|
Now that we have a new thread, in order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a complete and thorough read before posting! NOTE: When providing a source, please provide a very brief summary on what it's about and what purpose it adds to the discussion. The supporting statement should clearly explain why the subject is relevant and needs to be discussed. Please follow this rule especially for tweets.
Your supporting statement should always come BEFORE you provide the source.If you have any questions, comments, concern, or feedback regarding the USPMT, then please use this thread: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/website-feedback/510156-us-politics-thread |
On January 31 2019 01:55 hunts wrote:
I'm not sure if you're aware, but plenty of people who get those same preventable diseases you did don't live through it, or end up living in a hospital in an iron lung for the rest of their lives.
Not to mention the big thing: People who can be vaccinated, must be vaccinated, because some people, mainly infants, cannot. When we choose to endure an infection we can survive, we are also risking infecting someone who can't survive.
|
On January 31 2019 01:53 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:09 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 00:49 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 23:31 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 20:46 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 17:26 explosivekangaroo wrote:On January 30 2019 07:50 TheYango wrote:On January 30 2019 04:06 Excludos wrote:
Getting vaccinated as an adult isn't wrong either. It's not just "not wrong", it's actively recommended. Established medical organizations recommend a lot of vaccines for adults (yearly flu shot, tetanus booster every 10 years, pneumonia after age 65, etc.). It's just that when it comes to adults, we can't really make anyone do it because the the ethical/legal boundaries for medical autonomy are pretty clear-cut. If an adult doesn't want vaccines, we can't make them do it. Children are just an ethical nightmare when it comes to medical practice because they don't have autonomy to make their own medical decisions, so shitty parents that don't make decisions in the best interest of their kids become a problem. The state can actually override a parent's medical decision making if they are deemed to be acting against the best interest of the child--generally only really invoked in life-saving procedures with clear benefit (e.g. a Jehovah's Witness who refuses life-saving blood transfusion for their kid, or a mother who refuses chemotherapy for a kid with lymphoma because she believes in homeopathy). It's very easy to find cases where this has gone to court. Vaccines happen to occupy a troublesome space where because they are a form of preventative care rather than treatment, it's not really been established that medical providers or the state can override the parent's decision. Even though the same logic applies in theory, the nature of preventative care having probabilistic rather than deterministic benefit means that the same policies can't really be used (even though they should, IMO). I don't believe that the state should have the authority over the medical decisions concercning children. I think the best solution is to fund information campaigns. Honestly I compare not giving your kids vaccines akin to child abuse Yeah, I'm going to go with no on that one... Yeah I'm going with a low effort post on that... This is a discussion board, you can't just say "no u" and be content. Why exactly is it not child abuse when it could literally end up killing your child? And if that doesn't happen there's a chance of permanent damage. Hell, even if it doesn't end up killing your kid, it could end up killing someone else's due to weakened herd immunity. It's laughable that not vaccinating your child is even an option in today's society. I haven't put effort into all of my positions. I had a great childhood. If I didn't get measles as a teen and whichever ones I got as a child, it would have been 0.5% better. Thinking of all the legal things that I could have been subjected to and wasn't... they could have put me in a church, they could have taught me to hate the religious, or the gays, or the trans, or the foreigners, they could have pushed ideologies or expectations on me. I'm fine. Not ready to trade. This is a weird post and I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that since your childhood was pretty good, it isn't a big deal when infants die from preventable infection? Or are you saying because that didn't happen to you, it can't be that bad? Please clarify Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that. So when a baby dies from a preventable infection, what exactly does that mean? In your eyes, what occurred? When your parents decided to put infant children at risk of death, did they fail morally in any way?
Morally? How does that even work? Obviously they failed based on a flawed reasoning.
|
-22 and a wind chill of -40. Still got the paper in a T-shirt and sweatpants.
|
I'd personally compare not vaccinating your children to letting your kid smoke before they turn 16 or whatever the legal age for that is elsewhere.
