ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories
 

Notices


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.
Tags health conspiracies , vaccination , vaccine autism myth , vaccines

Closed Thread
Old 2nd June 2011, 11:18 AM   #361
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
Antivaxxers?

Is questioning the wisdom of OVER vaccinating babies anti vaccine?

Is wanting to spreading vaccinations over period of time anti vaccine?
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.
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 11:46 AM   #362
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by Tomblvd View Post
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.
I already did, twice maybe three times. Ask someone else.
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 12:00 PM   #363
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I already did, twice maybe three times. Ask someone else.
No you didn't.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 12:11 PM   #364
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I already did, twice maybe three times. Ask someone else.
Links or post numbers please.
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 01:50 PM   #365
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
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:
I'm curious, what are your falsifiability conditions? What evidence would you need to see to accept that vaccines do not cause autism? Can you give just one example of what you would accept?
I reviewed the thread and you never attempted to answer the questions.
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 06:39 PM   #366
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by Tomblvd View Post
Here's another question you've ignored. It was from 000063 (if that is his/her real name):



I reviewed the thread and you never attempted to answer the questions.
Yes I did. Search the thread for "1000"
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 06:46 PM   #367
Polaris
Philosopher
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,598
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
So what internet source would you recommend as a source? theman.com? NIST.com? Bigpharma.com Baptist.com? Cheney.com? Rumsfeld.com

If JoAnn started a site for ideas to make money would it be likely that most would be bogus?
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.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 07:04 PM   #368
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by Tomblvd View Post
Links or post numbers please.


http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=323

http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=352



http://www.internationalskeptics.com...&postcount=266
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 07:13 PM   #369
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
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.
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.

I care about the children.
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 07:17 PM   #370
Sceptic-PK
Illuminator
 
Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 3,032
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.

I care about the children.
Of course you do, which is why you wish to return to the olden days when children were ravaged by disease.
Sceptic-PK is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 07:44 PM   #371
Polaris
Philosopher
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 8,598
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.

I care about the children.
I rest my case.
__________________
"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.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 08:09 PM   #372
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,466
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post

Originally Posted by Travis
Babies can be born with all sorts of potential reactions to things. Of course we only find out about them when they actually have these reactions. But I suppose we should go the safer course and just keep all babies in a plastic bubble just in case.
Woman's lib eliminated much of what was left of that bubble.
There never was a bubble and the idea of a bubble is a bad one.

You don't raise your kids in some protective bubble "just in case" unless you want to screw them up. And, if your contention is accurate, and feminism is keeping that bubble away then good.
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 2nd June 2011, 09:06 PM   #373
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,867
Quote:
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 made even more bizarre when you consider that it's perfectly okay for some people to make money on medical treatments. When "Big Pharma" makes a profit on conventional treatments this is seen as proof that they are not to be trusted, but when private, unregulated alternative practicioners sell their overpriced products to gullible patients and make a fortune, no one lifts an eyebrow because that's for some reason not politically incorrect.

Edit:
Quote:
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.
What caused this sudden change in you?
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)

Last edited by Safe-Keeper; 2nd June 2011 at 09:07 PM.
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 12:54 AM   #374
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,466
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
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 03:04 AM   #375
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
Let's try this Clayton.

I'll just repost the post you are ignoring, that makes it easier to respond.

Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post




HMMMM. So instead of pushing rubella vaccine for all 10 year old girls who haven't already become immune, all babies get it?
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.
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 03:21 AM   #376
Safe-Keeper
Philosopher
 
Safe-Keeper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 7,867
Quote:
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?
I think he is saying that it would be better for the children to get the vaccine at a later age, rather than as infants, as they're not likely to get rubella as babies. But I don't see the logic in giving it to "10 year olds who haven't already become immune" (presumably by having a run-in with rubella) -- the whole point of a vaccine is that you give them to kids before they get ill, not afterwards.
__________________
In choosing to support humanitarian organizations, it's best to choose those that do not have "militant wings" (Mycroft, 2013)
Safe-Keeper is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 04:48 AM   #377
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.
What caused you to change your mind?

Quote:
I care about the children.
OH WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?

Are the children in danger? You haven't established this.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 07:15 AM   #378
ladmo
Muse
 
ladmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
Originally Posted by Travis View Post
There have always been exemptions as long as there has been a requirement for vaccination. I think it should be proven that there was ever a time when any state didn't give out exemptions before we start getting hung up on any particular year.
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
ladmo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 07:31 AM   #379
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
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
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.
__________________

Last edited by excaza; 3rd June 2011 at 07:32 AM.
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 07:33 AM   #380
Dave Rogers
Bandaged ice that stampedes inexpensively through a scribbled morning waving necessary ankles
 
Dave Rogers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 17,934
Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
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.
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.

Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
NJ allows only 2 "exemptions" 1) medical and 2) religious.
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:

Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
My child was allergic to certain vaccines due to an anaphylaxis condition.
Such a case would obviously be covered by exemption 1), medical.

Dave
__________________
"We will punish the murderer together. Our punishment will be more generosity, more tolerance and more democracy."

