Hundreds quarantined for measles in 2 CA universities.

[Highever]

Ah, ok, let me try again.



So John the unvaccinated adult gets a speeding ticket and has to appear in court or he will be jailed. What happens next?

John would have to remote in for court. Prison guards on unvaccinated prisoners would be required by law to be vaccinated or they cannot be hired.

Honestly just make vaccinations mandatory for any government related position.

[Neutraligon]

John would have to remote in for court. Prison guards on unvaccinated prisoners would be required by law to be vaccinated or they cannot be hired.

Honestly just make vaccinations mandatory for any government related position.

The judge is not the only one in that room.

[Highever]

Honestly just make vaccinations mandatory for any government related position.

The judge is not the only one in that room.

No but I'm just speaking in general, vaccinations should be mandatory to work in government related fields.

[Galloism]

Ah, ok, let me try again.



So John the unvaccinated adult gets a speeding ticket and has to appear in court or he will be jailed. What happens next?

John would have to remote in for court, assuming of course he does not have a medical excuse for not being vaccinated. Prison guards on unvaccinated prisoners would be required by law to be vaccinated or they cannot be hired. Personally of the opinion that if you are going to work for the government in any capacity, one of the requirements should be vaccination or proof of being medically unable to vaccinate.

That's an interesting concept - remoting in for court.

That being said, if the problem is the risk the unvaccinated person poses, doesn't the person with a medical excuse pose the exact same risk?

[Neutraligon]

John would have to remote in for court, assuming of course he does not have a medical excuse for not being vaccinated. Prison guards on unvaccinated prisoners would be required by law to be vaccinated or they cannot be hired. Personally of the opinion that if you are going to work for the government in any capacity, one of the requirements should be vaccination or proof of being medically unable to vaccinate.

That's an interesting concept - remoting in for court.

That being said, if the problem is the risk the unvaccinated person poses, doesn't the person with a medical excuse pose the exact same risk?

Yes they do, but they do not have a choice, unlike the those who have no medical reason. The purpose of the above law is to incentivize people to get vaccinated should they have the choice to do so, by making it difficult for them to receive benefits or have dealing with the government.

[Greater vakolicci haven]

That's an interesting concept - remoting in for court.

That being said, if the problem is the risk the unvaccinated person poses, doesn't the person with a medical excuse pose the exact same risk?

Yes they do, but they do not have a choice, unlike the those who have no medical reason. The purpose of the above law is to incentivize people to get vaccinated should they have the choice to do so, by making it difficult for them to receive benefits or have dealing with the government.

I'm pretty sure that the government can't refuse to do certain things though, we have human rights treaties we've signed up to.

[Galloism]

That's an interesting concept - remoting in for court.

That being said, if the problem is the risk the unvaccinated person poses, doesn't the person with a medical excuse pose the exact same risk?

Yes they do, but they do not have a choice, unlike the those who have no medical reason. The purpose of the above law is to insensitive people to get vaccinated should they have the choice to do so, by making it difficult for them to receive benefits or have dealing with the government.

Sure, but then you're really really undermining your justification. You're not barring them because they're a danger or you'd bar the others - you're barring them because you're trying to be as difficult as possible.

This is a pretty bad justification for a government action and can be used to justify almost any kind of action that's not specifically illegal but we don't like. Incidentally, several states have tried to do something similar to this to planned parenthood by refusing to fund them for other qualified medicaid services based on the fact that they performed abortions (a legal act). Essentially, saying we'll withhold services until you stop doing the thing we don't like but we can't outlaw.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving in place lower court rulings blocking the states from these actions.

And, just for the record, from their perspective, these people aren't just at a risk of killing people - they literally are killing people.

[Neutraligon]

Yes they do, but they do not have a choice, unlike the those who have no medical reason. The purpose of the above law is to insensitive people to get vaccinated should they have the choice to do so, by making it difficult for them to receive benefits or have dealing with the government.

Sure, but then you're really really undermining your justification. You're not barring them because they're a danger or you'd bar the others - you're barring them because you're trying to be as difficult as possible.

This is a pretty bad justification for a government action and can be used to justify almost any kind of action that's not specifically illegal but we don't like. Incidentally, several states have tried to do something similar to this to planned parenthood by refusing to fund them for other qualified medicaid services based on the fact that they performed abortions (a legal act). Essentially, saying we'll withhold services until you stop doing the thing we don't like but we can't outlaw.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving in place lower court rulings blocking the states from these actions.

