Bitcoin Forum

Sorry, but the "right" to get sick and die horribly only applies to things that aren't contagious.

I'm still upset that my right to make nuclear reactors was taken away  >:(

Living in society means that you make some concessions in order to stay a part of a community.

Sorry but building a nuclear reactor is not equivalent to a choice between bodily autonomy and freedom of movement. They are purposely building a very dangerous precedent to desensitize people to these kinds of actions.

Whats your take on lepers?

In my country we shipped off lepers to a far-away island so they don't endanger the population. After we managed to eradicate the diseases the island was decommissioned (the facilities are maintained as some sort of museum).

To be fair it was easier back then to just load people into ships without complaints - heard there used to be a separate island for prostitutes.

The whole vax thing is a touch subject and I think people should have the choice, but what's the issue with people not being vaccinated? Surely these diseases would only effect people who haven't been vaccinated anyway? If you've been vaccinated then what's to worry about? The only people then endanger our themselves and others who haven't been immunized, but that would be their fault if that ever happened.

I dont see why not. Its not about whether its a choice or not, its a matter of public risk. You have the right to do whatever you want, as long as it doesn't infringe on others. The argument can be made that people that could become carriers for dangerous infectious diseases are a risk to others.

You don't have to be vaccinated, you can just move elsewhere. I can't build a reactor where I'm at, but I could move somewhere where I could potentially obtain a permit to do so.

Whats your take on lepers?

It is literally about that choice for some people. Kind of you to summarily dismiss the reality of the minority. After all, it is not like we live in a constitutional republic where the rights of the minority are protected by the constitution right? Do you really think this tiny minority of people who refuse to vaccinate for whatever reason are more of a threat than the thousands flooding in from our Southern border every month?

I find it interesting a lot of the same people cheering for the loss of individual rights in the name of temporary safety are also cheering for open borders. Of course when you point this out, instantly come the floods of accusations of racism and xenophobia, because of course infectious diseases care what race you are right? At what point does this obsession with taking the rights of others to provide temporary safety end? Is this not setting a dangerous precedent ripe for abuse in the very near future?

I would absolutely say that Antivaxers have the right to do as they wish, if they are willing to agree to deal with any consequences as a result of their choice. Thats not going to happen though. I'm not going to try to compare threats, just because one threat has a higher total amount of damage as a possibility, doesn't mean we should disregard the others. Talking about dangerous precedents, do you know the human rights you lose during a federal isolation order by the CDC? You are imposing that on others by choosing not to get vaccinated. Yes, I understand that not everyone that doesn't get vaccinated will contract all of the diseases, but the possibility is real and not insignificant.

Your rights end when they spill over and infringe on others, thats just sort of how human civilization works. You don't get to claim minority rights, when they are harming the majority or anyone else.

Yeah, why would you compare threats when you can just let the lesser threat serve as a scapegoat for the more severe threat right? All it will cost is your freedom for some temporary safety. The threat of losing human rights is far more real and significant. I don't know if you have noticed, but this stripping of rights has become a global trend, but as long as they have scary excuses its A-OK right?

THESIS - ANTITHESIS - SYNTHESIS

No one has a right to compromise public safety. Saying that threat X statistically will claim 1,000 lives vs threat Y will statistically claim 100 doesn't mean we can just ignore threat Y. We could save far more lives ignoring nearly all hot-button issues combined, and focusing on proper nutrition, but that doesn't mean there is no point in anything besides nutrition.

This topic isn't about people in Rockland County being forcibly strapped to chairs and injected full of chemicals, its about them being told, you aren't welcome here because you are a threat to public safety. Those that have enjoyed their decades of lack of crippling diseases should change, just because others are willing to take the risk? You don't have to be forced to put anything inside your body if you don't want to, just don't feel indignation when others tell you they don't want to come in contact with you.

Owning a snotty tissue with measles virus on it will get you sent to prison for a while, why is having the child that produces those snotty tissues acceptable?


This isn't vaccination related, its travel related, but check out the SARS outbreak in Toronto in the early 2000s. It didn't affect hundreds of people, but it shut the city down pretty well. The doctors that didn't quit were quarantined along with those they came in contact with. They don't really want little Jimmy going to the hospital if he comes down with something that could kill the other patients with weakened immune systems, and quarantine is awful expensive. 

I am not ignoring anything. Again, as in every other time I bring this issue up you avoid responding to the directly related impact of uncontrolled illegal immigration. When dealing with mass medical issues, they use a process called "triage" which is designed to prioritize medical treatment based on the severity of the condition of the patients. Now if there is a group X which needs to be addressed but is in the minority, and a group Y who is in the majority and more severe, it makes no sense to treat group X before addressing the circumstances directly causing the issues of group Y.