- Fabian Stang, Mayor of Oslo

SSKCAS, covert member
Dave Rogers is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 08:04 AM   #381
Nonpareil
The Terrible Trivium
 
Nonpareil's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: A Cut Below
Posts: 6,407
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
I don't care a freaking tinker's damn about whether Autism causes vaccines.

I care about the children.
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
Nonpareil is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 08:30 AM   #382
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by Tomblvd View Post
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.
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.
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 08:45 AM   #383
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,466
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
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 08:49 AM   #384
AmandaM
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 470
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
The people who are in danger, will suffer serious consequences from Rubella, are women of child bearing age.
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.)
AmandaM is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 09:10 AM   #385
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
What caused you to change your mind?


OH WON'T SOMEONE THINK OF THE CHILDREN!?

Are the children in danger? You haven't established this.
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?
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 09:14 AM   #386
Clayton Moore
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 7,508
Originally Posted by AmandaM View Post
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.)
It's your body and your responsibility to determine whether you are no longer immune to Rubella.
Clayton Moore is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 09:30 AM   #387
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
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.
Oh?

Quote:
The WMD lie proves that the American public can be BLATANTLY lied to in order to fulfill an agenda.
The 'evidence' used to justify the supposed WMDs was shaky at best but most people were still stupid enough to buy it. Also remember that the 'evidence' used was an admitted forgery. Never mind that UN inspectors found nothing the last time they were there. Regardless, these are not analogous situations. There are documented trials out the wazoo for vaccines before they are approved for public use. Try again.

Quote:
Hasn't the CDC lied to the public many times without consequence?
Have they? Show us.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 09:31 AM   #388
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
It's your body and your responsibility to determine whether you are no longer immune to Rubella.
How exactly are you going to determine that? Jump around in a Rubella room and see what happens?
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:11 AM   #389
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
Clayton, what is your evidence that infants are getting too many vaccines?
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:15 AM   #390
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by Tomblvd View Post
Clayton, what is your evidence that infants are getting too many vaccines?
He doesn't have any. His argument against vaccinations is that infants are getting vaccinated.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:30 AM   #391
Travis
Misanthrope of the Mountains
 
Travis's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 20,466
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
It's your body and your responsibility to determine whether you are no longer immune to Rubella.
And how, exactly, are you going to determine if this immunity is still strong? And what if she is someone that can't take vaccines? Is she supposed to just never get pregnant?
__________________
"Because WE ARE IGNORANT OF 911 FACTS, WE DEMAND PROOF" -- Douglas Herman on Rense.com
Travis is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:34 AM   #392
aggle-rithm
Ardent Formulist
 
aggle-rithm's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 15,336
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
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?
Do you know what a "lie" is?
__________________
To understand recursion, you must first understand recursion.

Woo's razor: Never attribute to stupidity that which can be adequately explained by aliens.
aggle-rithm is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:56 AM   #393
ladmo
Muse
 
ladmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
Originally Posted by excaza View Post
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.
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.

Originally Posted by excaza View Post
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.
You sound like the "love or leave it" crowd in the 60's... well thought out argument.
ladmo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 10:56 AM   #394
Tomblvd
Muse
 
Tomblvd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 821
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post

Hasn't the CDC lied to the public many times without consequence? Do you think business hasn't noticed that?
Even if the CDC lies, why does every other developed country require infant immunizatons?

Are they all lying?
Tomblvd is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:01 AM   #395
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
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.
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:
You sound like the "love or leave it" crowd in the 60's... well thought out argument.
Better thought out than most peoples' arguments against vaccinations. At least you have a rational argument in your son's case.
__________________

Last edited by excaza; 3rd June 2011 at 11:08 AM.
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:07 AM   #396
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by AmandaM View Post
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.
Well hey, at the Clayton School Of MedicineTM, all you have to do is wash your hands and you've beaten Rubella.
__________________
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:11 AM   #397
ladmo
Muse
 
ladmo's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Posts: 676
Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
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.
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.



Originally Posted by Dave Rogers View Post
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
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.
ladmo is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:17 AM   #398
fullflavormenthol
Master Poster
 
fullflavormenthol's Avatar
 
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
fullflavormenthol is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:18 AM   #399
excaza
Illuminator
 
excaza's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Posts: 3,593
Originally Posted by ladmo View Post
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.
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:
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.
Ah yes, the forum mafia conspiracy. If the post bothers you, report it. Doesn't bother me one bit. Personally, I wish your hissy fit had been preserved, but oh well.
__________________

Last edited by excaza; 3rd June 2011 at 11:20 AM.
excaza is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Old 3rd June 2011, 11:28 AM   #400
000063
Philosopher
 
000063's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Posts: 5,310
Originally Posted by Clayton Moore View Post
Good idea. You can thank woman's lib for that.
because Trutherism, Holocaust denial, and being an anti-vaccer wasn't quite enough for you.
000063 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Back to Top
Closed Thread

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Conspiracy Theories

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:30 AM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
2014, TribeTech AB. All Rights Reserved.
This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.