• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

California Law Requires Vaccinations to Attend School.

My points are not extreme. Generally does not prevent infections. And there is a period before the symptoms are known.

They ARE extreme because the fact is that risk of harm from most childhood illnesses is minor, and among those who suffer the most, the risk of death is even less. Look at the statistics for polio when it was a problem. Only 0.05% of children exposed actually suffered from paralysis (1 out of every 200), and even then at most only 10% of those who suffer paralysis die. WHO | 10 facts on polio eradication

Now I reiterate, I have nothing against vaccinations. I have no problem with complying with vaccination requirements myself when I travel outside the USA, or when I was in the Army, or otherwise on a case by case basis. On the other hand, I stopped taking annual flu shots decades ago after I realized the only time I get sick is immediately after those shots. I think people have a right to refuse, and in the case of parents who fear the effects on their children, to refuse on the child's behalf.

I don't even mind the restriction from sending the kids to public school. I disagree with denying them the right to establish a private school so that they can send their kids to associate with other kids while the parents go out and earn a living.
 
They ARE extreme because the fact is that risk of harm from most childhood illnesses is minor, and among those who suffer the most, the risk of death is even less. Look at the statistics for polio when it was a problem. Only 0.05% of children exposed actually suffered from paralysis (1 out of every 200), and even then at most only 10% of those who suffer paralysis die. WHO | 10 facts on polio eradication

Now I reiterate, I have nothing against vaccinations. I have no problem with complying with vaccination requirements myself when I travel outside the USA, or when I was in the Army, or otherwise on a case by case basis. On the other hand, I stopped taking annual flu shots decades ago after I realized the only time I get sick is immediately after those shots. I think people have a right to refuse, and in the case of parents who fear the effects on their children, to refused on the child's behalf.

I don't even mind the restriction from sending the kids to public school. I disagree with denying them the right to establish a private school so that they can send their kids to associate with other kids while the parents go out and earn a living.

And on that we differ.
 
I guess liberals can no longer claim you can send your kid to private school to get around their invasion of your chiild's body.
 
The difference is that a person in prison has (typically) caused a direct harm for which he is being punished. No one is supposed to be sent to prison when he hasn't done anything wrong, but MIGHT do something wrong.

Recklessly endangering another is doing something wrong. And given the risk that the diseases we vaccinate against pose to children in a crowded environment like school, not vaccinating recklessly endangers innocent people. Yes, it's very very important to protect a person's bodily sovereignty. But it's also important not to let innocent kids get sick and die.

It's a balance of hardships. The hardship of a little injection is minimal. Obviously, if the kid has a serious risk of harmful side effects, then they should be exempted. It's about trying to minimize harm. And the difference between active or passive... that doesn't matter.
 
And on that we differ.

Yes we differ. Probably because I don't feel the need to be completely protected by nanny-state ideology. The ideology that advocates absolute safety is a requirement of all social interaction, leading to the corollary that liberty can be limited if one's actions have even the slightest possibility of a harmful result.
 
I guess liberals can no longer claim you can send your kid to private school to get around their invasion of your chiild's body.

If you want State -Fed dollars- No- If you wish to pony up- go ahead.

Note that they could in all probability be barred from participating at those schools that have sporting events with other schools.
 
Recklessly endangering another is doing something wrong. And given the risk that the diseases we vaccinate against pose to children in a crowded environment like school, not vaccinating recklessly endangers innocent people. Yes, it's very very important to protect a person's bodily sovereignty. But it's also important not to let innocent kids get sick and die.

It's a balance of hardships. The hardship of a little injection is minimal. Obviously, if the kid has a serious risk of harmful side effects, then they should be exempted. It's about trying to minimize harm. And the difference between active or passive... that doesn't matter.

Oh? So should people with a cold that go out shopping or to work get arrested or fined? All you have to support your case here is a handful of deaths in over decades of time from measles and an outbreak that affected less than 700 people. Real dangerous stuff, bro.
 