And, just for the record, from their perspective, these people aren't just at a risk of killing people - they literally are killing people.

No I am barring them because they have chosen to be a danger to society.

[Galloism]

Sure, but then you're really really undermining your justification. You're not barring them because they're a danger or you'd bar the others - you're barring them because you're trying to be as difficult as possible.

This is a pretty bad justification for a government action and can be used to justify almost any kind of action that's not specifically illegal but we don't like. Incidentally, several states have tried to do something similar to this to planned parenthood by refusing to fund them for other qualified medicaid services based on the fact that they performed abortions (a legal act). Essentially, saying we'll withhold services until you stop doing the thing we don't like but we can't outlaw.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving in place lower court rulings blocking the states from these actions.

And, just for the record, from their perspective, these people aren't just at a risk of killing people - they literally are killing people.

No I am barring them because they have chosen to be a danger to society.

Tbh, one could say the same about a very wide array of behaviors. Smokers, those who drink alcohol, those who vote for the (American) Greens, those with any kind of chronic health condition that choose to drive, or hell, people who drive at all if we’re being honest.

And, more to the point, for those who are against planned parenthood, planned parenthood completely falls under this category - they’ve chosen to be a danger to society. They really see them that way.

[Empires Empire]

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

[Senkaku]

No I am barring them because they have chosen to be a danger to society.

Tbh, one could say the same about a very wide array of behaviors. Smokers,

Pretty sure measles is a far deadlier killer than secondhand smoke ever will be.

those who drink alcohol,

I cannot damage the livers of other people around me simply by drinking.

those who vote for the (American) Greens,

Oh, come off it, Gallo. This is a stupid attempt at an argument. None of these things are equivalent to making yourself a vector for an epidemic disease.

those with any kind of chronic health condition that choose to drive,

...don't they ban narcoleptics and stuff from driving, or have I been living in a weird mirror dimension this whole time? Unless you mean, like, people with asthma or literally any chronic condition, in which case... not really related at all.

or hell, people who drive at all if we’re being honest.

Again, we're talking about spreading epidemic diseases, not just everyday risks associated with fucking transportation.

And, more to the point, for those who are against planned parenthood, planned parenthood completely falls under this category - they’ve chosen to be a danger to society. They really see them that way.

Pretty sure there's no disagreement that stuff like measles and polio are dangers to society, unlike abortion-- and you also can't really choose whether or not to get them, if you're not vaccinated. This argument is so inane that if I roll my eyes any harder I'm worried they might fall out of my skull.

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

Don't think anyone has ever suggesting locking up or killing people who have actual medical issues that prevent them from being vaccinated...? But go off I guess...?

Yes they do, but they do not have a choice, unlike the those who have no medical reason. The purpose of the above law is to insensitive people to get vaccinated should they have the choice to do so, by making it difficult for them to receive benefits or have dealing with the government.

Sure, but then you're really really undermining your justification. You're not barring them because they're a danger or you'd bar the others - you're barring them because you're trying to be as difficult as possible.

This is a pretty bad justification for a government action and can be used to justify almost any kind of action that's not specifically illegal but we don't like. Incidentally, several states have tried to do something similar to this to planned parenthood by refusing to fund them for other qualified medicaid services based on the fact that they performed abortions (a legal act). Essentially, saying we'll withhold services until you stop doing the thing we don't like but we can't outlaw.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving in place lower court rulings blocking the states from these actions.

And, just for the record, from their perspective, these people aren't just at a risk of killing people - they literally are killing people.

Comparing measles to abortion is really fucking stupid. The whole argument over abortion is because people can't agree if fetuses count as people, or at what point they begin to have personhood. Nobody disputes that a person who's already been born and then dies of the fucking measles is a human being. Furthermore, people can choose to not get abortions-- if you're unvaccinated due to medical necessity, and some unvaccinated dipshit with measles coughs on you, you can't just be like "well, measles doesn't really agree with my personal beliefs, so I think I'll give mine up for adoption instead."

[Dooom35796821595]

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

It sounds like you’re worried about people who would be medically exempt from the vaccine due to such complications, they obviously can’t be properly vaccinated. They are instead protected by heard immunity, the process of vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated to reduce the chances of the disease spreading throughout a population.