I don't think I'd want to call either of these two child abuse even though I'm obviously against both.
|
On January 31 2019 02:04 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 01:53 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:09 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 00:49 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 23:31 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 20:46 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 17:26 explosivekangaroo wrote:On January 30 2019 07:50 TheYango wrote:
[quote]
It's not just "not wrong", it's actively recommended. Established medical organizations recommend a lot of vaccines for adults (yearly flu shot, tetanus booster every 10 years, pneumonia after age 65, etc.). It's just that when it comes to adults, we can't really make anyone do it because the the ethical/legal boundaries for medical autonomy are pretty clear-cut. If an adult doesn't want vaccines, we can't make them do it.
Children are just an ethical nightmare when it comes to medical practice because they don't have autonomy to make their own medical decisions, so shitty parents that don't make decisions in the best interest of their kids become a problem. The state can actually override a parent's medical decision making if they are deemed to be acting against the best interest of the child--generally only really invoked in life-saving procedures with clear benefit (e.g. a Jehovah's Witness who refuses life-saving blood transfusion for their kid, or a mother who refuses chemotherapy for a kid with lymphoma because she believes in homeopathy). It's very easy to find cases where this has gone to court.
Vaccines happen to occupy a troublesome space where because they are a form of preventative care rather than treatment, it's not really been established that medical providers or the state can override the parent's decision. Even though the same logic applies in theory, the nature of preventative care having probabilistic rather than deterministic benefit means that the same policies can't really be used (even though they should, IMO). I don't believe that the state should have the authority over the medical decisions concercning children. I think the best solution is to fund information campaigns. Honestly I compare not giving your kids vaccines akin to child abuse Yeah, I'm going to go with no on that one... Yeah I'm going with a low effort post on that... This is a discussion board, you can't just say "no u" and be content. Why exactly is it not child abuse when it could literally end up killing your child? And if that doesn't happen there's a chance of permanent damage. Hell, even if it doesn't end up killing your kid, it could end up killing someone else's due to weakened herd immunity. It's laughable that not vaccinating your child is even an option in today's society. I haven't put effort into all of my positions. I had a great childhood. If I didn't get measles as a teen and whichever ones I got as a child, it would have been 0.5% better. Thinking of all the legal things that I could have been subjected to and wasn't... they could have put me in a church, they could have taught me to hate the religious, or the gays, or the trans, or the foreigners, they could have pushed ideologies or expectations on me. I'm fine. Not ready to trade. This is a weird post and I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that since your childhood was pretty good, it isn't a big deal when infants die from preventable infection? Or are you saying because that didn't happen to you, it can't be that bad? Please clarify Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that. So when a baby dies from a preventable infection, what exactly does that mean? In your eyes, what occurred? When your parents decided to put infant children at risk of death, did they fail morally in any way? Morally? How does that even work? Obviously they failed based on a flawed reasoning.
So then my point is: It is a moral failing to choose not to vaccinate. Regardless of how well the person not being vaccinated does with the infection, we do know infants will die if infected. Choosing to take a chance your decision might make a baby die (by an unvaccinated person infecting an infant) is something someone should be severely punished for. Do you disagree?
|
On January 31 2019 02:21 Sermokala wrote:
-22 and a wind chill of -40. Still got the paper in a T-shirt and sweatpants.
Here in palatine, il it's -20 with the same wind chill. I left KC for this. Is it the premise of 2012 or Day After Tomorrow yet?
|
A brisk 64 F here in Phx (tho it should get to 73 soon). All this news makes me second guess wanting to move to the midwest or north east for law school...
|
On January 31 2019 02:38 On_Slaught wrote:
A brisk 64 F here in Phx (tho it should get to 73 soon). All this news makes me second guess wanting to move to the midwest or north east for law school...
