|
On February 18 2015 05:06 Parnage wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 05:00 Numy wrote:On February 18 2015 04:48 ComaDose wrote:#callingfots hehehe yeah canadian anti-vaxers are just as embarrassing as the american ones. I think there are a few ontario people here! we should have a shindig. I'm still confused why that's even allowed. Surely it should be illegal to put others endanger like that. I mean I get people being idiots but I don't get the law allowing them to be potential threats to non-idiots. It's complicated. On one hand, you don't want people not vaccinated running around. However you also don't want to set a precedent that can let peoples personal well being be left up to a government that is often too large to properly react to individual's needs. Eventually a case will hit the big courts and it'll come down to parental rights do not overcome the right of public safety. Or something like that.
I still don't really see it as that complicated. You get vaccinated unless you have a medical reason which you can't. Where's the complication in that?
If we take a look at smoking we see the government putting in laws to prevent smoking effecting public safety. This happens all around the world and I believe in America too? Or can you just smoke everywhere there?
|
United States47024 Posts
On February 18 2015 05:09 Parnage wrote:
If you mean that people on both sides can be anti-vaccination then you are correct but I don't understand the people who'd try to assign blame to a political belief.
Unless you consider stupidity and ignorance to be political beliefs.
I generally tend to be pretty apathetic toward most divisive political issues and give both sides of the picture the benefit of the doubt, but the anti-vax movement is probably the stupidest movement I've ever seen.
|
On February 18 2015 05:09 Parnage wrote:
Eh? Nothing party line about it, it's just how the system of law works(in theory anyway)
If you mean that people on both sides can be anti-vaccination then you are correct but I don't understand the people who'd try to assign blame to a political belief.
I mean, normally when you see some stupid fad following like this crop up, it's often kept to one political party or the other because that's how a lot of peoples' opinions end up gravitating (when they identify with a party, their thoughts often align with that party - blah blah sheeple and all that). It's funny to see this one being on both sides of the fence.
And when I say funny, I mean in a tongue in cheek, objective way. It's quite pitiful that sicknesses that were nearly eradicated are cropping back up due to incredible closed-mindedness.
|
Here in austria they are
There's a party specifically for this
|
Intentional wavebait successful
|
On February 18 2015 05:05 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 05:04 Gahlo wrote:On February 18 2015 05:00 Numy wrote:On February 18 2015 04:48 ComaDose wrote:#callingfots hehehe yeah canadian anti-vaxers are just as embarrassing as the american ones. I think there are a few ontario people here! we should have a shindig. I'm still confused why that's even allowed. Surely it should be illegal to put others endanger like that. I mean I get people being idiots but I don't get the law allowing them to be potential threats to non-idiots. People have the right to be stupid and make stupid decisions. Surely only if those stupid decisions don't damage the lives of others? It's like drunk driving. Sure you can just go and kill yourself but you can also harm other people so it's illegal.
I think the argument would go that not being vaccinated doesn't directly harm other people and that being sick can. In the same way with drunk driving being that being drunk doesn't kill people but driving while drunk can. People aren't going to ban recreational consumption of alcohol because of drunk driving.
On February 18 2015 05:17 WaveofShadow wrote:
Intentional wavebait successful
Lies. Wavebait is only such if it is by accident.
|
On February 18 2015 04:15 Requizen wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 04:13 jcarlsoniv wrote:
that awkward moment when you're talking to your good work friend about league and he says "we should play some time"
hnnnnng Non-internet friends are inevitably Silver at best except for that one dude who is inexplicably Diamond by what seems to be sheer luck.
All my RL friends are diamond.... meanwhile i'm stuck at gold 
|
On February 18 2015 05:20 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 04:15 Requizen wrote:On February 18 2015 04:13 jcarlsoniv wrote:
that awkward moment when you're talking to your good work friend about league and he says "we should play some time"
hnnnnng Non-internet friends are inevitably Silver at best except for that one dude who is inexplicably Diamond by what seems to be sheer luck. All my RL friends are diamond.... meanwhile i'm stuck at gold
Speaking of which, Ketara come duo with me soon.
|
That analogy was kind of bullshit on my part. It's just something that there are no downsides to. One might say you taking away personal freedoms for the sake of public safety but the government already does this in other situations. It's even worse in that the child not getting vaccinated could be harmed while they have zero control over the stupidity of their parents.
|
On February 18 2015 05:20 wei2coolman wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 04:15 Requizen wrote:On February 18 2015 04:13 jcarlsoniv wrote:
that awkward moment when you're talking to your good work friend about league and he says "we should play some time"
hnnnnng Non-internet friends are inevitably Silver at best except for that one dude who is inexplicably Diamond by what seems to be sheer luck. All my RL friends are diamond.... meanwhile i'm stuck at gold
lol rekt
|
I'm trying to find a proper Wavebait image but this is all I got.
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 18 2015 05:22 Numy wrote:
That analogy was kind of bullshit on my part. It's just something that there are no downsides to. One might say you taking away personal freedoms for the sake of public safety but the government already does this in other situations. It's even worse in that the child not getting vaccinated could be harmed while they have zero control over the stupidity of their parents.