Yes we differ. Probably because I don't feel the need to be completely protected by nanny-state ideology. The ideology that advocates absolute safety is a requirement of all social interaction, leading to the corollary that liberty can be limited if one's actions have even the slightest possibility of a harmful result.
No.
Me I go with the science.
 
If you want State -Fed dollars- No- If you wish to pony up- go ahead.

Note that they could in all probability be barred from participating at those schools that have sporting events with other schools.

Yes, because private schools are in complete control if the government gives them money. Not.
 
Oh? So should people with a cold that go out shopping or to work get arrested or fined? All you have to support your case here is a handful of deaths in over decades of time from measles and an outbreak that affected less than 700 people. Real dangerous stuff, bro.

There were only a handful because we vaccinate everyone. And the hardship from catching a cold is minimal. Why are you only capable of going to extremes and not dealing with reality? And why do you not understand that different things are addressed differently. Reality doesn't deal in blanket rules.
 
Recklessly endangering another is doing something wrong. And given the risk that the diseases we vaccinate against pose to children in a crowded environment like school, not vaccinating recklessly endangers innocent people. Yes, it's very very important to protect a person's bodily sovereignty. But it's also important not to let innocent kids get sick and die.

It's a balance of hardships. The hardship of a little injection is minimal. Obviously, if the kid has a serious risk of harmful side effects, then they should be exempted. It's about trying to minimize harm. And the difference between active or passive... that doesn't matter.

Again, I have no problem with a law that concerns public school systems. But this law prohibits parent's from establishing a private school, requiring instead "home schooling." That causes all sorts of problems for those kids and their families, on behalf of the very small minority of children with immune deficiencies.

That makes this law punitive rather than beneficial. "Do this or be exiled!" No, just like religious groups may set up private schools, those parent who disagree with vaccination should be able to do so as well.
 
People undergoing Chemo know this. No vaccine for the cold, but for others there are. So the point is what?

Vaccinations do NOT begin to cover every possible communicable diseases or even a broad swath of diseases, just a narrow select few and the vaccinations are imperfect. Therefor requiring vaccination of everyone is rather pointless. My children don't get all the vaccinations in the times, doses, and amounts required now. I spread them out, and get select vaccinations for the worst diseases like polio and make sure my children's immune system is capable handling the shots and only one disease at a time. I take a measured considered approach to vaccination. I haven't gotten my children vaccinated for measles or chicken pox. There is isn't much need to as they are minor inconvenient diseases that don't really affect us any more other than be miserable in the modern setting. What might have been lethal isn't anymore. I have been vaccinated and have them fail and have had adverse effects from them notable the chicken pox vaccination failed when I was an young adult, and I had a adverse reaction to Anthrax vaccination and I never got the full regimen or I would be worse off now has it resulted in auto immune disorder in my case psoriasis mainly and Rheumatoid arthritis, both minor. I am 42. I shouldn't have arthritis. What I am saying is one size does not fit all, especially in healthcare. Vaccinations are risk vs. reward and each parent should be able to evaluate for themselves the risk and reward. Vaccinations are not something to be taken lightly. They are tools inherently dangerous, and like any tool should be handled with care and consideration.
 
Last edited:
There were only a handful because we vaccinate everyone. And the hardship from catching a cold is minimal. Why are you only capable of going to extremes and not dealing with reality? And why do you not understand that different things are addressed differently. Reality doesn't deal in blanket rules.

Because you people never stop at the reasonable. Why would I stop at the reasonable when I can't be assured you will stop there? Hell, I don't even think this is reasonable, so really, we are already past that point. If everyone vaccinates their kid then I don't understand how you even begin to justify force in this situation at all. We also have advanced medicine here in the US that lowers the probability of serious compilations from the measles by a substantial amount making your case for force here even weaker.
 
"Gov. Jerry Brown on Tuesday signed a hotly contested California bill to impose one of the strictest school vaccination laws in the country in the wake of an outbreak of measles at Disneyland late last year.

California now joins West Virginia and Mississippi as the only states without a personal-belief exemption for vaccines. Medical exemptions will still be available for children with serious health issues. When considering exemptions, doctors may take family medical history into account.