I argue that this tiny minority of people only demanding bodily autonomy are simply being used as the scapegoats to cover up for the disease that uncontrolled immigration from the 3rd world with substandard sanitation and healthcare as well as higher infection rates of transmissible diseases. Of course the synthesis of this scapegoating is advancing the continual incremental conditioning of people to losing their rights to everything, including their own bodies.

I don't know enough about the actual non fearmongering statistics regarding illegal immigration, and am not in a position to respond. I'd be happy to point out the CDC's statics that seem to conclude that Mexico has a higher vaccination rate than the U.S, but most of that data is for children, and I have not validated the legitimacy of their data.

I would agree with you if the tiny majority demanding bodily autonomy were absolutely isolated, and had no risk of spreading diseases that they obtained by choice to those that did not make the same choice. I support the choice not to be vaccinated, I do not support the choice to put others at risk because of it though.

Consider the choice to stop bathing. No one can force a person to bathe, but you may find out that you are no longer welcome in public places. Why is that understandable, but when a health risk is at stake, its oppressing a minority group? Again, its all fine and good as long as your choices only effect you when they effect others, it is not acceptable.

That's cute. How convenient you simply can just skip over this entire topic and not even discuss it because "I don't know enough". I love the additional hypocritical touch as you cast my point as fear mongering, but yours as completely logical when we are talking about the same result of the spread of infectious disease. I guess your fear mongering has more credibility does it?

As far as Mexico's vaccination rates, first of all you know very well Mexico is not the only source nation for illegal immigrants, nor are they even the majority source any more. People from all over the world cross illegally via our Southern border, also increasingly from Asian nations where infection rates are also very high. Furthermore it is well established that the rates of infectious disease are in fact substantially higher in South America than North America. I know you are smart enough to know these things, so I can only assume you are being disingenuous at this point. I also find it interesting that the areas that are having the most outbreaks are also in or geographically close to "sanctuary (http://www.ojjpac.org/sanctuary.asp)" cities which would naturally act as an inductive force for illegal immigrants to congregate. Here are some related references:

https://www.cdc.gov/measles/images/trends-measles-cases.png

Hmm... 2014... I wonder what happened in 2014...

https://ichef.bbci.co.uk/news/320/cpsprodpb/174D0/production/_105204459_border-nc.png
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2014_American_immigration_crisis
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/05/29/measles-outbreaks-cdc/9718129/

Interesting... the rate of measles infections spiked along with the flood of immigration. Curious we just had a large surge of illegal immigration and suddenly the rate of measles infections is again increasing isn't it?


https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-immigration-outbreaks/more-than-2000-migrants-quarantined-in-u-s-detention-centers-due-to-disease-outbreaks-idUSKBN1QR0EW
and what is this? Thousands in quarantine? Those seem like some pretty high rates of infection. I wonder how many that they didn't catch got through...

Of course this is all just fear mongering and we should just get over it an give up what few rights we have left for our "safety" right? Pay no attention to the thousands of disease carrying illegal immigrants behind the curtain.

I can make things up if you'd prefer? Actually, I meant my comment on fear mongering in your benefit. I don't trust any news sources or studies without reading the raw data. I don't know anything about how many illegal immigrants from the Mexican border are Mexican, Mongolian, or Moroccan, again I could make some stuff up if you'd like, but I'd rather just say I don't know enough about it. I'm skipping over the subject not because its not significant, but going back to my point previously, we don't get to just disregard certain things because there are other potentially more significant or important cases elsewhere.

I could say that improper diet is responsible for more than half of a million deaths per year in the U.S alone. For that reason, immigration doesn't matter, vaccination doesn't matter, automobile safety doesn't matter, and africanized honey bees don't matter, but again if we are constantly shifting goalposts, there is no point in discussing anything at all.

Here is what I'm claiming:

1) Lack of vaccinations lead to diseases that otherwise wouldn't exist.

2) Those responsible for infecting others with diseases that otherwise wouldn't exist are solely responsible for the cases that they transmit.

3) In the case that a disease is transmitted, and a non statically insignificant case where permanent damage is done, the one who transmitted it is responsible.

4) The financial and life toll associated with lack of vaccination outweighs your right to infect others.


Here is my conclusion, being told to go away because the rest of the population doesn't want your diseases is not unreasonable. Strapping you into a chair and forcing vaccinations on you is unreasonable. The needs of a society outweigh the rights of an individual, and if you disagree you should not have those rights forcibly stripped from you, but given the option to politely go elsewhere.

If your point is that other unvaccinated individuals are coming in illegally anyway, why does that suddenly invalidate all other concerns? Shouldn't we be just as concerned about them as unvaccinated U.S citizens?


