"Sick Privilege

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Thank you Freedom Hawk, for taking the stand for all the world to see why pure Libertarianism is horrendous and does not work in reality. The government is not always perfect, but preventing and prosecuting child abuse and child endangerment is something that it should take under its wing. Anti-Vaxxers clearly put their children at a probablisticly greater rate of death or disability, and it is a relatively easy thing for the government to check for.

"THE GREATER GOOD" is an equally valid, if not superior argument in favor of mandating vaccines that don't have a medical conflict. A fundamental obligation of government is to provide for the security and well being of its citizens. This is often interpreted in a militaristic context, but disease also falls under its purview. This is why we establish entities like the CDC to do research and propose policy recommendations. Citizens refusing vaccines prevent the eradication of deadly diseases and weaken herd immunity.

[Indy Texas]

No. Even if it makes no logical sense, they still may have religious reasons for it, and confiscating the kids because of that would interfere with Freedom of Religion. I understand a government that isn't all-powerful is a foreign concept to this forum, but people still have their rights. Children aren't the property of muh guvment, and this very idea that they can force parents to put something in their kid's bodies is sickening.

So you're okay with a measles outbreak in America in 2015 because "Muh freedoms, I don't want no vaccinations givin' muh kids the autism."

People who are that stupid shouldn't have the right to reproduce.

Not out of TEH AUTISM but out of religious freedom. Children are INKSing people too not assets. If parents were sensible, then they would. It's like The Draft. Maybe have the kids decide too. As for smilo, no, parents and the child should decide, but ultimately for the child. The government, no matter what you say, has no place in family matters. If you guys don't want them in people's bedrooms, then keep them out of living rooms, too.

This is blatantly insane.  I can understand the religious exemption for vaccines.  But, for cancer treatment?  Insane.  Sure, maybe there are cases where chemo is useless because you're too far gone.  But, there are plenty of cases of cancer where radiation plus chemo = 99% chance to survive and no treatment means death.  Not providing care to a child in that situation is neglect.  

You don't just let parents kill their children by neglect, even if that neglect is because of the parent's sincere beliefs.  Would you also allow parents to starve their children?  To kill them because they think God said so?  Parental rights are important sure.  But, you can just let people abuse or neglect their children.  

Personally, I don't think we should necessarily force parents to vaccinate.  Forcing people to do anything is difficult and problematic.  Maybe you can just hit parents with a fine if they refuse to vaccinate their kids.

That at least seems like a good compromise. It shows the importance while not treating a family bond like a disposable object

I guess if you saw your next door neighbor's child chained up in the basement with no food or water, you'd keep mum. Wouldn't want to get the evil CPS or police involved. Parents can do whatever they want with their children. Woohoo! Muh freedoms!

[Simfan34]

Found the map for who's doing this by state. Vermont, Michigan, Oregon, Idaho, and Illinois make your top 5.

Not at all surprising.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

[7,052,770]

Refusing to vaccinate should be classified as "child abuse." Problem solved.

[SUSAN CRUSHBONE]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

[AggregateDemand]

THE GREATER GOOD! That's all I'm hearing from you right now. Parents should have all agency over their kids.

Be that as it may, libertarianism allows citizens the right to sue parents into poverty until they comply or until they move to a remote region where they are no longer externalizing inordinate costs on the market and the citizenry.

The question; therefore, is whether you are willing to let thousands of county courts and scores of federal district courts make inconsistent rulings or whether you want to cut to the chase and establish a basic set of federal guidelines to lend a bit of certainty to the chaos.

The end result is going to be the same. It's just how much wealth/utility-killing rancor you want to invite.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrant this hyperbolic language.

[Free Bird]

I can't believe there would come a day that I agree with Antonio

[Flake]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrants this hyperbolic language.

The problem with that statement: Let's say Jenny McCarthy moves into a town, she gets measles and luckily for this town, everybody is immune thanks to legal vaccinations, except for one person. Let's say her name is Ashley. Now Ashley relies on community immunity (everybody else is immune from the disease so she cannot get it) because she's allergic to the vaccine. Well at the "Stirring the Pot" book signing, Ashley comes into contact with Jenny, and she is infected with measles, and eventually dies.

The only reason Ashley was able to stay healthy was because all people were immune, until Jenny McCarthy came with her autism psuedoscience and led to her death.

How does this affect parents? Well their children must be vaccinated in order for them to stay healthy, for others to stay healthy, and it's completely irresponsible for these parents to recklessly hurt their children just for "religious purposes" or whatever. Unless a child is allergic to a vaccination, every child needs to be vaccinated (not just 95%) in order to protect everyone from these infectious diseases.

[Negusa Nagast 🚀]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrant this hyperbolic language.

There are states in the US at the threshold for loosing their herd immunity to highly communicable diseases like measles. This is an issue and these parents are culpable for putting their children and other people at risk.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

Parents should have all agency over their kids.

Why? Have you ever really questioned that assumption or does it just seem self-evident?

[ingemann]

Parents should have all agency over their kids.

Why? Have you ever really questioned that assumption or does it just seem self-evident?

Rather good question. Why should parents be able to deny their children medical treatment?

[Sol]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrant this hyperbolic language.

The issue is also that anti-vaxxers tend to be a certain demographic profile (white granola liberals mostly) and those people tend to congregate in the same sorts of places. Which means that that 2-5% is concentrated.

[Free Bird]

I'm going with someone's idea. Sure fine them, but don't take them. That seems a bit extreme

[Antonio the Sixth]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrants this hyperbolic language.

