Senator Pan Introduces SB-18 Bill of Rights for Children and Youth in California.

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That bill "sb-277" made it so the parents couldn't object to vaccinations except for medical reasons

Nothing in the law says children can be vaccinated without parental consent.

No, but what it DOES however is deny children an education (aside from home schooling), if parents choose not to vaccinate their children. I think that's teetering on extortion.

It keeps your child from infecting mine.

But, the thread subject is not vaccinations.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That bill "sb-277" made it so the parents couldn't object to vaccinations except for medical reasons

Nothing in the law says children can be vaccinated without parental consent.

No, but what it DOES however is deny children an education (aside from home schooling), if parents choose not to vaccinate their children. I think that's teetering on extortion.

It keeps your child from infecting mine.

But, the thread subject is not vaccinations.

Shouldn't matter if yours are vaccinated right?

a reply to: EternalShadow

For medical reasons (which are exempted) some children cannot be vaccinated.

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That bill "sb-277" made it so the parents couldn't object to vaccinations except for medical reasons

Nothing in the law says children can be vaccinated without parental consent.

No, but what it DOES however is deny children an education (aside from home schooling), if parents choose not to vaccinate their children. I think that's teetering on extortion.

It keeps your child from infecting mine.

But, the thread subject is not vaccinations.

Shouldn't matter if yours are vaccinated right?

I support vaccinations.

The subject of this thread is not vaccinations.

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: EternalShadow

For medical reasons (which are exempted) some children cannot be vaccinated.

True. However, if you can't AFFORD private or home schooling, you either have to submit or move. A large swath of the population is marginalized by that, pretty much saying if you're too poor to make other arrangements, these decisions will be made for you.

The poor have always been made to be the Petri dishes of the wealthy and the corporations. All under the guise of the General welfare clause in the constitution.

California being the most "concerned" about everything under Sun, hence the "Nannyfornia" label.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That bill "sb-277" made it so the parents couldn't object to vaccinations except for medical reasons

Nothing in the law says children can be vaccinated without parental consent.

No, but what it DOES however is deny children an education (aside from home schooling), if parents choose not to vaccinate their children. I think that's teetering on extortion.

It keeps your child from infecting mine.

But, the thread subject is not vaccinations.

Shouldn't matter if yours are vaccinated right?

I support vaccinations.

The subject of this thread is not vaccinations.

Obviously.

And no, this subject is relative to the topic and conversation.

a reply to: EternalShadow

However, if you can't AFFORD private or home schooling, you either have to submit or move.

Yea. Well. This is a matter of public health, after all.

But some places wanted to say that if you were gay and wanted to get married you had to move. You ok with that?

Never mind. Way, way off topic.

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: EternalShadow

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

That bill "sb-277" made it so the parents couldn't object to vaccinations except for medical reasons

Nothing in the law says children can be vaccinated without parental consent.

No, but what it DOES however is deny children an education (aside from home schooling), if parents choose not to vaccinate their children. I think that's teetering on extortion.

It keeps your child from infecting mine.

But, the thread subject is not vaccinations.

Shouldn't matter if yours are vaccinated right?

I support vaccinations.

The subject of this thread is not vaccinations.

Obviously.

And no, this subject is relative to the topic and conversation.

There are threads specific to vaccinations.

originally posted by: Annee
I support vaccinations.

The subject of this thread is not vaccinations.

Good for you... But it should be the parents making those decisions, not you, and not the state. BTW, if this law passes it would affect healthcare decisions as well as education and nutrition. The state shouldn't be the "guardians of children who have families."

a reply to: kaylaluv

So you advocate to total control of the state over the children parents right.

Got you.

Got to love when the state is the one that decides for the wellbeing of our children when they seem fit, it works wonders, that is why California is such and example state this days.

a reply to: KTemplar

I am sure that they will cut their inflated immigrations budget that goes to support the illegals in California to pay for

for all this, I am sure that if they gather all the illegals and gang members in the state they will have plenty left overs.

a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It takes a village to take away your rights as a parent.

originally posted by: marg6043
a reply to: kaylaluv

So you advocate to total control of the state over the children parents right.

I advocate children having access to healthy food, proper healthcare, housing and education, and growing up in a nurturing, caring environment. You don't?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: ElectricUniverse

It takes a village to take away your rights as a parent.

No one should ever question a parent, because parents always know what's best for their own kid.

www.cnn.com...

a reply to: kaylaluv

Why pray, does that even need to be codified? Seems much like what the vast, vast parents already know... commonsense to me.

Just one more instance of "see, we're actually doing something... We care, we really, really do."

a reply to: kaylaluv

These laws weaken parental rights and strengthen state rights.

You are for that.

Ok.

I am against that.

a reply to: DBCowboy

I am for strengthening children's rights.

You are apparently against that.

Ok.

a reply to: kaylaluv

Children (were) the responsibility of parents.

Not the state. Ever.

So let me get this straight a parent has the right to choose the abortion of their child but does not have the right to choose to feed their child cheetos?

a reply to: DanDanDat

Or home-school.

The state knows everything and is never wrong.