As you said, I'm not paying much attention to the fear mongering statistics of political propaganda trying to support their claims one way or another. Take a look at sources prior to the eradication of infectious diseases to make conclusions about them. People today have the right to be idiots, because they were never actually faced with threats. The reason Mexico is more vaccinated than the U.S, is because they had been dealing with actual epidemics far more recently than us. People under 60 didn't watch their friends and family deal with these diseases, so they are a non issue, that is until they resurface. We forget just how fortunate that we are that we don't live in a time where 50% of children die before they hit age 5, it really wasn't that long ago.

You are just repeating yourself now. I could make exactly the same accusation on your part that you are using fear of infection to sell your own preferred narrative using the exact same dismissive logic you use. The sourced numbers are pretty milk toast and well accepted, its not like I linked some conspiracy rag, but anything you can use to not actually address the issue right? Don't make stuff up, put on your big boy pants and fucking learn something instead of just arrogantly dismissing the premise.

The concept that immigration can lead to bringing in infectious disease is not some conspiracy theory, this is a well established FACT. What is also a fact is the population of the so called "antivaxxers" are tiny compared to the flood of illegal immigration. Illegal immigration is doing far more to spread disease than a handful of people refusing to vaccinate. Unfortunately it is politically incorrect to address this reality, so all the spineless people ignore it in favor of jumping on the much more popular "2 minutes of hate" against "antivaxxers" fueled and coordinated by popular media via the fear porn that they love so much. This doesn't invalidate other concerns, however if the primary cause is being obfuscated in order to create more dehumanization of minority groups and sell people on the removal of their rights using that fear, then even if all the "antivaxers" just disappear over night you still have a huge problem. In summary you are trying to plug a pinhole in the boat you are in while the whole back end just fell off of the boat. You should probably put the boat back together before worrying about your pinhole.

If I say that I also support unvaccinated illegal immigrants staying out of the same spaces as unvaccinated U.S citizens, does that help? I'm not "afraid" of infection, statistically it'll never happen to me, but its an absolutely real possibility. I'm not pretending that every single unvaccinated child will catch the plague, but all it takes is one to screw over a lot of people. The same could happen with immigrants as a source of contagion, but that doesn't mean we ignore the pinhole until we've shored up everything else. The problem is that with a single case that occurs, who foots the bill? Who is held responsible, and makes everything right?

Its not media, its thousands of years of human history that have taught us diseases are bad. Telling me to shut up and deal with you doing whatever you want is dismissive in itself, what about my right to not catch your diseases? Now you are stripping me, and using your minority defense to make your point infallible. Anti vaxers are not a minority group, they are just reckless. The point I keep trying to stress, you don't have to get vaccinated. Just don't expect everyone to respect your decision. I don't have to bathe, and if I don't bathe for a few years, I don't get the right to get pissed off when they kick me off the subway. If you don't give a shit about your community, you aren't welcome in your community.

My only point is that you only get to live exactly how you want, with whatever you perceive as your rights, if you live on your own. Don't expect that you can force your bullshit on others, any more than I can force mine on you. That doesn't mean we have to live harmoniously as neighbors however, and a community can tell me to leave for not bathing, and they can tell you to leave for being unvaccinated. A homeowners association can tell you to leave for not having the right color doors, your recourse is to not live in that homeowners association if you don't want to abide by their rules.

We obviously don't care much about each other's opinions even after making our claims. Thats cool, we nor our opinions will likely never effect each other in any way. I'm alright with watching it play out. Shoot me a pm with I told you so when it all works out in the end.

....
Here is what I'm claiming:

1) Lack of vaccinations lead to diseases that otherwise wouldn't exist.

2) Those responsible for infecting others with diseases that otherwise wouldn't exist are solely responsible for the cases that they transmit.

3) In the case that a disease is transmitted, and a non statically insignificant case where permanent damage is done, the one who transmitted it is responsible.

4) The financial and life toll associated with lack of vaccination outweighs your right to infect others.


Here is my conclusion, being told to go away because the rest of the population doesn't want your diseases is not unreasonable. Strapping you into a chair and forcing vaccinations on you is unreasonable. The needs of a society outweigh the rights of an individual, and if you disagree you should not have those rights forcibly stripped from you, but given the option to politely go elsewhere.

If your point is that other unvaccinated individuals are coming in illegally anyway, why does that suddenly invalidate all other concerns? Shouldn't we be just as concerned about them as unvaccinated U.S citizens? ....

Great argument. The only problem is I provided lots of sources and plenty of logical arguments, none of which you bothered to even attempt to refute, instead opting to just call it "bullshit" and creating a false equivalency. I didn't say you were scared, I suggested that the same dismissive logic you applied to me is also equally able to be applied to you, that of fear mongering. I also never told you to "shut up and deal with you doing whatever". Also stripping you? What?