And smallpox is one disease that has been totally eliminated by vaccines, with the only remaining samples in Russian and American bioweapon labs. So it can be done.

And you’re right, vaccines aren’t 100% some don’t get immunity, others lose it over time. That just makes it ever more important that those who can do, no ‘my religion’ or ‘my choice’ nonsense.

[Galloism]

Tbh, one could say the same about a very wide array of behaviors. Smokers,

Pretty sure measles is a far deadlier killer than secondhand smoke ever will be.

those who drink alcohol,

I cannot damage the livers of other people around me simply by drinking.

those who vote for the (American) Greens,

Oh, come off it, Gallo. This is a stupid attempt at an argument. None of these things are equivalent to making yourself a vector for an epidemic disease.

those with any kind of chronic health condition that choose to drive,

...don't they ban narcoleptics and stuff from driving, or have I been living in a weird mirror dimension this whole time? Unless you mean, like, people with asthma or literally any chronic condition, in which case... not really related at all.

or hell, people who drive at all if we’re being honest.

Again, we're talking about spreading epidemic diseases, not just everyday risks associated with fucking transportation.

I’m not even talking about crashes (although it’s a good analogue). Transportation pollution kills 53,000 people a year in America alone - that’s not even counting the 35,000 highway deaths a year.

http://lae.mit.edu/2013/08/29/air-pollu ... n-the-u-s/

Every time you drive, you’re contributing to killing people. And many people choose to drive unnecessarily.

I dare anyone to prove lack of vaccination kills anywhere near the number of people private transportation does.

And, more to the point, for those who are against planned parenthood, planned parenthood completely falls under this category - they’ve chosen to be a danger to society. They really see them that way.

Pretty sure there's no disagreement that stuff like measles and polio are dangers to society, unlike abortion-- and you also can't really choose whether or not to get them, if you're not vaccinated. This argument is so inane that if I roll my eyes any harder I'm worried they might fall out of my skull.

There is debate on measles. It’s stupid debate, but there is debate.

And the “victims” of abortion can’t choose not to be aborted either.

You’re laying the foundation of our rights destruction here.

Sure, but then you're really really undermining your justification. You're not barring them because they're a danger or you'd bar the others - you're barring them because you're trying to be as difficult as possible.

This is a pretty bad justification for a government action and can be used to justify almost any kind of action that's not specifically illegal but we don't like. Incidentally, several states have tried to do something similar to this to planned parenthood by refusing to fund them for other qualified medicaid services based on the fact that they performed abortions (a legal act). Essentially, saying we'll withhold services until you stop doing the thing we don't like but we can't outlaw.

The Supreme Court refused to hear the case, leaving in place lower court rulings blocking the states from these actions.

And, just for the record, from their perspective, these people aren't just at a risk of killing people - they literally are killing people.

Comparing measles to abortion is really fucking stupid. The whole argument over abortion is because people can't agree if fetuses count as people, or at what point they begin to have personhood. Nobody disputes that a person who's already been born and then dies of the fucking measles is a human being. Furthermore, people can choose to not get abortions-- if you're unvaccinated due to medical necessity, and some unvaccinated dipshit with measles coughs on you, you can't just be like "well, measles doesn't really agree with my personal beliefs, so I think I'll give mine up for adoption instead."

Fetuses can’t choose not to be aborted. Because they can’t make choices at all.

And, to the point, this is about bodily autonomy. We either have it or we don’t. Legally we don’t, but we should. However, to have bodily autonomy, we have to tolerate adults not getting vaccinated the same way we have to tolerate women getting abortions.

And if we can effectively say “no, your right to your body is effectively subordinate to the state if it can harm another person”, well... 38 states at least imply the fetus is a person in their state laws, as it can be murdered. You can’t murder non persons.

Again, you’re haphazardly stumbling into a trap here. Please don’t break my society.

[Senkaku]

Pretty sure measles is a far deadlier killer than secondhand smoke ever will be.

I cannot damage the livers of other people around me simply by drinking.

Oh, come off it, Gallo. This is a stupid attempt at an argument. None of these things are equivalent to making yourself a vector for an epidemic disease.

...don't they ban narcoleptics and stuff from driving, or have I been living in a weird mirror dimension this whole time? Unless you mean, like, people with asthma or literally any chronic condition, in which case... not really related at all.