Effective the 2016-17 school year, children whose parents refuse vaccination and are not granted a medical exemption must be homeschooled. School-age children who currently claim a personal-belief exemption will need to get fully vaccinated by kindergarten and seventh grade, the state's two vaccine checkpoints. The law applies to both public and private schools, as well as daycare centers."

What's next for California's contentious vaccine law

So, in order to attend either public or private school in California, all children who don't have a specific medical exemption must now be fully vaccinated against all childhood disease.

On the surface this seems to be a reasonable public safety measure designed to "protect the children." However, IMO it just one more step down the road of Nanny-State policies designed to violate individual liberty in the name of public security.

My argument isn't that vaccinations are inherently bad, although as with any pharmaceutical product there is ALWAYS a risk of allergic reaction in a section of the population; nor do I buy into the position that vaccinations cause Autism.

My argument is about the erosion of the right to be secure in one's physical person from seizure and invasion. A person's physical body is their evidence of existential individuality; the basis from which all claims of individual liberty and inherent rights flow. Forcible invasion of a person's body for ANY reason is a direct assault on their liberty. History demonstrates that once you give a government that kind of power over the individual, it is a slippery slope leading to all sorts of horrors. (See Compulsory Sterilization, Nazi experimentation, etc.)

It is one thing to lock someone up for a violent act for a period of incarceration, but quite another to require individuals to submit to blood tests, DNA extraction, or the forcible injection of substances into the body because other people think it will make THEM safer.

In this case, voluntary vaccination serves to protect you and your children from infection. Compelling someone else to do so? I don't think your concerns trump their rights to choose not to.

Meh, we were never at risk for any sort of outbreak. Even CO, which has the lowest percentage of immunized children, isn't breaking out into a bunch of dead kids. It's an overreaction.
 
Again, I have no problem with a law that concerns public school systems. But this law prohibits parent's from establishing a private school, requiring instead "home schooling." That causes all sorts of problems for those kids and their families, on behalf of the very small minority of children with immune deficiencies.

That makes this law punitive rather than beneficial. "Do this or be exiled!" No, just like religious groups may set up private schools, those parent who disagree with vaccination should be able to do so as well.

It's just as dangerous in a private school. Why should the kids there be put in danger? Obviously, we don't have different laws against reckless endangerment for public and private property. Someone negligently swinging a hammer or spraying chemicals doesn't have a different level of responsibility if they're on a public road or a private lawn.

No one is exiling anyone. We just want to protect kids from deadly diseases. I understand that the loss of liberty bothers you. It bothers me, too. But I don't see an alternative that doesn't put innocent kids in danger.

Honestly, you could make the case that any parent not vaccinating their kids without a serious medical reason is child abuse. They're being harmed for absolutely no gain, save the paranoid ramblings of conspiracy theorists.

Ultimately, if you want to see this law changed, it needs a technological solution, not a legal one. We need a better method to fight these diseases, and no one will need to be injected with anything.
 
It's just as dangerous in a private school. Why should the kids there be put in danger? Obviously, we don't have different laws against reckless endangerment for public and private property. Someone negligently swinging a hammer or spraying chemicals doesn't have a different level of responsibility if they're on a public road or a private lawn.

No one is exiling anyone. We just want to protect kids from deadly diseases. I understand that the loss of liberty bothers you. It bothers me, too. But I don't see an alternative that doesn't put innocent kids in danger.

Honestly, you could make the case that any parent not vaccinating their kids without a serious medical reason is child abuse. They're being harmed for absolutely no gain, save the paranoid ramblings of conspiracy theorists.

Ultimately, if you want to see this law changed, it needs a technological solution, not a legal one. We need a better method to fight these diseases, and no one will need to be injected with anything.

What if me and my neighbors decided to home school our kids together and half of the kids aren't vaccinated? Don't the other half deserve protection?

And not getting your kids a shot when they are healthy is not child abuse. Jesus.
 
Last edited:
But again, that's great until they are 18, then what? What happens when they go to work with others who have infants? Have cancer? Or are immune compromised?

What about college? Don't college kids deserve protection too? You know, I was seventeen when I started college, so I guess I have to ask why minors in college aren't protected. Seems only right.
 