Why in the world would you ever want to live in the midwest or northeast when the pacific northwest exists? I'll end my post here at risk of coming across as a supremacist
|
On January 31 2019 02:24 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 02:04 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:53 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:09 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 00:49 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 23:31 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 20:46 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 17:26 explosivekangaroo wrote:
[quote]
I don't believe that the state should have the authority over the medical decisions concercning children. I think the best solution is to fund information campaigns. Honestly I compare not giving your kids vaccines akin to child abuse Yeah, I'm going to go with no on that one... Yeah I'm going with a low effort post on that... This is a discussion board, you can't just say "no u" and be content. Why exactly is it not child abuse when it could literally end up killing your child? And if that doesn't happen there's a chance of permanent damage. Hell, even if it doesn't end up killing your kid, it could end up killing someone else's due to weakened herd immunity. It's laughable that not vaccinating your child is even an option in today's society. I haven't put effort into all of my positions. I had a great childhood. If I didn't get measles as a teen and whichever ones I got as a child, it would have been 0.5% better. Thinking of all the legal things that I could have been subjected to and wasn't... they could have put me in a church, they could have taught me to hate the religious, or the gays, or the trans, or the foreigners, they could have pushed ideologies or expectations on me. I'm fine. Not ready to trade. This is a weird post and I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that since your childhood was pretty good, it isn't a big deal when infants die from preventable infection? Or are you saying because that didn't happen to you, it can't be that bad? Please clarify Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that. So when a baby dies from a preventable infection, what exactly does that mean? In your eyes, what occurred? When your parents decided to put infant children at risk of death, did they fail morally in any way? Morally? How does that even work? Obviously they failed based on a flawed reasoning. So then my point is: It is a moral failing to choose not to vaccinate. Regardless of how well the person not being vaccinated does with the infection, we do know infants will die if infected. Choosing to take a chance your decision might make a baby die (by an unvaccinated person infecting an infant) is something someone should be severely punished for. Do you disagree?
Yes I do.
I suspect you go this far on the subject because you get no pushback. I'd be interested in taking the conversation to a subject where you would get pushback, to see if your beliefs stay as extreme. Do you believe a conservative upbringing is child abuse?
|
On January 31 2019 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 02:38 On_Slaught wrote:
A brisk 64 F here in Phx (tho it should get to 73 soon). All this news makes me second guess wanting to move to the midwest or north east for law school... Why in the world would you ever want to live in the midwest or northeast when the pacific northwest exists? I'll end my post here at risk of coming across as a supremacist
Why in the world would you ever want to live in the US when Mediterranean Europe exists? 
|
On January 31 2019 02:42 Mohdoo wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 02:38 On_Slaught wrote:
A brisk 64 F here in Phx (tho it should get to 73 soon). All this news makes me second guess wanting to move to the midwest or north east for law school... Why in the world would you ever want to live in the midwest or northeast when the pacific northwest exists? I'll end my post here at risk of coming across as a supremacist
I’ve lived in both and I’d still choose the Midwest
|
On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:
Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that.
So your disagreement is because you don't understand what the term "child abuse" actually means.
Not all child abuse cases end in the child being taken away from the family. Removing the child from their home is an option of last resort, because displacing a child comes with its own significant psychological trauma. Particularly in cases of neglect (and yes, neglect is a form of child abuse--and one of the most common ones) that are often due to poor parent knowledge/education, options which allow the abused child to return home are preferable to ones that involve them being taken away, if those investigating the issue deem the likely outcomes to be good.
Cases where victims of abuse have to be taken away from their homes generally involve relatively extreme cases of physical or sexual abuse. But those aren't the only instances of child abuse that exist.
Regarding the topic of discussion: failure to vaccinate could be argued as a form of neglect. Failure to provide adequate nutrition or routine medical care for a child are generally accepted as forms of neglect, and nutrition and route medical care are forms of preventative medicine, just like vaccination is. Where that actually lands *legally* is murky waters because different states have their own individual laws pertaining to child neglect.
|
In some states, neglect constitutes a lower finding of wrongful parental (in)action, so in that context, I do think it more accurate to refer to a lack of vaccination as neglect rather than abuse. That said, depending on the circumstances, I could see a parent’s failure to vaccinate constituting abuse, particularly where the child has a known, underlying vulnerability to something that could have been protected against.
For reference, in the state I did child abuse/neglect work in, a finding that a parent’s failure to prevent her three year old from wandering down the street without shoes on constituted neglect was upheld throughout the appeal process.
|
On January 31 2019 03:11 TheYango wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:
Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that. So your disagreement is because you don't understand what the term "child abuse" actually means.
Considering the other answers I've gotten so far I'm not sure I misunderstand. Sounded awfully like all the others were fine with putting me in the system.
|
On January 31 2019 02:29 ZerOCoolSC2 wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 02:21 Sermokala wrote:
-22 and a wind chill of -40. Still got the paper in a T-shirt and sweatpants. Here in palatine, il it's -20 with the same wind chill. I left KC for this. Is it the premise of 2012 or Day After Tomorrow yet?