The problem with that statement: Let's say Jenny McCarthy moves into a town, she gets measles and luckily for this town, everybody is immune thanks to legal vaccinations, except for one person. Let's say her name is Ashley. Now Ashley relies on community immunity (everybody else is immune from the disease so she cannot get it) because she's allergic to the vaccine. Well at the "Stirring the Pot" book signing, Ashley comes into contact with Jenny, and she is infected with measles, and eventually dies.

The only reason Ashley was able to stay healthy was because all people were immune, until Jenny McCarthy came with her autism psuedoscience and led to her death.

How does this affect parents? Well their children must be vaccinated in order for them to stay healthy, for others to stay healthy, and it's completely irresponsible for these parents to recklessly hurt their children just for "religious purposes" or whatever. Unless a child is allergic to a vaccination, every child needs to be vaccinated (not just 95%) in order to protect everyone from these infectious diseases.

That's a legitimate point, but considering that the likelihood of such a situation occurring any given year is probably below 5%, I don't think it's worth making such a big fuss about it (OK, I know that would mean that a kid would die every 20 years or so, and that's horrible, but come on).

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

Refusing to vaccinate should be classified as "child abuse." Problem solved.

since when does that solve anything? 

Also the idea that the state should force chemo on anyone is pretty awful. At least with vaccines  serious painful side effects are not all that likely. On the other hand, side effects from being taken away from your parents are very likely as well. I would guess the diminution in projected lifespan is substantially greater than not getting a vaccine.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm loathe to take a child away from their parents unless the situation is very, very dire. Failure to vaccinate doesn't come close to meeting that standard.

Let's look at the negative effects of non-vaccination. As Antonio V noted, not receiving a vaccine has a chance of contracting a disease that has a chance of killing them. Obviously, not preventing these diseases is a dumb decision, but its hardly child abuse, much less a death sentence. Given the hysterics of some on this thread, I wonder how some of my fellow posters feel about parents who own swimming pools.

[Indy Texas]

I'm loathe to take a child away from their parents unless the situation is very, very dire. Failure to vaccinate doesn't come close to meeting that standard.

Let's look at the negative effects of non-vaccination. As Antonio V noted, not receiving a vaccine has a chance of contracting a disease that has a chance of killing them. Obviously, not preventing these diseases is a dumb decision, but its hardly child abuse, much less a death sentence. Given the hysterics of some on this thread, I wonder how some of my fellow posters feel about parents who own swimming pools.

Nothing wrong with owning a swimming pool.

There is something very wrong with owning a swimming pool and deliberately not teaching your child how to swim, which is more analogous to this situation.

[All Along The Watchtower]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrant this hyperbolic language.

The issue is also that anti-vaxxers tend to be a certain demographic profile (white granola liberals mostly) and those people tend to congregate in the same sorts of places. Which means that that 2-5% is concentrated.

Why do you assume that most anti-vaxxers are liberals?

[Pandaguineapig]

How much do you want to bet that most people who believe that vaccines cause autism also believe that Bush did 9/11 and Elvis is still alive

[DC Al Fine]

Oh come on Snowstalker, this is dumb even by your standards.

honestly i agree with him in this case. refusing to vaccinate your children definitely falls under the umbrella of child abuse.

Look, I'm not saying that's the right thing to do, but it's not like every child who doesn't get vaccinated is going to catch smallpox and die. As long as it's only 2-5% of the population that asks for exemption, it's really a non-issue and certainly doesn't warrant this hyperbolic language.

The issue is also that anti-vaxxers tend to be a certain demographic profile (white granola liberals mostly) and those people tend to congregate in the same sorts of places. Which means that that 2-5% is concentrated.

Why do you assume that most anti-vaxxers are liberals?

See above map. The highest concentrations of anti-vacxxers are in Vermont and Oregon.

[DC Al Fine]

I'm loathe to take a child away from their parents unless the situation is very, very dire. Failure to vaccinate doesn't come close to meeting that standard.

Let's look at the negative effects of non-vaccination. As Antonio V noted, not receiving a vaccine has a chance of contracting a disease that has a chance of killing them. Obviously, not preventing these diseases is a dumb decision, but its hardly child abuse, much less a death sentence. Given the hysterics of some on this thread, I wonder how some of my fellow posters feel about parents who own swimming pools.

Nothing wrong with owning a swimming pool.

There is something very wrong with owning a swimming pool and deliberately not teaching your child how to swim, which is more analogous to this situation.

You're missing the point.

Both anti-vaccination and not teaching your child to swim (when you live near a body of water) are dumb parenting moves.

Neither act merits your hysterics. Neither act merits taking children away from their parents as others suggest.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

There's just as many in libertarian states. It started as a left-wing movement by elitist whites (one of the leaders was RFK Jr with some Hollywood notables) and the anti-government West took control. However, despite those states being ultra-right wing, the South is the only region of the country stereotyped as ultra-right wing, and they are vehemently against it. I found the Mississippi stats on another site, and they were at less than .1% non-vax.

Outside of Vermont, the liberal East isn't that into it either. It's just the white west coast liberalism joined by the anarchists (and Vermont has to oppose the South I guess). But the left gets the stereotype because they started the trend and California and Oregon are the definition of liberalism in most people's eyes. And Christians aren't into it (except perhaps Mormons, but I doubt that.)

[Oak Hills]

Found the map for who's doing this by state. Vermont, Michigan, Oregon, Idaho, and Illinois make your top 5.

I'm actually very surprised at Michigan, Illinois and Idaho, actually.

And at least Mississippi and Alabama get something right.