Vaccinations do NOT begin to cover every possible communicable diseases or even a broad swath of diseases, just a narrow select few and the vaccinations are imperfect. Therefor requiring vaccination of everyone is rather pointless. My children don't get all the vaccinations in the times, doses, and amounts required now. I spread them out, and get select vaccinations for the worst diseases like polio and make sure my children's immune system is capable handling the shots and only one disease at a time. I take a measured considered approach to vaccination. I haven't gotten my children vaccinated for measles or chicken pox. There is isn't much need to as they are minor inconvenient diseases that don't really affect us any more other than be miserable in the modern setting. What might have been lethal isn't anymore. I have been vaccinated and have them fail and have had adverse effects from them notable the chicken pox vaccination failed when I was an young adult, and I had a adverse reaction to Anthrax vaccination and I never got the full regimen or I would be worse off now has it resulted in auto immune disorder in my case psoriasis mainly and Rheumatoid arthritis, both minor. I am 42. I shouldn't have arthritis. What I am saying is one size does not fit all, especially in healthcare. Vaccinations are risk vs. reward and each parent should be able to evaluate for themselves the risk and reward. Vaccinations are not something to be taken lightly. They are tools inherently dangerous, and like any tool should be handled with care and consideration.

Spread them out, is fine, I think the same way. But vaccinate.
Measles not as minor as you think
Measles | Complications | CDC

Tetanus is another.
Tetanus Symptoms - Mayo Clinic
Hep A & B.

Chickenpox is not as harmless either.
Chickenpox Possible Complications - Chickenpox Health Information - NY Times Health
Adults have the greatest risk for dying from chickenpox, with infants having the next highest risk. Males (both boys and men) have a higher risk for a severe case of chickenpox than females. Children who catch chickenpox from family members are likely to have a more severe case than if they caught it outside the home. The older the child, the higher the risk for a more severe case. But even in such circumstances, chickenpox is rarely serious in children. Other factors put individuals at specifically higher risk for complications of chickenpox.
Recurrence of Chickenpox and Reactivation as Shingles
 
Spread them out, is fine, I think the same way. But vaccinate.
Measles not as minor as you think
Measles | Complications | CDC

Tetanus is another.
Tetanus Symptoms - Mayo Clinic
Hep A & B.

Chickenpox is not as harmless either.
Chickenpox*Possible Complications - Chickenpox Health Information - NY Times Health

The risks of the vaccinations for measles and chickenpox out weigh the potential good IMO. Not to mention failure to protect rates are not good either. Remember I got the chicken pox even though I was vaccinated with the full prescribed regimen of the time. They are not absolutely necessary unlike polio or whooping cough which are dangerous even with modern medicine. I am playing the odds and the odds now favor me not to vaccinate against those particular diseases in favor of more virulent and potentially deadly diseases such as TB, Whooping Cough, Polio, Hepatitis ect. There are time span verses recovery from the vaccine factors that few realize and that sufficient time for recovery and more importantly preparation for vaccination immunity build up so as to minimize problems with vaccines. Not all vaccines work or are made the same or have the same potency. They are NOT as I said before one size fits all and have to be adjusted accordingly to the individual. There are lots of vaccines and many that combine multiple diseases. A body should be at maximum health before taking a vaccination especially a multiple type vaccination. That said these are medical decisions that should be left to the parents. There is a very good case for NOT vaccinating your child, especially for things like the measles or chicken pox. Vaccines are good, however mandating them by government coercion is not.
 
And how does forcing vaccines on kids that attend public schools stop measles outbreaks at Disneyland? Does the governor realize that people from all around the globe visit Disneyland?

Or the beach, or the mall, or even the high school football game. Its so egocentric of us to think that only CA kids attend anything in CA. There is a whole big world out there and Europe is less likely to be vaccinated than the US as they mistrust the pharmaceutical industry more than us.

