence? Do you think business hasn't noticed that? |
3rd June 2011, 09:14 AM | #386 |
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
|
|
3rd June 2011, 09:30 AM | #387 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
Oh?
Quote:
Quote:
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 09:31 AM | #388 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 10:11 AM | #389 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
Clayton, what is your evidence that infants are getting too many vaccines?
|
3rd June 2011, 10:15 AM | #390 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 10:30 AM | #391 |
Misanthrope of the Mountains
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 24,133
|
|
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
|
|
3rd June 2011, 10:34 AM | #392 |
Ardent Formulist
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,334
|
|
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion. Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens. |
|
3rd June 2011, 10:56 AM | #393 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
|
The original premise was that vaccines were mandatory for compulsory education. The link shows that it is in NJ and there are only 2 ways to get out of government mandated vaccines in elementary school. plain and simple.
You sound like the "love or leave it" crowd in the 60's... well thought out argument. |
3rd June 2011, 10:56 AM | #394 |
Muse
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
|
|
3rd June 2011, 11:01 AM | #395 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
No. The original premise was that there were no exemptions. You can't suddenly change your tune and pretend you were right all along. Either you knew about the exemptions and you were lying to me, or you didn't know about them at all. Either way, your post was demonstrably wrong.
Quote:
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 11:07 AM | #396 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 11:11 AM | #397 |
Muse
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
|
Maybe I didn't state it as well I could. The difference of opinion that I have with others is that if a person doesn't wish to have the vaccine given to their child... this is no opt out unless it is against your religious views or you are medically unable to take it. There is no provision, exception, exemption, or whatever one wishes to call it for people who just don't want to take it. That was my original gripe as it became a mandated order.
Point taken but the medical exemption was not available then but it is now and was available before the end of the first year of implementation in my state. What sets me off with this entire forum is that certain lackeys get away with calling others "nimrods" without censorship while people who disagree with government mandates gets censored. I understand about "attacking" the person and not the statement but the door does not swing both ways. |
3rd June 2011, 11:17 AM | #398 |
Master Poster
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 2,415
|
Ladmo if you look back, nimrod was removed from the comment; you can go check if you would like. Nevertheless I would imagine that is something to take up with forum management and not air out here.
|
__________________
"Burning people! He says what we're all thinking!" -GLaDOS |
|
3rd June 2011, 11:18 AM | #399 |
Illuminator
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
|
So you're asserting that the government mandated a medication without a provision exempting those who are allergic to it? Care to back this up with some of your precious facts, or are we just going to float on your assertions?
Quote:
|
__________________
|
|
3rd June 2011, 11:28 AM | #400 |
Philosopher
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,398
|
|
Thread Tools | |
|
|