Again, we're talking about spreading epidemic diseases, not just everyday risks associated with fucking transportation.

I’m not even talking about crashes (although it’s a good analogue). Transportation pollution kills 53,000 people a year in America alone - that’s not even counting the 35,000 highway deaths a year.

http://lae.mit.edu/2013/08/29/air-pollu ... n-the-u-s/

Every time you drive, you’re contributing to killing people. And many people choose to drive unnecessarily.

I dare anyone to prove lack of vaccination kills anywhere near the number of people private transportation does.

And every time I walk somewhere I contribute to the death rate of people who trip and fall on their faces and break their fucking skulls open and die because they're distracted from looking at hot people, and every time I go to the grocery store I contribute to the death rate of store clerks who are crushed in tragic shelf domino accidents or have pallets of iced coffee dropped on them. Are we going to do this with every cause of death and every way you can technically contribute to other people dying? Because we can, but it's stupid, and you know it's stupid and also not relevant. And you can say "but it's the same!!! so you have to think about it!!!", but it isn't, and I don't.

Pretty sure there's no disagreement that stuff like measles and polio are dangers to society, unlike abortion-- and you also can't really choose whether or not to get them, if you're not vaccinated. This argument is so inane that if I roll my eyes any harder I'm worried they might fall out of my skull.

There is debate on measles. It’s stupid debate, but there is debate.

No, there isn't. And when you say there is, you're legitimizing a lethal brand of pseudoscience. Can we cut the "I am a good little centrist and there are always two sides" shit here, please?

And the “victims” of abortion can’t choose not to be aborted either.

No one can even agree if there are victims of abortion. No one can disagree that there are victims of measles or polio.

You’re laying the foundation of our rights destruction here.

Well, props for a higher degree of paranoia than even me, I guess. I really just don't see it-- preventing the spread of epidemic diseases is rather different than whatever dystopia you're afraid of where people get shot for drinking soda or whatever.

Comparing measles to abortion is really fucking stupid. The whole argument over abortion is because people can't agree if fetuses count as people, or at what point they begin to have personhood. Nobody disputes that a person who's already been born and then dies of the fucking measles is a human being. Furthermore, people can choose to not get abortions-- if you're unvaccinated due to medical necessity, and some unvaccinated dipshit with measles coughs on you, you can't just be like "well, measles doesn't really agree with my personal beliefs, so I think I'll give mine up for adoption instead."

Fetuses can’t choose not to be aborted. Because they can’t make choices at all.

In my opinion, fetuses can't choose anything, because they aren't people. Their very personhood is up for debate. The personhood of toddlers dying from measles is not.

And, to the point, this is about bodily autonomy. We either have it or we don’t. Legally we don’t, but we should. However, to have bodily autonomy, we have to tolerate adults not getting vaccinated the same way we have to tolerate women getting abortions.

I disagree. I think the two procedures are different and there should therefore be different rules for them, and that your reductive nonsense and hand-wringing over legal principles is costing American lives. There is a limit to the amount of stupid decisions people should be allowed to make-- I know you're terrified of that leading to a slippery slope where we're all wearing straitjackets and swaddled in packing peanuts and can only sip nutrislurry through a straw while under supervision or whatever, but I frankly think it's a bunch of hysterical nonsense that's blinding you to a real, actual, deadly public health crisis.

And if we can effectively say “no, your right to your body is effectively subordinate to the state if it can harm another person”, well... 38 states at least imply the fetus is a person in their state laws, as it can be murdered. You can’t murder non persons.

Which leaves 12 that don't and some where they can fight over the implicature-- again, the personhood of the persons/things in question in abortion is a matter of debate (and I'd also point out that one woman choosing to get an abortion isn't going to result in spontaneous miscarriages all over her town and potentially the country or the world).

Again, you’re haphazardly stumbling into a trap here. Please don’t break my society.

As usual, you seem comically unaware of the fact that your society is already deeply broken.

[Galloism]

I’m not even talking about crashes (although it’s a good analogue). Transportation pollution kills 53,000 people a year in America alone - that’s not even counting the 35,000 highway deaths a year.

http://lae.mit.edu/2013/08/29/air-pollu ... n-the-u-s/

Every time you drive, you’re contributing to killing people. And many people choose to drive unnecessarily.

