|
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 18:17 MightyBeast wrote:
Federally subsidized housing should be removed and eliminated all across America. If you can’t or don’t pay rent where you live you have no place bothering those that do. Get out of the country
Wow, this is psychopath behaviour right here. Zero empathy, or even ability to consider what might happen to yourself in the future. I hope you never get put in a position where you lose your job and is unable to find a new for any various reason, while people yell at you to "get out of the country". Even more so, where are they suppose to go? If everyone subscribed to the same way of thinking, there would be no "other country" to "get out" to.
|
I'd say its a pretty clear troll. Coming out of nowhere with a statement that is obviously designed to rile people up.
|
On January 31 2019 16:07 explosivekangaroo wrote:
I'm for vaccinations, but imagine if you are a reasonable scientific-minded person living in a religious country that forces your children to undergo an absurd medical ritual.
It's not hard to see why some would be against the state having the authority on medical procedures.
I think you can agree with me that the two are not equal, as one is based on belief and the other in evidence. I completely get that this is how people might feel, but fortunately science doesn't care about your beliefs or feelings, it just is. We can not subscribe to every possible hogwash religious rituals across the world, but we can collect everyone under the umbrella of science, and we should.
|
On January 31 2019 18:17 MightyBeast wrote:
Federally subsidized housing should be removed and eliminated all across America. If you can’t or don’t pay rent where you live you have no place bothering those that do. Get out of the country
User was temp banned for this post.
This post might as well have said: the elderly deserve to be homeless.
|
Norway28563 Posts
On January 31 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 16:07 explosivekangaroo wrote:
I'm for vaccinations, but imagine if you are a reasonable scientific-minded person living in a religious country that forces your children to undergo an absurd medical ritual.
It's not hard to see why some would be against the state having the authority on medical procedures. I think you can agree with me that the two are not equal, as one is based on belief and the other in evidence. I completely get that this is how people might feel, but fortunately science doesn't care about your beliefs or feelings, it just is. We can not subscribe to every possible hogwash religious rituals across the world, but we can collect everyone under the umbrella of science, and we should.
how can we collect everyone under the umbrella of science?
|
With regards to vaccinations people still haven't answered one question:
Do you really think a kid would be better off in the state's child protection system and vaccinated than with their parents but unvaccinated?
I get the feeling that they wouldn't. You are ruining the kid's life by removing them(often) from parents who love them and shoving them into a system that leads many times to homelessness, crime and drugs.
The lengths people are willing to go to to punish people who disagree with them are pretty ridiculous.
|
You don't need to put the kid in CPS to vaccinate them. It literally takes a doctor visit.
|
On January 31 2019 21:32 Jockmcplop wrote:
With regards to vaccinations people still haven't answered one question:
Do you really think a kid would be better off in the state's child protection system and vaccinated than with their parents but unvaccinated?
I get the feeling that they wouldn't. You are ruining the kid's life by removing them(often) from parents who love them and shoving them into a system that leads many times to homelessness, crime and drugs.
The lengths people are willing to go to to punish people who disagree with them are pretty ridiculous. No, but you don't need to take a child permanently away from its parents to vaccinate. A 5 minute visit by a nurse is enough.
|
Requiring that parents vaccinate their children is not the same thing as a hair trigger parental rights termination. There can be clear legal incentives for vaccinations that do not implicate "being put into the system."
|
ok well it seemed that a few pages ago everyone was arguing that kids who aren't being vaccinated should be taken away from their parents. I'm glad that everyone seems to no longer think that.
|
On January 31 2019 21:41 Jockmcplop wrote:
ok well it seemed that a few pages ago everyone was arguing that kids who aren't being vaccinated should be taken away from their parents. I'm glad that everyone seems to no longer think that. I think your confusing people calling it child abuse with removing a child from a home. It can be a solution to child abuse but its an measure of last resort, not the default reaction.
|
No one was arguing that kids were to be taken away from their parents. People were arguing that it was child abuse in the form of neglect. Kids being taken away from their parents because of neglect occurs only in the very extreme circumstances, which no one was arguing the failure of vaccinating their kids were.
Child Safety Services are there to protect the child, and in most cases of neglect/abuse the optimal place for the kid to be is with his/her family. This is why they tend to (or should) give an helping hand in most of the time to the family. At least that is how it works in Norway. However since those benign cases (which are most of them) rarely creates headlines, people often have a misunderstanding of how helpful child safety services are to a family that struggles or are ignorant of the child's needs.
|
On January 31 2019 22:02 Neneu wrote:
No one was arguing that kids were to be taken away from their parents. People were arguing that it was child abuse in the form of neglect. Kids being taken away from their parents because of neglect occurs only in the very extreme circumstances, which no one was arguing the failure of vaccinating their kids were.
Child Safety Services are there to protect the child, and in most cases of neglect/abuse the optimal place for the kid to be is with his/hers family. This is why they tend to (or should) give an helping hand in most of the time to the family. At least that is how it works in Norway. However since those benign cases (which are most of them) rarely creates headlines, people often have a misunderstanding of how helpful child safety services are to a family that struggles or are ignorant of the child's needs.
