Colo. Sends Non-Vaccinating Parents ILLEGAL Order to “Register Their Child With the State”

originally posted by: UniFinity

It seems trust has been misplaced.

People are to trusting the big man in power and to doubtful to the little man.

Trust? This has nothing to do with trust.

Vaccines work. They stop epidemics. That's FACT.

Any child not vaccinated endangers my child.

originally posted by: UniFinity

When it comes to our kids and what we put into them, it should be safe 100% no IFs or BUTs.

Idealism, how cute.

Can you say what you feed your kid, or clothe your kid with, or what air they breath is 100% safe?

It doesn't take much to start an epidemic.

Tell you what, why don't all you non-vaxers go buy an island and live there together - - - you have no right to endanger my kid.

a reply to: UniFinity

Yes, and I have done. She gets her vaccines when it's time.

Here's a hypothetical for everyone against vaccines.

You travel to a country with a high Zika virus rate. If you don't have the vaccine before you go then you will have a 50/50 chance of getting the Zika virus. If you get the Zika virus it will the spread with a 50/50 chance to all your friends, families and strangers in your country as they're not vaccinated.

Do you get the vaccine and risk problems to yourself (hurting the few to save the many) or do you not get the vaccine and just hope you don't get it (hurting the many to save the few)?

I could give less that half a crap about anybodies viewpoint on vaccines. It's too volatile a field as neither side accepts the other could be right or partially right. All these statistics people throw around is all well and good, until your kid becomes the statistic and dies or is damaged.

The government should have no right, and technically doesn't, to force anybody to put anything in their bodies or their children's body if they do not wish it. Also, the government needs to back off the taking kids, threatening to take kids, and behaving as if kids are property. This whole country is going to hell and people don't care. They are willingly giving up their rights to feel safe. TSA. People accept groping and x-rays and invasive searches as acceptable because they want to feel safer. Because, the other 250 people on the plane couldn't stop 8 people with box blades. If that's true at all, that shows as a nation how weak we are.

The first time I watched Captain America, the Winter soldier, I got chills when the talking head in the basement went on about freedom. Talked about how if you try to take peoples freedoms, they resist. But, if you frighten them enough, they will willingly give up every freedom to feel safe. Thats what's happening here. And people are too caught up in their moral superiority, their know it all attitude, their right to know everything, they ability to get offended over stupidity to realize it. If the internet was to go down right now and never return, I wouldn't loose a seconds sleep over it.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UniFinity

Yes, and I have done. She gets her vaccines when it's time.

Here's a hypothetical for everyone against vaccines.

You travel to a country with a high Zika virus rate. If you don't have the vaccine before you go then you will have a 50/50 chance of getting the Zika virus. If you get the Zika virus it will the spread with a 50/50 chance to all your friends, families and strangers in your country as they're not vaccinated.

Do you get the vaccine and risk problems to yourself (hurting the few to save the many) or do you not get the vaccine and just hope you don't get it (hurting the many to save the few)?

You know you are supposed to wait for the next Olympics before you go on the Zika scare campaign? No spoilers please.

Reminds me of swine flu level 6 and tamiflu.

a reply to: riley

So you're not going to answer the HYPOTHETICAL question?

originally posted by: tnhiker

The government should have no right, and technically doesn't, to force anybody to put anything in their bodies or their children's body if they do not wish it.

The government should have Every Right to prevent an epidemic.

originally posted by: Annee

The government should have Every Right to prevent an epidemic.

You hit it right on the head. Here's something I like about right's.

Source

Your Rights End Where Mine Begin

By: Rachel Marsden

As a conservative in favor of limited government, people often ask me what kind of government intervention I do support. The answer is simple: I’m in support of people doing anything they want in a free and democratic society—until their actions infringe on my freedom or anyone else’s. At that point, the state ought to step in, if only to maintain personal liberty. If the state doesn’t intervene in those instances, when minimal intervention would be required to rectify the situation, then the situation risks spiraling out of control to the point where extreme measures become warranted.

Something many people often forget.

I deleted as I believe ATS is full of ..people who have very mainstream views.

As in corporations always tell the truth and governments never lie.




Now take your medication.

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: riley

So you're not going to answer the HYPOTHETICAL question?

It is not a hypothetical question because I don't believe they have been honest about Zika virus either.

originally posted by: riley

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: tnhiker

The government should have no right, and technically doesn't, to force anybody to put anything in their bodies or their children's body if they do not wish it.

The government should have Every Right to prevent an epidemic.

Well they can start with severe autism in that case.

Funny how they ignore that. They have zero interest in treating it, curing it or preventing it. They don't mind that something suddenly started disabling millions of kids.

Gee. I. wonder. Why.

What complete and utter bs.