I dare anyone to prove lack of vaccination kills anywhere near the number of people private transportation does.

And every time I walk somewhere I contribute to the death rate of people who trip and fall on their faces and break their fucking skulls open and die because they're distracted from looking at hot people, and every time I go to the grocery store I contribute to the death rate of store clerks who are crushed in tragic shelf domino accidents or have pallets of iced coffee dropped on them. Are we going to do this with every cause of death and every way you can technically contribute to other people dying? Because we can, but it's stupid, and you know it's stupid and also not relevant. And you can say "but it's the same!!! so you have to think about it!!!", but it isn't, and I don't.

We should consider these things. As, after all, we're making a claim here that this threat is so egregious, so terrible, it necessities violating peoples bodily autonomy to contain it. That's a SUPER high bar.

We shouldn't do that without it literally being a national crisis. With that in mind, how many people are killed by lack of vaccination?

There is debate on measles. It’s stupid debate, but there is debate.

No, there isn't. And when you say there is, you're legitimizing a lethal brand of pseudoscience. Can we cut the "I am a good little centrist and there are always two sides" shit here, please?

Stupid debate continues to be debate.

And the “victims” of abortion can’t choose not to be aborted either.

No one can even agree if there are victims of abortion. No one can disagree that there are victims of measles or polio.

You’re laying the foundation of our rights destruction here.

Well, props for a higher degree of paranoia than even me, I guess. I really just don't see it-- preventing the spread of epidemic diseases is rather different than whatever dystopia you're afraid of where people get shot for drinking soda or whatever.

I mean, here's the thing - if we force this. If we strap people down and force them to get vaccinated. Or we tell them that we are going to leave them in the realm of poverty and death from being unable to work or access basic social systems because they aren't vaccinated, then you are saying, to the entire nation, that we do not have a right to bodily autonomy. That right is subordinate to the state.

And we've already seen what the states say.

Fetuses can’t choose not to be aborted. Because they can’t make choices at all.

In my opinion, fetuses can't choose anything, because they aren't people. Their very personhood is up for debate. The personhood of toddlers dying from measles is not.

38 states at least imply disagreement.

The 12 states that don't are Oregon, Montana, Wyoming, New Mexico, Missouri, New York, New Jersey, Vermont, Connecticut, Delaware, Michigan, and Hawaii (although in Michigan the fetus can be victims of other crimes, just not murder).

That's about 59 million people out of 326 million. 82% of the population lives in a place where state law implies a fetus is a person to be protected from harm by state law.

Besides that, in all 50 states, federal laws also apply to the unborn thanks to the Unborn Victims of Violence Act. All of America lives under a regime where the fetus is accorded personhood protections by federal law (aside from abortion) where federal law applies.

And, to the point, this is about bodily autonomy. We either have it or we don’t. Legally we don’t, but we should. However, to have bodily autonomy, we have to tolerate adults not getting vaccinated the same way we have to tolerate women getting abortions.

I disagree. I think the two procedures are different and there should therefore be different rules for them, and that your reductive nonsense and hand-wringing over legal principles is costing American lives. There is a limit to the amount of stupid decisions people should be allowed to make-- I know you're terrified of that leading to a slippery slope where we're all wearing straitjackets and swaddled in packing peanuts and can only sip nutrislurry through a straw while under supervision or whatever, but I frankly think it's a bunch of hysterical nonsense that's blinding you to a real, actual, deadly public health crisis.

It's not really that. See, I watch things.

You remember when the Republican states sued that they couldn't be forced to expand Medicare, and SCOTUS sided with them?

Well, that's being used now to defend "sanctuary states" against federal penalties now that Trump is in power. Same arguments, used by the other side.

Every argument you make can and will be used against you in the future. If you make the argument that bodily autonomy is no big deal, then it will be turned against you and quoted against you later.

Again, you’re haphazardly stumbling into a trap here. Please don’t break my society.

As usual, you seem comically unaware of the fact that your society is already deeply broken.

Fair, but please don't break it more.

[Hammer Britannia]

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

I'm fearing for the people who can't take vaccines, like babies under 6 months, the immunocompromized, etc.