It is a FACT that "antivaxxers" are in the minority, in the literal sense they are small in numbers. I am very sorry of you can't manage to rub a couple brain cells together to come up with a coherent argument against the argument I presented instead once again opting for arrogant dismissal. What about illegal immigrants? Clearly they don't give a shit about our community if they are bringing disease in to the country and violating our laws. Why is it you are so fast to ignore them but focus on "antivaxxers" even though the numbers show they are a much larger source of disease outbreaks?

See you just want your poorly thought out arguments to only work for you while you totally dismiss solid logical arguments with sources I present as bullshit instead of even attempting to directly refute them. You seem hyper focused on the vaccine denial aspect of this when I in fact never once attempted to argue against vaccination, only compulsory vaccination. You aren't even addressing my premise, you are just creating a premise, attributing it to me, then expecting me to defend it as you repeatedly dismiss my actual premise. If you are as smart as you think you are why is it you can't engage me in an intellectually honest debate?

Is everyone starting to see the pattern here? Do you really think the government cares this much about your health? This is not about vaccines, this is about control and stripping the rights of ALL OF US.

PROBLEM - REACTION - SOLUTION  = THESIS - ANTITHESIS - SYNTHESIS  =  CHAOS - FEAR - SUMBISSION

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-27/ny-county-bans-unvaccinated-kids-all-public-places

snip

Sounds pretty reasonable to me as public policy.

I would mention that the medical issues with unfiltered, unfettered illegal immigrants goes far beyond this. Docs here are having to deal now with vast numbers of tropical diseases they have zero experience with, various types of parasites.

It's also true that we're setting up two parallel systems, one which is lax (and free) for the immigrants and another which is strict (and expensive) for the citizens.

No, the problem is we are having a clash of ideologies, not a debate. Your own words are religion to you, and mine are the same to me. I'm not interested in your points about immigration, I brought that up a while ago so you wouldn't waste your time. I'd have to swim through countless hours of research to justify whether your sources are valid or not, what they actually mean, and whether it is worth communicating my thoughts on them. I'd be happy to do that if this was a thread about border security and influx of disease, but as I stated before, I know nothing about any of that. If that was the topic of the thread, I wouldn't have replied, as I have nothing to add to that conversation. I'm not dismissing your claim that immigrant carriers of diseases are of greater number than domestic unvaccinated citizens, because I don't know otherwise. You are not a minority group because of an individual belief on whether or not you should be vaccinated. Citing the 6th grade statistics definition of minority versus the anthropology definition of minority is dishonest.

I cannot engage you in a debate because I cannot understand your point of view. I really don't mean this as a personal attack, but to me, it sounds like you live in a self entitled fairy land, where you can do absolutely anything you want with no regard for others. I understand this is probably not the case, but from my perspective thats what your words mean. My absolute main point throughout the entire discussion which you keep trying to drag away from "County in New York bans unvaccinated from public spaces" to, "We aren't as bad as this other group!" is that you cannot force people to accept your life choices. You make a choice, other people have a reaction, you don't get to scream outrage because other people aren't as understanding of what you consider a good idea. If your point is that the threat is being overblown, sure you might be right! That doesn't change anything, your rights are not being taken from you until someone is holding you down and injecting you. People are just saying I don't want to live with you.

Everything you describe as false equivalencies and incoherent arguments makes absolute perfect sense to me, I'd assume in the same way your argument makes perfect sense to you, and absolutely no sense to me. You don't debate people who have different ideologies as you, because they aren't formed from misunderstanding but perception.
I'm not trying to take some philosophical high ground, I'm just stating that we are both wasting our time.

I do not think that people are physically able to take responsibility for the actions of their choice to not be vaccinated. That is why it is a problem at the social level rather than just a matter of individual responsibility. I have zero problem with unvaccinated people living the way they want, but just don't be surprised if your only neighbors are also unvaccinated neighbors, and when the question is asking 1,000 people to move elsewhere or asking 1, its not really a hard to answer. Set your own house on fire if you'd like, but the situation is different if you live in an apartment complex.

It is literally about that choice for some people. Kind of you to summarily dismiss the reality of the minority. After all, it is not like we live in a constitutional republic where the rights of the minority are protected by the constitution right? Do you really think this tiny minority of people who refuse to vaccinate for whatever reason are more of a threat than the thousands flooding in from our Southern border every month?

I find it interesting a lot of the same people cheering for the loss of individual rights in the name of temporary safety are also cheering for open borders. Of course when you point this out, instantly come the floods of accusations of racism and xenophobia, because of course infectious diseases care what race you are right? At what point does this obsession with taking the rights of others to provide temporary safety end? Is this not setting a dangerous precedent ripe for abuse in the very near future?

If you don't care for the floods of accusations and if you're not a xenophobe then stop acting like a xenophobe.