In terms of getting people to actually vaccinate their kids making vaccinating mandatory is actually less effective than simply making vaccination more convenient than non-vaccination via forms and such. Don't ask me exactly how, I heard it on a news story that compared the effectiveness of the laws in different states.
|
On February 18 2015 05:22 Numy wrote:
That analogy was kind of bullshit on my part. It's just something that there are no downsides to. One might say you taking away personal freedoms for the sake of public safety but the government already does this in other situations. It's even worse in that the child not getting vaccinated could be harmed while they have zero control over the stupidity of their parents.
Yup. The entire thing is tragic.
On February 18 2015 05:24 phyvo wrote:I'm trying to find a proper Wavebait image but this is all I got. + Show Spoiler +
Well, it matches the color of his hair. lol
|
On February 18 2015 05:09 Numy wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 05:06 Parnage wrote:On February 18 2015 05:00 Numy wrote:On February 18 2015 04:48 ComaDose wrote:#callingfots hehehe yeah canadian anti-vaxers are just as embarrassing as the american ones. I think there are a few ontario people here! we should have a shindig. I'm still confused why that's even allowed. Surely it should be illegal to put others endanger like that. I mean I get people being idiots but I don't get the law allowing them to be potential threats to non-idiots. It's complicated. On one hand, you don't want people not vaccinated running around. However you also don't want to set a precedent that can let peoples personal well being be left up to a government that is often too large to properly react to individual's needs. Eventually a case will hit the big courts and it'll come down to parental rights do not overcome the right of public safety. Or something like that. I still don't really see it as that complicated. You get vaccinated unless you have a medical reason which you can't. Where's the complication in that? If we take a look at smoking we see the government putting in laws to prevent smoking effecting public safety. This happens all around the world and I believe in America too? Or can you just smoke everywhere there?
You have to set the precedent for public safety first Numy. You can't just force people to do something without general a decision of courts behind it. Most likely it'll take a supreme court ruling to ultimately force vaccinations on children of unwilling parents.
No, you can't say it's just like smoking either, that's not how the law works here. I mean you could ignore all the legality but if that doesn't come across as just a tad dystopian to you I honestly don't know what to tell ya then.
|
What kind of picture would you have wanted to find exactly? I mean that's a wave and bait so....
|
On February 18 2015 05:25 Parnage wrote:Show nested quote +On February 18 2015 05:09 Numy wrote:On February 18 2015 05:06 Parnage wrote:On February 18 2015 05:00 Numy wrote:On February 18 2015 04:48 ComaDose wrote:#callingfots hehehe yeah canadian anti-vaxers are just as embarrassing as the american ones. I think there are a few ontario people here! we should have a shindig. I'm still confused why that's even allowed. Surely it should be illegal to put others endanger like that. I mean I get people being idiots but I don't get the law allowing them to be potential threats to non-idiots. It's complicated. On one hand, you don't want people not vaccinated running around. However you also don't want to set a precedent that can let peoples personal well being be left up to a government that is often too large to properly react to individual's needs. Eventually a case will hit the big courts and it'll come down to parental rights do not overcome the right of public safety. Or something like that. I still don't really see it as that complicated. You get vaccinated unless you have a medical reason which you can't. Where's the complication in that? If we take a look at smoking we see the government putting in laws to prevent smoking effecting public safety. This happens all around the world and I believe in America too? Or can you just smoke everywhere there? You have to set the precedent for public safety first Numy. You can't just force people to do something without general a decision of courts behind it. Most likely it'll take a supreme court ruling to ultimately force vaccinations on children of unwilling parents. No, you can't say it's just like smoking either, that's not how the law works here. I mean you could ignore all the legality but if that doesn't come across as just a tad dystopian to you I honestly don't know what to tell ya then.
Don't really know if your law is similar to here or not, I think it isn't which confused me more. I get what you saying though. It's one of the instances that makes me feel that the system of law needs more fine tuning. I know I get into arguments with my cousin(He's practicing here now) about law all the time, although he gets more angry at it lol. That's supposedly with us having a good system and constitution.
|
United States47024 Posts
On February 18 2015 05:18 Gahlo wrote:
I think the argument would go that not being vaccinated doesn't directly harm other people and that being sick can. In the same way with drunk driving being that being drunk doesn't kill people but driving while drunk can. People aren't going to ban recreational consumption of alcohol because of drunk driving.
I would be OK without mandatory vaccinations if it meant you could take someone to court over someone else's child getting your child sick because they didn't get vaccinated.
|
Parnage, I like you, but there is just absolutely 0 argument against required vaccinations for the public. People can hide behind the "but the government is forcing us to do things" argument all they want, but it's 100% bullshit.
If people really want the choice of whether or not to vaccinate, then fine, they must be prepared to be quarantined in their home without any outside interaction whatsoever for the rest of their lives. Putting other people (and their own kids) at risk for terrible diseases WE HAVE CURES AND PREVENTIONS FOR is absolute idiocy any way you look at it.
|
|
|
Parnage isn't saying there is an argument against it so much as saying law isn't there for it. It would require setting a public safety precedent which could then be used for other unforeseen things. At least if I'm understanding him right.
|
On February 18 2015 05:26 WaveofShadow wrote:
What kind of picture would you have wanted to find exactly? I mean that's a wave and bait so....
Ideally someone would have taken a picture of a tsunami approaching a chocolate cake moments before impact and somehow managed to survive. I just hoped to find a funny photoshop of it though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Bry6__1IIAAXzO9.jpg)