A simple Google search brought up a ton of results. Here's one with published papers. But I guess they have "zero interest", right?

originally posted by: riley
Well they can start with severe autism in that case.

Funny how they ignore that. They have zero interest in treating it, curing it or preventing it. They don't mind that something suddenly started disabling millions of kids.

Gee. I. wonder. Why.

Suddenly? There is no rise in autism: there is earlier and better detection. Let's take the US for example: in the 1980s it was called 'Infantile autism' and could only be diagnosed in children who showed symptoms before they were three years of age. Now it's not 'infantile' anymore, the age and language impairment limits have been removed. This means the number of people that fit into the autism criteria has expanded.
LINK

EDIT TO ADD: perharps you could tell us what causes autism and how it could be treated or prevent it? Because scientists still dont' know.

originally posted by: riley

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: riley

So you're not going to answer the HYPOTHETICAL question?

It is not a hypothetical question because I don't believe they have been honest about Zika virus either.

Fine. Change it to AIDS, HIV, a terminal case of the flu, killer herpes or suffocation by dandruff. The illness wasn't the point.

people still fall for the vaxx conspiracy thing ?

really ?

Example. This is what ATS is now. Post according to the handbook.

This is our future.



To the point where people think we don't know about the deaths related to AIDS treatments.

originally posted by: syrinx high priest
people still fall for the vaxx conspiracy thing ?

really ?

You forgot to include "tinfoil hatter".

originally posted by: TerryDon79
a reply to: UniFinity

So sacrificing the few to save the many is wrong?

Let's sacrifice many to let a few not vaccinate makes so much more sense.

/sarcasm

and this is the part I loathe about anti-vaxxers

They want to tell you that you should keep your hands off their children and not endanger them which is unproven and very skeptical

They will tell you that the CDC is corrupt and their studies are bogus and yet somehow Wakefield who was proven to be full of it and handfuls of videos are infallible. THEY have nothing to gain...THEY cannot possibly have and agenda but the CDC? of course it's an agenda

They will say that you should endanger MY child with YOUR vaccine

However, they don't seem to care at all that by not vaccinating they put babies too young to vaccinate at severe risk AND seem to forget that immunocompromised kids are at even greater risk.

So in a way they are telling you, "don't endanger my baby! Oh...yours? That isn't my problem."

That to me is disgusting

Thing is, if you don't want to vaccinate your kid I actually believe that the right does somewhat exist. However, a list like this is not a bad step.

All I am saying is that it is pretty damn extremist to say "my baby is the only one that matters and forget about the other millions"

a reply to: KyoZero

Any particular reason you quoted my sarcastic post?

If you hadn't noticed, I'm all for vaccinations.

a reply to: TerryDon79

I would not get vaccinated, but I will tell you what I would do.

I would get checked out as fast as I can. maybe even before I left their country.
Or immediately as I got back and before any contact.

Would that be good?
I don't know how Zika virus spreads, but I would take highest measures to not put others at risk at all cost!
if there are no such measures possible I would NOT even go near that country or people!

But you know this and that (mandatory vaccinations for kids) are two way different issues, not really related, except the point you are trying to make about the sacrifice and the fact that it is related to vaccination. But one is for adults and their travels and pleasures!
the other is (mandatory) vaccination for kids, ffs.

yeah, I am a bit idealistic around this issue as Annee says, and I think this is appropriate.
Kids are our most precious, dearest and nearest to us personally and also the future belongs to them. And we should act appropriately with that in mind at all cost.

Some vaccinations are good and appropriate, but some are not necessary and are even dangerous to some kids as it seems.

If we should be giving vaccinations to all of them, then everything should be transparent and no secrecy or profit involved!
From what i hear, today, some kids can get over 10 vaccinations or more...I think that is waaay to much.

We don't know what kinda effect has on the body. The whole picture.
We don't know how does all the different chemicals mix up.
we don't know how do they affect other areas of the body.
we don't know nearly enough to be giving kids anything near that amount,
in my opinion.

I mean just in recent times there is a lot of fuss (still too little, imo) about endocannabinoid system and its use and connection with thc for instance....
Or until just recently important link between the brain and lymphatic immune system was found within us...
and so on.

And you and all others who supports your stand, are trying to say, that injecting people and especially kids with all this stuff is OK, as if we know it all...thanks but no thanks, for me.

People in the past seems to get by just fine without so many, or we would not be around...
Although, I know that vaccination has started with mainly good intentions - to do good and help people!

But it has developed into profit in my opinion as did almost everything else.
But it is your choice to do and believe what you want.
I choose to believe "little" people on youtube and elsewhere on internet, not all of them!

a reply to: TerryDon79

yes...

I was agreeing with you

read what I said

I could have made it more initially clear that I was agreeing....apologies for that