This whole Anti-Vax Vaxx issue has so many aspects to it:
How much freedom do we want to give up for safety?
How much should we interfere with a parents choice? Even when that choice puts someone else and even their own child at risk.
I am vaccinated for things in countries I may never see, my kid was vaxxed, my pets are always vaxxed- I personally believe in being vaccinated.
Why parents can't trust news outlets or even their doctors to make well informed decisions?  <---that is a problem all on its own right now

About 15 years ago Rotary almost hit a wall with the Polio vaccination. People didn't want to be vaccinated anymore or let their children be vaccinated.
A lot of it was mis-information combined with the fact that Polio was at that point almost eradicated so not only were people afraid of the vaccine, or rumors of what was really happening but many had also not experienced the effects of an outbreak so they either didn't believe it existed or understand how devastating the effects  Polio could be.

So because I want the laws of my nation to be enforced, I don't want the people here to be infected with diseases, and I don't want all of our social systems to collapse under the weight of uncontrolled illegal immigration, and have our rights stripped I am a xenophobe? This continual autistic screeching from the left about racism, xenophobia, and victim status is so frequently and arbitrarily exploited it has literally become meaningless and made it that much harder to identify ACTUAL racists. Good job.

You have no argument so instead you are forced to resort to character attacks to pretend you have a point and pretend you are in a position of moral superiority. What about the immigrants already here who don't want their opportunities taken by this tidal wave of people from the 3rd world? Fuck them too right? Again, much like SaltySpitoon you are relying on the strawman of anti-vaccination in order to argue against the premise of preserving human and constitutional rights in favor of removing informed consent for medical treatment. I am not against vaccination, I am against COMPULSORY vaccination.

I didn't bring up immigration but it seems to be an argument you want to have: even if it's only with yourself...have at it.
Didn't call you a racist and thought what I said was very direct and clear.
I'm not a leftist or on the right and for sure have --zero- claim to moral superiority.

Your own words are the only things on this forum capable of character attacks against you.

Yes, I brought up immigration, and? I brought it up because it is the real cause of these outbreaks but everyone is so afraid of being politically incorrect everyone denies it even when the numbers clearly support this premise. The tiny minority of "antivaxxers" are simply being used as a scapegoat, a distraction, and another incremental infringement of human rights that the Fabians trying to take over our nation are oh so fond of.

I suppose it is just a coincidence that xenophobia is a synonym of racism (https://www.thesaurus.com/browse/xenophobia) eh? No of course you didn't call me racist, you just used an interchangeable word with racism to label me. I don't care what you identify as, you are still spouting leftist Marxist rhetoric regardless if you know enough to recognize this or not. Most Socialists, Marxists, and Communists like to think they are some thing else anyway because that is how they work, via re-branding, deception, and infiltration, and it will always "be different this time". Unfortunately people are usually too ignorant of political theory, psychology, and history to know they are spouting Marxist ideologies.

OK

It is interesting how people always seem to see themselves on the side of the ones being protected but never imagine themselves being the ones stripped of their rights. You don't get it. The dilution of the rights of any is dilution of the rights of us all. This is how law works.

Great debate as usual.

Techshare,
I prefer to have conversations and make an effort to talk to people online the same way I would in real life.
Can't imagine standing in front of someone spouting off the way you do for too long.

Sometimes you have an interesting point of view, this post isn't one of those times...it's some regurgitated Alex Jones BS: not interested in that conversation.
The Rotary example wasn't antidotal.
You don't have debates; you have these pre-formed diatribes you want to have made up from the current political punditry.
There is no current political conversation being had anywhere right now that actually addresses immigration issues I'm not going to get into some non-sensical argument online over it.
You've got something to say about Muslims, how the Mexican Catholics are going to vote, on and on...
How many Muslims and Mexican Catholics do you actually know? I don't mean "know of" ... I mean people that matter to you.
Your signature in all caps is all anyone needs to know about you, you behave badly and complain about being treated badly.

"the Fabians trying to take over our nation are oh so fond of." <---see that's funny
Like when you compared socialism to a cocaine high  <---truly brilliant; I liked the analogy the first time I read in an article, although admittedly I appreciated your guttural version just a little more.

And I prefer to have a debate without the bullshit and dancing around peoples emotions because they can't handle facts. So tell me, if I am regurgitating political punditry, and there is no current political conversation being had anywhere right now that addresses immigration issues, what exactly am I regurgitating from? I am sorry your world view is limited to what those that own the media pre-approved for plebeian discussion, but that is not demonstrative of there being no legitimate discussion to be had. These are serious issues that sad little people who worry about feelings more than they do issues that can cause great physical suffering run away from.