It varies state by state, but that's generally the case in the US as well.
|
On January 31 2019 21:25 Liquid`Drone wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 31 2019 16:07 explosivekangaroo wrote:
I'm for vaccinations, but imagine if you are a reasonable scientific-minded person living in a religious country that forces your children to undergo an absurd medical ritual.
It's not hard to see why some would be against the state having the authority on medical procedures. I think you can agree with me that the two are not equal, as one is based on belief and the other in evidence. I completely get that this is how people might feel, but fortunately science doesn't care about your beliefs or feelings, it just is. We can not subscribe to every possible hogwash religious rituals across the world, but we can collect everyone under the umbrella of science, and we should. how can we collect everyone under the umbrella of science?
With laws? Isn't that what we've been arguing about the last few pages? Whether vaccination (an offspring of science) should be mandatory or not?
|
On January 31 2019 23:17 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 21:25 Liquid`Drone wrote:On January 31 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 31 2019 16:07 explosivekangaroo wrote:
I'm for vaccinations, but imagine if you are a reasonable scientific-minded person living in a religious country that forces your children to undergo an absurd medical ritual.
It's not hard to see why some would be against the state having the authority on medical procedures. I think you can agree with me that the two are not equal, as one is based on belief and the other in evidence. I completely get that this is how people might feel, but fortunately science doesn't care about your beliefs or feelings, it just is. We can not subscribe to every possible hogwash religious rituals across the world, but we can collect everyone under the umbrella of science, and we should. how can we collect everyone under the umbrella of science? With laws? Isn't that what we've been arguing about the last few pages? Whether vaccination (an offspring of science) should be mandatory or not? I'd say proper education goes a very long way to getting people to trust in science more.
|
United States42017 Posts
On January 31 2019 23:17 Excludos wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 21:25 Liquid`Drone wrote:On January 31 2019 19:33 Excludos wrote:On January 31 2019 16:07 explosivekangaroo wrote:
I'm for vaccinations, but imagine if you are a reasonable scientific-minded person living in a religious country that forces your children to undergo an absurd medical ritual.
It's not hard to see why some would be against the state having the authority on medical procedures. I think you can agree with me that the two are not equal, as one is based on belief and the other in evidence. I completely get that this is how people might feel, but fortunately science doesn't care about your beliefs or feelings, it just is. We can not subscribe to every possible hogwash religious rituals across the world, but we can collect everyone under the umbrella of science, and we should. how can we collect everyone under the umbrella of science? With laws? Isn't that what we've been arguing about the last few pages? Whether vaccination (an offspring of science) should be mandatory or not?
It’s a question of societal freedoms, not science. Someone could agree with all the science but think smallpox works as a valuable check on human population. The question is whether a society should allow members to be on team smallpox in the name of freedom.
|
On January 31 2019 15:46 iPlaY.NettleS wrote:Show nested quote +On January 31 2019 13:16 KwarK wrote:On January 31 2019 03:48 Nebuchad wrote:On January 31 2019 03:11 TheYango wrote: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. Or just forcing your parents to get you vaccinated. How very authoritarian. And not something i can agree with. Many these days do not have the immune system to cope with vaccines.Heck just two weeks ago one of the top UK cancer researchers died minutes after recieving the yellow fever vaccine! https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/jan/11/top-cancer-scientist-prof-martin-gore-dies-after-rare-reaction-to-yellow-fever-vaccinationA more moderate position on vaccines is required.Recognising that there are risks.Being on either extreme is not good. To get back on topic here, I’m hopeful that Schultz will run.For the laughs.But he’s dreaming if he thinks republicans will vote for the Starbucks CEO as he claims.
That reaction is absurdly rare (there is already a warning against anyone his age getting the vaccine).
Furthermore, there is no explanation in the article about what actually killed him.
The risks of all regularly used vaccines are ridiculously low. Taking a "moderation" stance is a false equivalency that serves no real purpose. There are already safeguards in place for the exceedingly rare cases where vaccines may cause medical complications.
It’s a question of societal freedoms, not science. Someone could agree with all the science but think smallpox works as a valuable check on human population. The question is whether a society should allow members to be on team smallpox in the name of freedom.
So, side note (not that it takes away from your actual point), but we don't actually vaccinate against smallpox. First off, smallpox has been eradicated, and second, the vaccine is probably the most dangerous vaccine that we have, so the general public doesn't get it. The only time the smallpox vaccine is used is on military service members when they're being deployed overseas.
|
The problem arises when there is someone who cannot be vaccinated or has a reduced immunes system(a child with cancer) in the same class as someone who chooses not to be vaccinated. The child with an immune deficiency is at much greater risk than the child whose parents are scared of vaccinations. The law says that both children have a right to be there, but we all know that the child with cancer is going to be forced to pull out of public school for their own safety. I’m for letting people have the personal freedom to not vaccinate their children, but I would like laws in place that make it clear they are responsible for the burden of that decision. Like finding a new school/class without at risk children.
|
|
|
The first problems you just wrote has nothing to do with "science lying" but rather lack of regulation and control on powerful pharmaceutical companies. The second isn't even a problem vaguely related with science.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