We also don't need to bring back dead diseases, thank you. Polio was almost irradicated

[Estanglia]

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

We're not advocating for people who are physically incapable of getting a vaccine without severe/life-threatening/fatal side effects to be mandatorily vaccinated. We're advocating for anti-vaxxers and the like (the people who stand in the way of herd immunity, something that would protect people who can't have vaccines) to be mandatorily vaccinated.

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

What do you mean by this?

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

We nearly eradicated polio, and smallpox is entirely gone outside of some still kept by scientists using vaccines.

And just because it isn't 100% effective doesn't mean that it's not useful. Rejecting things because they're not perfect only leads to problems.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

People incapable of being vaccinated dying because some moron thought their precious child would get autism from a vaccine.

Or the chance that diseases could mutate because of them still being around because of these people, rendering our currently existing vaccine useless.

[Empires Empire]

Don't think anyone has ever suggesting locking up or killing people who have actual medical issues that prevent them from being vaccinated...? But go off I guess...?

IDK man, some of these posters seem pretty rabid about the extreme measures that need to be taken, because the anti-vaxxer guys' zealotry offends their zealotry to something they poorly understand so much that clearly anyone unvaccinated has to go. What, am I going to have to show my papers at the bio-checkpoint documenting something that happened in the '80s where probably my pediatrician isn't even still alive? My parents aren't even still alive, I have no idea how I could even find the doctor who administered said inoculations... Or maybe they force me to take this potentially fatal vaccine because I can't prove it? Seems like everyone's more concerned about politics and feelings over science... like always now. So now I'm scared of measles, and scared of them too. What a world.

It sounds like you’re worried about people who would be medically exempt from the vaccine due to such complications, they obviously can’t be properly vaccinated. They are instead protected by heard immunity, the process of vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated to reduce the chances of the disease spreading throughout a population.

And smallpox is one disease that has been totally eliminated by vaccines, with the only remaining samples in Russian and American bioweapon labs. So it can be done.

And you’re right, vaccines aren’t 100% some don’t get immunity, others lose it over time. That just makes it ever more important that those who can do, no ‘my religion’ or ‘my choice’ nonsense.

Education and cheap/free access to vaccinations with some emphasis on factual data and safe practices? Certainly. Definitely public health awareness and accessibility are great things.

However, as someone who couldn't be properly vaccinated against that one thing, hearing all these people going off on a tirade about the unvaccinated being inhuman monster threats to humanity... Kinda scary. Maybe I'm just sensitive to that kind of thing, but the thought of being barred from public places because of a knee-jerk reaction or forcibly given something that could potentially send me into full blown anaphylaxis is a bit scary, and it isn't exactly something that never happened before in the world. So now not only do I have to worry about measles, I have to worry about some kind of Salem style witch hunt lumping me in with their hated anti-vaxxer people. It's waaaay overboard, like most every reaction people have to everything these days.

The anti-vaxxer people and their opposition are mouth-foaming zealots, just like how every debate now has turned into zealotry complete with pitchforks and torches. Both sides' self-surety and unwillingness to see reason are scary these days, in most every issue. People really need to calm down about calling everyone they disagree with a 'threat to humanity'. They're all indistinguishable from each other in how ready they are to fight everyone who disagrees.

[Estanglia]

Don't think anyone has ever suggesting locking up or killing people who have actual medical issues that prevent them from being vaccinated...? But go off I guess...?

IDK man, some of these posters seem pretty rabid about the extreme measures that need to be taken, because the anti-vaxxer guys' zealotry offends their zealotry to something they poorly understand so much that clearly anyone unvaccinated has to go. What, am I going to have to show my papers at the bio-checkpoint documenting something that happened in the '80s where probably my pediatrician isn't even still alive? My parents aren't even still alive, I have no idea how I could even find the doctor who administered said inoculations... Or maybe they force me to take this potentially fatal vaccine because I can't prove it? Seems like everyone's more concerned about politics and feelings over science... like always now. So now I'm scared of measles, and scared of them too. What a world.

It sounds like you’re worried about people who would be medically exempt from the vaccine due to such complications, they obviously can’t be properly vaccinated. They are instead protected by heard immunity, the process of vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated to reduce the chances of the disease spreading throughout a population.

And smallpox is one disease that has been totally eliminated by vaccines, with the only remaining samples in Russian and American bioweapon labs. So it can be done.

And you’re right, vaccines aren’t 100% some don’t get immunity, others lose it over time. That just makes it ever more important that those who can do, no ‘my religion’ or ‘my choice’ nonsense.