You lack any logical argument so you need to fall back on character attacks, assumptions, and accusations. You don't know shit about me or why that sig is there, so save your breath. Or have a logic based debate where you don't rely on all that lazy bullshit and perhaps I will become just a teeny bit less caustic. Either way I have no need to be liked by or need approval from anyone so if you don't like the way I communicate don't interact with me. I am going to continue to take a sledghammer to bad ideas regardless of who's feefees it hurts because the world desperately needs people like me to do so.

The issue of uncontrolled immigration MUST be addressed, if it is not there will be no USA as we know it to speak of within the next 10 years because it will become the USSA, and some people would love that, which is why the real cause of these outbreaks must be obfuscated at all costs.

“I am going to continue to take a sledghammer to bad ideas regardless of who's feefees it hurts because the world desperately needs people like me to do so.”


WoW! (And I don’t mean wow in the happy Shibe sense) I mean “wow” you actually believe yourself?
                                                                       You’ve got a lot to say about other people’s “feefees”: while you are sensitive AF.

The world doesn’t desperately need people like you, there are more than enough caustic flame wars happening on the internet right now.
No, I don’t like the way you “communicate” you just keep running your mouth (clicking away on your keyboard)

Meanwhile in the real world:
I’ll take advantage of bitcointalk’s “chill effect”.

“I am going to continue to take a sledghammer to bad ideas regardless of who's feefees it hurts because the world desperately needs people like me to do so.”


WoW! (And I don’t mean wow in the happy Shibe sense) I mean “wow” you actually believe yourself?
                                                                       You’ve got a lot to say about other people’s “feefees”: while you are sensitive AF.

The world doesn’t desperately need people like you, there are more than enough caustic flame wars happening on the internet right now.
No, I don’t like the way you “communicate” you just keep running your mouth (clicking away on your keyboard)

Meanwhile in the real world:
I’ll take advantage of bitcointalk’s “chill effect”.

Parents are hosting "measles parties" so their kids can contract the deadly virus instead of getting the jab, it has been reported.

City health officials blasted parents after they were found encouraging their un-vaccinated kids to get the virus from each other in Brooklyn, New York.

Some 285 cases of measles have been confirmed in New York since October

Anti-vaxxer parents in New York have been found to host parties in hopes their un-vaccinated children get infected with measles (stock image)

The movement against the MMR vaccine, which protects against measles, mumps and rubella, is largely thought to stem from the work of Andrew Wakefield.

The now discredited UK doctor penned a damning research paper claiming a link between the MMR vaccine, autism and bowel disease.

The study was retracted in 2010 but the paper has had a lasting influence with the "anti-vaxxer" movement particularly taking off in America.

And the movement has sparked concern amid the current measles outbreak in New York – the largest the city has seen since 1991.

It is believed misguided parents are hosting "measles parties", encouraging their young, un-vaccinated children to spread measles with the idea that once a child has contracted it, they will be immune.

The "parties" are similar to "pox-parties" where kids were encouraged to contract chickenpox from each other.

These were popular before the introduction of the varicella vaccine in 1955.

It is now widely recognised by health officials that vaccinating a child is far safer than deliberately infecting them.

MEASLES OUTBREAK

The measles virus is highly contagious and in some cases can lead to death.

The city's health commissioner said she was "particularly concerned" about these parties and urged parents to get the MMR vaccine for their children.

She said: "I understand that parents may be afraid of getting their children vaccinated.

"I know that getting vaccinated is far safer than getting measles."

According to the NHS, the MMR vaccine is "a safe and effective combined vaccine that protects against 3 separate illnesses – measles, mumps and rubella (German measles) – in a single injection.

"The full course of MMR vaccination requires 2 doses.

"Measles, mumps and rubella are highly infectious conditions that can have serious, potentially fatal complications, including meningitis, swelling of the brain (encephalitis) and deafness."

I'm still upset that my right to make nuclear reactors was taken away  >:(

Living in society means that you make some concessions in order to stay a part of a community. Rockland County has said that in order to stay a part of their community, you must be vaccinated, otherwise they don't want you there. That said, if you want to truly make it fair, since its a retroactive change, I'd argue that they should pay for those that want to move because of the change.

Soon we'll wish we had the ole Russian policy of shipping us off to Siberia, because they probably don't care what you do there.

Is everyone starting to see the pattern here? Do you really think the government cares this much about your health? This is not about vaccines, this is about control and stripping the rights of ALL OF US.

PROBLEM - REACTION - SOLUTION  = THESIS - ANTITHESIS - SYNTHESIS  =  CHAOS - FEAR - SUMBISSION

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-03-27/ny-county-bans-unvaccinated-kids-all-public-places

you want americans child mortality to be as high as african or afghan child mortality? be happy that there are vaccines.

