Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

All vaccines voluntary in US.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
All vaccines voluntary in US.


[/ QUOTE ]

Certain vacines are mandatory if you wish your child to recieve a public education.

Stu

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Certain vacines are mandatory if you wish your child to recieve a public education.

[/ QUOTE ]

Imposing conditions on provision of a free service is not 'forcing'.

Also yes. The state should IMO be able to violate certain aspects of individual freedom for the sake of public health. Disease control is a social issue; an individual who refuses vaccines for common illnesses is making a choice that impacts negatively on everyone.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]


Imposing conditions on provision of a free service is not 'forcing'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh, thats not a free service. All are forced to pay regardless of use. Thats not free, in fact that might be the opposite of free.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, obviously.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

Parents still have the choice to home school children if they don't want to abide by the public schools rules. Freedom of choice.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


Imposing conditions on provision of a free service is not 'forcing'.

[/ QUOTE ]

Uhhh, thats not a free service. All are forced to pay regardless of use. Thats not free, in fact that might be the opposite of free.

[/ QUOTE ]

Free at the point of service, as the jargon goes.

Whether the government should be allowed to tax people is obviously another question, and I think this forum has probably done it to death by now.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

On a sidenote... this part makes me laugh:
"Some conservatives and parents’-rights groups say such a requirement would encourage premarital sex and interfere with the way they raise their children..."

Yes... obviously any children who are given a vaccination against a cancer causing virus will become horn-dogs. And you simply cannot raise your children with moral standards if they're vaccinated.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force anyone to get anything?

[/ QUOTE ]

of course not

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
On a sidenote... this part makes me laugh:
"Some conservatives and parents’-rights groups say such a requirement would encourage premarital sex and interfere with the way they raise their children..."

Yes... obviously any children who are given a vaccination against a cancer causing virus will become horn-dogs.

[/ QUOTE ]No, wait, it's actually worse. They expect a child getting cancer vaccination to start inhaling asbestos, smoking Gitanes and vacationing in Chernobyl.

Those folks are dangerous.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]


Does it matter? They're gonna do what they want anyway. You may wanna question their position of power, actually (hint: it's a monopoly).

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

No.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

Sounds like the OP is pro-cancer.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
They're gonna do what they want anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the relevant government officials are held to their oaths of office.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

A better question might be...

"Should Corporations be allowed to force little girls..." through their influence and power on Capital Hill.

Merck & Co. is a corporation. Free market, Capitalists, etc.

On the other hand... If those little girls get the vaccine, they won't be suffering when they are "big" girls. Will they? We all know that the little girls grow up and they tend to like the boys later on. And quite often, they don't make the right decisions as to which boys get the nookie. So, the vaccine might just help them out a bit.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
A better question might be...

"Should Corporations be allowed to force little girls..." through their influence and power on Capital Hill.

Merck & Co. is a corporation. Free market, Capitalists, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

Ahahaha. A corporation is doing it, so it's "free market". ELL-OH-ELL.

[ QUOTE ]
On the other hand... If those little girls get the vaccine, they won't be suffering when they are "big" girls. Will they? We all know that the little girls grow up and they tend to like the boys later on. And quite often, they don't make the right decisions as to which boys get the nookie. So, the vaccine might just help them out a bit.

[/ QUOTE ]

"It's for your own good, trust us!"

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

PVN: I want to buy X.
Gov't: We've realized all people should have X. New law suggest PVN buy X, and we'll subsidize the purchase with some tax dollars.
PVN: WTF?!?!?!? I DON'T WANT X! WHY IS THE GOV'T DOING THIS TO ME?!??!??! OPPRESSION!!!!

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

The Gardasil vaccine will clearly eliminate disease and degradation in the future.

[ QUOTE ]
"It's for your own good, trust us!"

[/ QUOTE ]

And, a person mocking me on an internet forum is someone I can trust?

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
"It's for your own good, trust us!"

[/ QUOTE ]

"The price of freedom is eternal vigilance."

- Thomas Jefferson

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

Sorry,

The vaccine actually works. Don't know what you guys are so uptight about?????

Huh?

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
They're gonna do what they want anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not if the relevant government officials are held to their oaths of office.

[/ QUOTE ]

Something that hasn't been happening for over a century. Not with Congress anyway.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Merck & Co. is a corporation. Free market, Capitalists, etc.

[/ QUOTE ]

A corporation is a government created entity, making it anti-free market.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sorry,

The vaccine actually works. Don't know what you guys are so uptight about?????

Huh?

[/ QUOTE ]

Even without taking into account things like mercury and cancer causing viruses and contamination, the vaccine makers themselves admit that there can be side effects, and under law if a vaccinatee is injured they are prohibited from receiving just compensation via law.

It's a cost/benefit thing. If you don't mind your child being injured a small percentage of the time (according to the drug industry) then no biggee.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
All vaccines voluntary in US.




Certain vacines are mandatory if you wish your child to recieve a public education.

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Total propaganda. In most states the parent can simply sign a waiver, in West Virginia and Louisiana I believe it's a simple judge ordered court procedure, similiar to a legal name change, no biggee. Assuming you even want your kid to go to public school.

But notice how the article makes it seem like it's THE LAW that you must vaccinate your child. It's a sign of propaganda I think. Like a consensus reality propaganda, not saying the writers are deliberately deceiving people.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a cost benefit analysis, if there's no benefit then there's only the cost.

Having said that, if parents are dumb enough to vaccinate their children for every little thing, then their children probably will be promiscuous.

I think the reality is that for most (dumb)people, this is a good thing.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

In a cost benefit analysis, if there's no benefit then there's only the cost.