Its actually as accurate today after tomorrow. The reason why its so cold is beacuse its the air thats suppose to directly over the polar caps. Its a polar vortex of cold where the air pressure is low enough to bring air from as high in the atmosphere as its safe to.
This weather system is actually a result of global warming as it destabilizes the weather patterns that are normally in place to prevent this from happening. Sunday, where I live it will be 42 degrees, Thats global warming chaos for you.
I can't imagine how the Somalian immigrants are doing I hope we don't have some horror story about that in the coming days.
|
Stay safe sermo (and others)
|
On January 31 2019 00:34 Velr wrote:
To be fair, a good part of the anti-GMO crowd does actually think "Gentech = Unnatural = Evilmutantplants = Weareallgonnadie" and has no clue about why it is actually problematic.
Useless hyperbole here or a big citation needed.
|
Every open commentary space on every german newspaper or, even worse, facebook.
(Zeit and Spiegel mainly)
|
On January 31 2019 02:44 Nebuchad wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 02:24 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 02:04 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:53 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 01:32 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 01:09 Mohdoo wrote:On January 31 2019 00:49 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 23:31 Excludos wrote:On January 30 2019 20:46 Nebuchad wrote:On January 30 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:
[quote]
Honestly I compare not giving your kids vaccines akin to child abuse Yeah, I'm going to go with no on that one... Yeah I'm going with a low effort post on that... This is a discussion board, you can't just say "no u" and be content. Why exactly is it not child abuse when it could literally end up killing your child? And if that doesn't happen there's a chance of permanent damage. Hell, even if it doesn't end up killing your kid, it could end up killing someone else's due to weakened herd immunity. It's laughable that not vaccinating your child is even an option in today's society. I haven't put effort into all of my positions. I had a great childhood. If I didn't get measles as a teen and whichever ones I got as a child, it would have been 0.5% better. Thinking of all the legal things that I could have been subjected to and wasn't... they could have put me in a church, they could have taught me to hate the religious, or the gays, or the trans, or the foreigners, they could have pushed ideologies or expectations on me. I'm fine. Not ready to trade. This is a weird post and I don't understand what you are saying. Are you saying that since your childhood was pretty good, it isn't a big deal when infants die from preventable infection? Or are you saying because that didn't happen to you, it can't be that bad? Please clarify Child abuse is a big word to me. It implies that the kid would be so much better off with some other parents that the state has to intervene. I find it pretty insulting to child abuse victims that you would compare their experience to mine, and I don't want laws that reflect that. So when a baby dies from a preventable infection, what exactly does that mean? In your eyes, what occurred? When your parents decided to put infant children at risk of death, did they fail morally in any way? Morally? How does that even work? Obviously they failed based on a flawed reasoning. So then my point is: It is a moral failing to choose not to vaccinate. Regardless of how well the person not being vaccinated does with the infection, we do know infants will die if infected. Choosing to take a chance your decision might make a baby die (by an unvaccinated person infecting an infant) is something someone should be severely punished for. Do you disagree? Yes I do. I suspect you go this far on the subject because you get no pushback. I'd be interested in taking the conversation to a subject where you would get pushback, to see if your beliefs stay as extreme. Do you believe a conservative upbringing is child abuse?
I do not think conservative upbringing constitutes child abuse because conservative upbringings do not directly translate to increased medical risk. In the case of refusal to vaccinate, there are a few things to consider:
1. What is the reason for not vaccinating? If I wanted an abortion so that I could drink alcohol, that would make me a bad person. But if I wanted an abortion so that my wife doesn't die giving birth, I would not be a bad person.
2. What is the cost of vaccination? If the parents can't afford to vaccinate, they are not bad parents, but they are dumb and should look into finding other funding
3. What are the risks of not vaccinating? If we assume a child could die from not being vaccinated, and that an infected child can spread their infection to an infant that would die from the infection, it means (1) and (2) need to be major.
In essence, (1) and (2) need to generally greatly overwhelm (3) in terms of scientific validity. In accordance with modern medicine, the medical risks of vaccination combined with other reasons to not vaccinate do not surpass the risks of not vaccinating.
When we apply a similar thought process to "being conservative", we do not get as clear a picture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