People are happy that there are vaccines. As far as I can tell, people want to better understand the full side effects of them.

they have to read, where i live you can read all side effects, i doubt its possible to lie in pharmaindustry.

Most conservatives believe that the Left-wing Democrat Party opposes President Donald Trump’s efforts to secure our borders and enforce all immigration laws because they want to flood the country with ‘new voters.’

That’s true to an extent, but that’s far from the whole story.

The primary objective of the American Left — and, really, the global Left — is the destruction of the United States as founded, period. This is something you should never forget because the United States stands as the one beacon of true individual freedom and liberty the world over; if we fall, there is no similar country to take our place.

Thus, if you look at the issues that are important to Democrats and you examine their political objectives and view the policies they pursue through this lens, you can begin to understand why they do the things they do.

Take the migrant invasion currently occurring along our U.S.-Mexico border. To any rational American, the right thing to do would be to give the president and our governing institutions all the diplomatic, financial, and physical tools required to secure it. But instead, Democrats fight the president tooth and nail.

And what’s happening? Not only are the migrants overwhelming our ability to handle the onslaught, because of the way our laws are written — and because Democrats refuse to work with Republicans and the president to change them — federal immigration officials have been forced to release disease-ridden migrants into our cities, thus exposing Americans to diseases we eradicated long ago.

According to LifeSiteNews, a Catholic publication, the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association is charging UNICEF and WHO with sterilizing millions of girls and women under cover of an anti-tetanus vaccination program sponsored by the Kenyan government.

The Kenyan government denies there is anything wrong with the vaccine, and says it is perfectly safe.

The Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, however, saw evidence to the contrary, and had six different samples of the tetanus vaccine from various locations around Kenya sent to an independent laboratory in South Africa for testing.

The results confirmed their worst fears: all six samples tested positive for the HCG antigen. The HCG antigen is used in anti-fertility vaccines, but was found present in tetanus vaccines targeted to young girls and women of childbearing age. Dr. Ngare, spokesman for the Kenya Catholic Doctors Association, stated in a bulletin released November 4:

    “This proved right our worst fears; that this WHO campaign is not about eradicating neonatal tetanus but a well-coordinated forceful population control mass sterilization exercise using a proven fertility regulating vaccine. This evidence was presented to the Ministry of Health before the third round of immunization but was ignored.” (Source.)

Dr. Ngare brought up several points about the mass tetanus vaccination program in Kenya that caused the Catholic doctors to become suspicious:

   Dr. Ngare told LifeSiteNews that several things alerted doctors in the Church’s far-flung medical system of 54 hospitals, 83 health centres, and 17 medical and nursing schools to the possibility the anti-tetanus campaign was secretly an anti-fertility campaign.

    Why, they ask does it involve an unprecedented five shots (or “jabs” as they are known, in Kenya) over more than two years and why is it applied only to women of childbearing years, and why is it being conducted without the usual fanfare of government publicity?

    “Usually we give a series three shots over two to three years, we give it anyone who comes into the clinic with an open wound, men, women or children.” said Dr. Ngare.

    But it is the five vaccination regime that is most alarming. “The only time tetanus vaccine has been given in five doses is when it is used as a carrier in fertility regulating vaccines laced with the pregnancy hormone, Human Chorionic Gonadotropin (HCG) developed by WHO in 1992.” (Source.)

UNICEF: A History of Taking Advantage of Disasters to Mass Vaccinate

https://www.dcclothesline.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/05/CDC-vaccine-ingredients3-678x381.jpg

But not all vaccine addictives are harmless.

For 8 years, from 1955 to 1963, more than 98 million Americans received the polio vaccine. But it wasn’t until 60 years later, in 2015, that the CDC admitted that the polio vaccine had been contaminated with an ingredient — the cancer-causing Simian vacuolating virus 40 (SV40).

...
And every kid deserves a disease free life (atleast the diseases which are preventable).
...

...
I wonder if Ebola has an outbreak in the US they will still be blaming "antivaxxers".

https://www.zerohedge.com/news/2019-06-14/orthodox-jews-threaten-motherfer-ny-lawmaker-after-anti-vax-law-passes

With these improvements, the death rates from childhood infectious diseases plummeted—long before the advent of vaccines for those illnesses. U.S. vital statistics affirm that the measles mortality (death) rate had dropped 99.4% before introduction of the first measles vaccine in 1963.


Fuzzy measles math

Prior to the measles vaccine's U.S. introduction, the estimated number of measles cases annually was between 4 and 6.5 million (depending on the source). The government-reported mortality rate—pre-vaccine—was approximately 1 in 10,000 cases. So why do today's media often report it as 1 in 1,000 cases? This appears to be an attempt to exaggerate the facts and promote fear to drive the vaccine mandate agenda. Ninety percent or more of all measles cases were so mild that they were never reported because parents never took their children to the doctor. Only 10% of overall cases were severe enough to warrant seeking medical care, but even in that subgroup, not all cases were reported. It was only among the 10% that sought medical care and were reported that the fatality rate was about 1 in 1,000. Modern news outlets get away with inaccurately reporting the death rate as 1 in 1,000 by leaving out the crucial word "reported" and referring only to "cases."