Education and cheap/free access to vaccinations with some emphasis on factual data and safe practices? Certainly. Definitely public health awareness and accessibility are great things.

However, as someone who couldn't be properly vaccinated against that one thing, hearing all these people going off on a tirade about the unvaccinated being inhuman monster threats to humanity... Kinda scary. Maybe I'm just sensitive to that kind of thing, but the thought of being barred from public places because of a knee-jerk reaction or forcibly given something that could potentially send me into full blown anaphylaxis is a bit scary, and it isn't exactly something that never happened before in the world. So now not only do I have to worry about measles, I have to worry about some kind of Salem style witch hunt lumping me in with their hated anti-vaxxer people. It's waaaay overboard, like most every reaction people have to everything these days.

The anti-vaxxer people and their opposition are mouth-foaming zealots, just like how every debate now has turned into zealotry complete with pitchforks and torches. Both sides' self-surety and unwillingness to see reason are scary these days, in most every issue. People really need to calm down about calling everyone they disagree with a 'threat to humanity'. They're all indistinguishable from each other in how ready they are to fight everyone who disagrees.

You bring up a good point.

If we go with mandatory vaccinations, how can we tell that someone is immunocompromised or the like if the documents about their condition don't exist?

Like if someone was allergic to a vaccine, but we can't find the records detailing it. Do we force them to have the vaccine, causing harm, or let them off?

[Empires Empire]

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

I'm fearing for the people who can't take vaccines, like babies under 6 months, the immunocompromized, etc.

We also don't need to bring back dead diseases, thank you. Polio was almost irradicated

We don't really need your fearmongering making policies more damaging to us than the risks we already have to live with, thank you. Please concern yourself with your own life, not 'fearing for' mine and potentially causing me more harm than good because your feelings get in the way of science and require a knee-jerk reaction by legislation so you can feel like you struck a blow at your mortal political enemies, nevermind those of us caught in the middle.

[Empires Empire]

You bring up a good point.

If we go with mandatory vaccinations, how can we tell that someone is immunocompromised or the like if the documents about their condition don't exist?

Like if someone was allergic to a vaccine, but we can't find the records detailing it. Do we force them to have the vaccine, causing harm, or let them off?

Yes! Thank you for understanding how outright terrifying this is to someone like me caught in the middle of this debate. These kinds of knee jerk blanket reactions WILL cause harm to someone, somewhere. Potentially turning innocent people into political collateral damage isn't okay!

[Hurtful Thoughts]

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

It sounds like you’re worried about people who would be medically exempt from the vaccine due to such complications, they obviously can’t be properly vaccinated. They are instead protected by heard immunity, the process of vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated to reduce the chances of the disease spreading throughout a population.

And smallpox is one disease that has been totally eliminated by vaccines, with the only remaining samples in Russian and American bioweapon labs. So it can be done.

And you’re right, vaccines aren’t 100% some don’t get immunity, others lose it over time. That just makes it ever more important that those who can do, no ‘my religion’ or ‘my choice’ nonsense.

Herd immunity is immunizing as much as possible so that those who cannot are effectively living in a virtual safety-bubble the size of a moderately large country.

It like vaccination of an individual isn't foolproof, but it makes the rate of spread 0.10% of 0.01%... rather than an 85.00% transmissibility-rate.

And there are people that refuse the MMR vaccine because they don't want to deal with a short 4 hour long high-fever.

[Purpelia]

If we go with mandatory vaccinations, how can we tell that someone is immunocompromised or the like if the documents about their condition don't exist?

Like if someone was allergic to a vaccine, but we can't find the records detailing it. Do we force them to have the vaccine, causing harm, or let them off?

It should be the duty of the individual to provide any excusory paperwork. Just as it is for any other obligatory thing. If a person asks for an exemption that's just how it works. You shouldn't expect the state to do that for you.

[Thermodolia]

I haven't posted anything here in years, but this one is pretty damn scary so, hey, let's do this...

Do read this documentation from the World Health Organization before you continue with this nonsense, or even reply to my post: https://www.who.int/vaccine_safety/initiative/tools/MMR_vaccine_rates_information_sheet.pdf?ua=1
Note that the rates of reaction occurance are individual of each other, more than one complication can arise, and each is an individual danger. Certain vaccines have higher rates of adverse reactions than others, the MMR is one with a very high incidence rate.