Having said that, if parents are dumb enough to vaccinate their children for every little thing, then their children probably will be promiscuous.

I think the reality is that for most (dumb)people, this is a good thing.

[/ QUOTE ]

Well I think that a lot of people are making a big deal out of this being sexually transmitted. I think HPV is a pretty poor example because it's something that most people don't know about and is not going to impact people's sexual decsion making at all IMO.

As far as only dumb people being for this I'm not sure I agree. I do agree that obv it all has do with cost/benefit, but cervical cancer affects a lot of women, and while the chance goes up if you are more promiscuous, I think that if even ifyou have 2-3 partners in your lifetime (depending on how promiscuous they are) you are up there as far as relative risk goes.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

[/ QUOTE ]

LOL.. at what age can you make these decisions meaningfully, and what about circumstances when it is not your choice.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

[/ QUOTE ]

Choices like not wearing slutty clothes so you aren't raped.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Sounds like the OP is pro-cancer.

[/ QUOTE ]

Random digression (this reminds me of a great story):

Two of my friends and I were hanging out and drinking with a few girls back in college (trying to get with them obv), one of whom asks, "Do any of you guys want to donate to XXXXX cancer fund?", and my friend responds with, "No, I'm pro-cancer actually," followed by a rant about how it is good population control. The girl, whose father had just died of cancer, stormed out with her friends never to return. Worst. Game. Ever... but hilarious nonetheless.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

I think a kick in the balls would have been a more appropriate reaction.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
Quote:
Sounds like the OP is pro-cancer.



Random digression (this reminds me of a great story):

Two of my friends and I were hanging out and drinking with a few girls back in college (trying to get with them obv), one of whom asks, "Do any of you guys want to donate to XXXXX cancer fund?", and my friend responds with, "No, I'm pro-cancer actually," followed by a rant about how it is good population control. The girl, whose father had just died of cancer, stormed out with her friends never to return. Worst. Game. Ever... but hilarious nonetheless.

[/ QUOTE ]

Not to be alarmist, but vaccines in the recent past were shown to be contaminated with a cancer causing virus or retrovirus or something. This may be the best argument against vaccines, the unknown cost. We know about mercury and biocontamination and stuff and it's bad. What don't we know about?

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I still don't get it. Lets say we could give everyone a vaccine against HIV, that was 100% effective and had no side effects, but you was only effective it if you gave it to infants. We shouldn't use it?

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
I guess I still don't get it. Lets say we could give everyone a vaccine against HIV, that was 100% effective and had no side effects, but you was only effective it if you gave it to infants. We shouldn't use it?

[/ QUOTE ]

The drug companies lobbied for a very similiar thing, hepB vaccine to infants, the only difference from your scenario was that a) it had side effects b) not 100% c) it could be given later in life.

Let's face it, it's more about money and marketing than about public health.

And there's no free lunch. There is always a cost/benefit analysis to be done.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I still don't get it. Lets say we could give everyone a vaccine against HIV, that was 100% effective and had no side effects, but you was only effective it if you gave it to infants. We shouldn't use it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I'm not aware of any vaccine that is both 100% effective and 100% risk-free (many, or maybe all, vaccines have risks of adverse effects). If someone (not an infant, obviously) has decided that if they ever engage in sex it will be only with a committed, special partner, then I see near zero value for that person to have a vaccine that prevents STD's. Yet there would be a risk of a bad reaction to the vaccine. For such persons the vaccine would be a bad bet. Now add the state using its force to make people take the vaccine, and I think you will see why I answered no to the original question in this thread.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
The Gardasil vaccine will clearly eliminate disease and degradation in the future.

[ QUOTE ]
"It's for your own good, trust us!"

[/ QUOTE ]

And, a person mocking me on an internet forum is someone I can trust?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not asking (or forcing) you to put any trust in me.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Should the state be allowed to force little girls to get STD vacines?

Link

Stu

[/ QUOTE ]

Why does it matter if the disease is sexually transmitted?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because if it is sexually transmitted, one can choose not to be exposed to it (or choose not to spread it); unlike, for example, a disease that may be caught by someone coughing in one's face.

[/ QUOTE ]

I guess I still don't get it. Lets say we could give everyone a vaccine against HIV, that was 100% effective and had no side effects, but you was only effective it if you gave it to infants. We shouldn't use it?

[/ QUOTE ]

Well, I'm not aware of any vaccine that is both 100% effective and 100% risk-free (many, or maybe all, vaccines have risks of adverse effects). If someone (not an infant, obviously) has decided that if they ever engage in sex it will be only with a committed, special partner, then I see near zero value for that person to have a vaccine that prevents STD's. Yet there would be a risk of a bad reaction to the vaccine. For such persons the vaccine would be a bad bet. Now add the state using its force to make people take the vaccine, and I think you will see why I answered no to the original question in this thread.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do see your point. I just think HPV is a virus that is a lot different from most STD's. Anyone that has had 2-3 sexual partners, or who's partners have had 2-3 sexual partners is very likely to have HPV (I think 75% of the women in the U.S. have it). It is usually asyptomatic, or mild symptoms, and the main adverse affects are cervical cancer of a certain % that are unlucky enough to have certain type of HPV virus. In addition it is not prevented by condom usage. So I agree with what has been said previously that obviously this should come down to cost vs benefit, but I think that the argument that this is a behavior related disease, while somewhat true, this is a widespread virus that most women get through non-risky or promiscuous sexual behavior.

Re: Should the state be allowed to force little girls............
 

If someone (not an infant, obviously) has decided that if they ever engage in sex it will be only with a committed, special partner, then I see near zero value for that person to have a vaccine that prevents STD's.

I think that's fair. Both of them should be exempt if the US decided to implement such a policy.