But even a death rate of 1 in 10,000 cases does not accurately reflect the situation for the majority of the population, for whom measles mortality was far less. Socioeconomic factors are very important in this discussion but often overlooked. In the middle of the last century, U.S. children living in poverty had poorer nutrition, less sanitary living conditions and less access to medical care. As one might expect, this resulted in less viable and resilient immune systems that made them more vulnerable to measles complications and death.

Two Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) studies support the observation that poorer children suffered more serious complications and a higher measles mortality rate. One study, titled "Measles mortality: a retrospective look at the vaccine era" (authored for the CDC's Bureau of Epidemiology and published in 1975 in the American Journal of Epidemiology), reviewed statistics from 1958-1963. A 1980 study from the CDC's Immunization Division, titled "Measles mortality in the United States 1971-1975" and published in the American Journal of Public Health, reviewed records from 1971-1975. Both studies showed that children who lived at or below the poverty level, and especially in rural settings, were significantly more likely to die from measles than those in the higher income brackets. In fact, the second study found a ten times (1,000%) higher death rate for those below the poverty level than for the more affluent population.

As I thought about those numbers and the 1000% greater incidence of death in poverty-stricken children, I became curious as to how disproportionate those numbers might be when considering the population as a whole. Remember, the overall mortality rate for the entire country was reported as approximately 1 death for every 10,000 cases of measles. In the pre-measles-vaccine era from 1959-1962, the total U.S. population was from 178 million (1959) to 189 million (1963), and the percentage of families living at or below the poverty level was about 8% (approximately 14 million). If that 8% had a 1,000% higher mortality rate than the more affluent population, it would stand to reason that the mortality rate for that affluent segment must be far less than 1 in 10,000 cases. Here are the CDC measles mortality numbers for 1971-1975 reported in the American Journal of Public Health:

-Families with incomes of less than or equal to $5,000/year: 1 death in 237,467 (population)

-Families with incomes between $5,000 and $10,000/year: 1 death in 1,009,437 (population)

-Families with incomes over $10,000/year: 1 death in 2,190,837 (population)

In other words, for higher-income households, there was less than a one in two million measles fatality rate.

CBS News reported that the decision to stop counting H1N1 flu cases was made so hastily that states weren't given the opportunity to provide input. Investigative reporter Sharyl Attkisson dug into state-by-state numbers of positively-confirmed swine flu cases, but she and her CBS team were stonewalled by the CDC for months. Finally, rather than wait for the CDC, reporters took the initiative to contact each state individually and found: "Of the presumed likely swine flu cases, only a fraction of them were actually swine flu."

...

Was there ever a swine flue epidemic?

There was not even the hint of one.

What is provided here is a case study of  Vaccine criminality in which the product is hyped and sold to the corporations benefit.  However all the damage is paid by the State including much of the legal cost.  Corporate bankruptcy needs to be imposed to end this horror.

Ye all the rules have been rigged to run out another fraud any time they like.

Swine Flu Vaccine Injury Settlements Reveal Health Authorities & Big Pharma Are Partners In Crime

Sorry, but the "right" to get sick and die horribly only applies to things that aren't contagious.

Is everyone starting to see the pattern here? Do you really think the government cares this much about your health? This is not about vaccines, this is about control and stripping the rights of ALL OF US.

PROBLEM - REACTION - SOLUTION  = THESIS - ANTITHESIS - SYNTHESIS  =  CHAOS - FEAR - SUMBISSION

I'm still upset that my right to make nuclear reactors was taken away  >:(

...

My favorite part of all of this hysteria and impotent rage is pretty much everyone agrees the US healthcare system is corrupt to the core, and regularly turns the population into lab rats for testing and pushing dangerous drugs. Then these same people turn around and implicitly trust this same system to be able to forcibly inject everyone with vaccines without informed consent, and with these companies holding absolutely zero liability over any harm caused. Not a contradiction at all. What could go wrong?

One of the most juicy hypothesis about this is that it was the subject of some of the 'deepest' and most advanced forms of propaganda.  That would also imply that it is one of the highest priority projects of those who control the levers of propaganda.

I'll be honest and say that in spite of spending a fair amount of energy entertaining this hypothesis and looking for evidence, I really have not found anything which accounts for the strength which which people hold the aforementioned contradictory belief structure.  Propaganda is a vast field though, and it guards it's secrets fairly well.  The hypothesis has certainly not been killed by anything I've noticed.