As one of the MANY people who had serious adverse reactions to the MMR vaccination course as a child, and was medically indicated NOT to continue it due to severe risk of further complications, you guys are scary AF.

This kind of psychotic paranoia is what happens when people who have literally ZERO medical scientific knowledge start basing policy choices on feelings rather than facts, you get just as scary as the problems you're talking about, if not more so.

There is a HUGE difference between "anti-vaxxers" and the LARGE numbers of people who had adverse reactions to one or more out of the many vaccinations we receive as children and do not fully continue the process with one or more of said vaccines.

Measles is a danger to me, there's nothing I can do about that. As well as many many thousands of other people in the US alone, combine that with the small incidence rate of the unvaccinated and those for whom it simply didn't properly work, there's your answer how this happened.

You want to kill me because of that combination of uncontrollable genetic factors? Lock me up? Good luck...

Maybe stop obsessing over how _______ group of people is ruining everything and you should get rid of them all, especially when the problem is a hell of a lot more complicated than that and you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.

Oh and before you say it, no I'm not an "anti-vaxxer" or whatever, not even TRYING is ridiculous I'd agree. However, realistically vaccines or the introduction of any foreign agents into the body is never going to have a 100% success rate, and total elimination of a disease is just not possible without some kind of magic panacea that works 100% on everyone.

More over, if you ARE successfully vaccinated... what are you even afraid of?

It sounds like you’re worried about people who would be medically exempt from the vaccine due to such complications, they obviously can’t be properly vaccinated. They are instead protected by heard immunity, the process of vaccinating everyone who can be vaccinated to reduce the chances of the disease spreading throughout a population.

And smallpox is one disease that has been totally eliminated by vaccines, with the only remaining samples in Russian and American bioweapon labs. So it can be done.

And you’re right, vaccines aren’t 100% some don’t get immunity, others lose it over time. That just makes it ever more important that those who can do, no ‘my religion’ or ‘my choice’ nonsense.

The CDC isn’t a bioweapons lab, just a research lab

[Thermodolia]

IDK man, some of these posters seem pretty rabid about the extreme measures that need to be taken, because the anti-vaxxer guys' zealotry offends their zealotry to something they poorly understand so much that clearly anyone unvaccinated has to go. What, am I going to have to show my papers at the bio-checkpoint documenting something that happened in the '80s where probably my pediatrician isn't even still alive? My parents aren't even still alive, I have no idea how I could even find the doctor who administered said inoculations... Or maybe they force me to take this potentially fatal vaccine because I can't prove it? Seems like everyone's more concerned about politics and feelings over science... like always now. So now I'm scared of measles, and scared of them too. What a world.



Education and cheap/free access to vaccinations with some emphasis on factual data and safe practices? Certainly. Definitely public health awareness and accessibility are great things.

However, as someone who couldn't be properly vaccinated against that one thing, hearing all these people going off on a tirade about the unvaccinated being inhuman monster threats to humanity... Kinda scary. Maybe I'm just sensitive to that kind of thing, but the thought of being barred from public places because of a knee-jerk reaction or forcibly given something that could potentially send me into full blown anaphylaxis is a bit scary, and it isn't exactly something that never happened before in the world. So now not only do I have to worry about measles, I have to worry about some kind of Salem style witch hunt lumping me in with their hated anti-vaxxer people. It's waaaay overboard, like most every reaction people have to everything these days.

The anti-vaxxer people and their opposition are mouth-foaming zealots, just like how every debate now has turned into zealotry complete with pitchforks and torches. Both sides' self-surety and unwillingness to see reason are scary these days, in most every issue. People really need to calm down about calling everyone they disagree with a 'threat to humanity'. They're all indistinguishable from each other in how ready they are to fight everyone who disagrees.

You bring up a good point.

If we go with mandatory vaccinations, how can we tell that someone is immunocompromised or the like if the documents about their condition don't exist?

Like if someone was allergic to a vaccine, but we can't find the records detailing it. Do we force them to have the vaccine, causing harm, or let them off?

We’d figure out pretty quickly if they have an adverse reaction to it. When you get a vaccination they ask you to stay in the doctors office for a bit in case any adverse effects occur.

So if no evidence exists then we treat them like any other person who hasn’t been vaccinated