Think the U.S Has a Measles Problem? Just Look at Europe - NBC News
 
The risks of the vaccinations for measles and chickenpox out weigh the potential good IMO. Not to mention failure to protect rates are not good either. Remember I got the chicken pox even though I was vaccinated with the full prescribed regimen of the time. They are not absolutely necessary unlike polio or whooping cough which are dangerous even with modern medicine. I am playing the odds and the odds now favor me not to vaccinate against those particular diseases in favor of more virulent and potentially deadly diseases such as TB, Whooping Cough, Polio, Hepatitis ect. There are time span verses recovery from the vaccine factors that few realize and that sufficient time for recovery and more importantly preparation for vaccination immunity build up so as to minimize problems with vaccines. Not all vaccines work or are made the same or have the same potency. They are NOT as I said before one size fits all and have to be adjusted accordingly to the individual. There are lots of vaccines and many that combine multiple diseases. A body should be at maximum health before taking a vaccination especially a multiple type vaccination. That said these are medical decisions that should be left to the parents. There is a very good case for NOT vaccinating your child, especially for things like the measles or chicken pox. Vaccines are good, however mandating them by government coercion is not.

In favor of? Vaccines aren't a zero-sum game.

Measles damages your immune system for years. How the **** did you get the idea that measles is some innocuous childhood disease?
 
In favor of? Vaccines aren't a zero-sum game.

Measles damages your immune system for years. How the **** did you get the idea that measles is some innocuous childhood disease?

Vaccines first, are not a game of any kind it is a matter of quality of life and in some cases life and death. Therefor what is required is an objective analysis of probabilities and outcomes and weighing of each. The probability that contracting measles is quite low in this country. Should I decide to go to another country with my children such as South America or elsewhere lesser developed then vaccination for Measles would be in order. There are 21 different strains of Measles a that are currently known. The vaccine give varying degrees of protection from all the variants unlike flu vaccines. Measles are not a life threatening disease in the United States, or for that matter all but the most undeveloped nations in the world. Even then its fatality rate is 30% with a compromised immune system. It is mildly more dangerous than chickenpox.

Immunization requires a strong immune system. If your immune system is compromised whether or not you have a vaccine is all but a moot point. If you get a major illness your immune system will be compromised, whether you are immunized or not. Its a about probabilities plain and simple. My preference for immunization is to immunize as needed as late as possible on a prepared immune system so as to minimize risks and maximize effectiveness. I don't do one size fits all when it comes to medical decisions. I make them based on the needs and requirements of my children based on my physicians inputs. Vaccines are like any other medical device or medicine, and require due and careful consideration. The Hippocratic Oath states first, "Do no harm."
 
Vaccines first, are not a game of any kind it is a matter of quality of life and in some cases life and death. Therefor what is required is an objective analysis of probabilities and outcomes and weighing of each. The probability that contracting measles is quite low in this country. Should I decide to go to another country with my children such as South America or elsewhere lesser developed then vaccination for Measles would be in order. There are 21 different strains of Measles a that are currently known. The vaccine give varying degrees of protection from all the variants unlike flu vaccines. Measles are not a life threatening disease in the United States, or for that matter all but the most undeveloped nations in the world. Even then its fatality rate is 30% with a compromised immune system. It is mildly more dangerous than chickenpox.

Immunization requires a strong immune system. If your immune system is compromised whether or not you have a vaccine is all but a moot point. If you get a major illness your immune system will be compromised, whether you are immunized or not. Its a about probabilities plain and simple. My preference for immunization is to immunize as needed as late as possible on a prepared immune system so as to minimize risks and maximize effectiveness. I don't do one size fits all when it comes to medical decisions. I make them based on the needs and requirements of my children based on my physicians inputs. Vaccines are like any other medical device or medicine, and require due and careful consideration. The Hippocratic Oath states first, "Do no harm."

What data do you use to adjust your personal vaccination schedule?
 
What data do you use to adjust your personal vaccination schedule?

There combination of data points which I collude with my or my children's physician with. Typical factors will include current health, vaccination type, antibody levels if previously vaccinated for a particular disease, and more technical indicators relating to the vaccination and current health state. I don't have a personal vaccination schedule unless I am going overseas to an under developed area.
 
Back
Top Bottom