313
New Hampshire's GOP are taking a stand—against the polio vaccine
(www.motherjones.com)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2024
313 points (98.5% liked)
politics
18075 readers
3028 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect!
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Kids can't protect themselves. They don't have the ability to make their own informed choices. Please don't destroy the evidence-based protections we have that keep them from dying, being crippled, having to get a machine to breathe for them permanently, etc. We have decades of data and it's overwhelmingly clear: vaccines save lives and do so incredibly safely.
Every time a child is seriously harmed because a parent ignored vaccine guidelines the parents should be charged with criminal neglect. It's ~~no different~~ not different enough than if you fed your children say, mercury, and then claimed you believed it was helpful because of Facebook gurus or similarly unaccredited sources. In both situations a child is being permanently harmed due to choices they have no ability to understand, resist or protest and thus we need laws to protect them.
Also, not only are the anti-vaxxer parents endangering their own children, but also everyone else's by increasing risk of their kids becoming vectors/reservoirs for infection and potential mutation into new strains that could evade current vaccines. "High mutation rate is an important characteristic of viruses that can enable them to evade immune responses and propagate infection." So not only are anti-vaxxers making choices for their own kids, but potentially also others' kids. It's not guaranteed but it's rolling some high-stakes dice.
Not to forget, making choices for the very weakest we have: Children that are too sick to be vaccinated. Your “uneasiness” towards a little jab millions of people have survived absolutely fine might take someone else's little wonder away. Because you circle jerked a bit on facefuck or shitter.
Also any kids who do get vaccinated are more at risk.
Absolutely. Yet, neglecting the sick in a Facebook-fueled self-righteous frenzy of flawed “uhm akchually” is even more disgusting in my eyes than endangering the other healthy children is.
They are a afraid. And rather than facing the fear in a responsible and healthy way they hide behind conspiracy. It's oddly paralleled to political conspiracies. The mental health crisis has a far bigger reach than just horrible gun problems. People refuse to accept their failed attempts to rationalize their own feelings of fear. It's scary thing to have the world dying. I wish they would just own it.
I totally agree that children should be vaccinated.
But I just want to point out that there is a difference between actively doing something to harm your kid, and passively not doing something to protect your kid.
Lack of protection is not equivalent to active harm.
Parents should still be required to vaccinate their kids.
Letting your kids play in traffic isn't acceptable even though it is passively not doing something to protect them. That's because being different doesn't mean that one is always fine.
Not vaccinating kids* is like letting your kids play in traffic and letting them drag other kids into traffic too.
*the exception are kids who can't be vaccinated for medical reasons
Negligence is absolutely a form of harm.
I'll upvote, agree they aren't exactly the same, and edit but I'll also argue they should both be illegal. That is admittedly opinion but let me explain. My reasoning is there are other examples of passively, but still criminally, failing to protect a child: improper storage of firearms, explosives, or chemicals. Not using seatbelts or safety seats. Failing to secure medical aid for a desperately ill child. I am not a lawyer, but those seem to set precedents where the adult wasn't actively putting a gun in the kid's hand or causing a fatal illness but they were still prosecuted.
Given the prevalence of anti-vaxxer parents, it seems current law doesn't make failure to vaccinate your young child a criminal charge. My argument, and I know there are other views, is it should be (although defining criminal limits would require work). We protect kids in other situations where there's no ill intent and IMO that's a good thing. I know my position errs towards caution and is somewhat extreme, but polio is pretty extreme. The arguments that anti-vaxxers bring eerily mirror those brought by people who resisted seat belts (and I know you clearly aren't one, just continuing the reasoning). 40 years later I think most agree mandatory seat belts proved to be a good and reasonable requirement that saves thousands every year.