Chris Chripie is getting ripped for his 'insane' comment on vaccinations

[C_Clayton_Jones]

If he walked it back, then he is smart.

It would have been a lot smarter to not say it in the first place

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

What's frustrating, of course, is that the health of our children is at risk because of such irresponsible statements.

 

[Dana7360]

So, you do not believe that children should have special legal protection. Therefore, there should be no such thing as statutory rape, child endearment laws, child neglect laws, child molestation laws, and child abuse laws. in addition, you would give children the right to make legal contracts and to be held accountable for any contract that they sign. if a parent fails to feed his child, the government should stay out of the matter, right?

I don't think that you have thought this through.

Parents make decisions for their children. That is the way it has always been. When a child has appendicitis, their parent must consent to any medical treatment. If the parents want to reject treatment in favor of prayer, that is their right. And it leads to the child dying. Do I like that it happens? No. But that's how a free society works.

It's a crime in America.

Trials for Parents Who Chose Faith Over Medicine - NYTimes.com

The parents were put on trial and found guilty. The state supreme court upheld the ruling.

Kara Neumann case - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

They aren't the only ones who have caused the death of their child and then found themselves prosecuted for a crime. Usually manslaughter. I don't know about all the outcomes of all the cases but I wouldn't be surprised it most, if not all, resulted in the parents being found guilty of a crime usually manslaughter.

 

[Dana7360]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

Yes it is viable.

It was done for at least 2 decades that I know of. I think it was started in the 30s, FDR I think started it, but I wasn't born yet so I can't comment on that time.

In the 1960s and 1970s it was mandatory and taken out of the hands of the parents.

It was done in the schools. All the kids were lined up in either the gym or cafeteria and everyone of them were vaccinated. The only exceptions being those who already had the vaccination.

The result was many childhood diseases that killed so many were eradicated. The only way to do that is for EVERYONE to be vaccinated.

The ONLY reason children are no longer vaccinated for small pox is that it's not necessary anymore. The reason for that is because everyone who was born up to the 1980s has that small pox scar on their upper arm. I know some who have two scars. I have never encountered anyone in my age group or older who doesn't have that scar. That scar and vaccination is the ONLY reason why that disease is eradicated and no one has to get the vaccination anymore.

But hey, people have the right to put babies at risk for death don't they? People have the right to kill other people's babies don't they?

That's who is most open for those diseases because they're too young to be vaccinated. So a child who didn't get vaccinated and has one of those diseases gives it to a baby and that baby dies.

 

[Dana7360]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

we could keep them on-the-hook financially for any medical care needed to keep their kids alive. Thats what rw'ers claim to want anyway right? with their "let 'em die" war cry. Personal responsibility rw'ers. You have to pay every thin dime out-of-pocket for any illness gotten due directly to lack of immunization

I would also include those that infect babies and cause their death.

If you cause someone else's baby to die because you didn't vaccinate your kid, you should be held liable for all costs the parents of the baby had to pay. They should also be prosecuted for killing an innocent baby.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Every parent who does not use regular medicine as a part of their health care regimen for very ill children must be prosecuted. A child who is not vaccinated for yet contracts polio must be removed from the parents' custody and visitation forever, and the parents must pay for their child's care of the rest of the child's life. That can be done by judgment, and if the law is changed by the legislature, the law can be overturned by the judges.

 

[JakeStarkey]

I remember how excited my parents and my sibs and I were to get the Salk vaccine.

It should be mandatory, yes.

 

[bendog]

Anti-vaccine movement is giving diseases a 2nd life
Jenny McCarthy should roast in hell.

 

[SwimExpert]

Children have to reach a certain age before they can be vaccinated. All not yet at that age are at risk.

Twelve months old. Keep your kid at home if you don't want him to get sick.

What about FREEEEEEDOM?????

Making your own choices is freedom.

 

[SwimExpert]

Not when it comes to public health. Quarantine measures can be forced. As can curfews and other restrictions when it comes to public safety.

How did you feel about forcing this woman?

She did not need to be.

Says you. I guess the question is, who get's to play God this week?

 

[rdean]

Hard to believe that vaccines available for over 50 years are now viewed as evil by conservatives

Why? I would think it's something to be expected. And they sink lower and lower into ignorant insanity.

 

[rdean]

Children have to reach a certain age before they can be vaccinated. All not yet at that age are at risk.

Twelve months old. Keep your kid at home if you don't want him to get sick.

What about FREEEEEEDOM?????

Making your own choices is freedom.

Not if it puts my family in danger.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

we could keep them on-the-hook financially for any medical care needed to keep their kids alive. Thats what rw'ers claim to want anyway right? with their "let 'em die" war cry. Personal responsibility rw'ers. You have to pay every thin dime out-of-pocket for any illness gotten due directly to lack of immunization

I would also include those that infect babies and cause their death.

If you cause someone else's baby to die because you didn't vaccinate your kid, you should be held liable for all costs the parents of the baby had to pay. They should also be prosecuted for killing an innocent baby.

This is a slippery slope.

I have never had a flu or pneumonia vaccine. If someone comes in contact with me, gets the flu and dies, am I responsible?

How would you prove cause and effect?

 

[rdean]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

we could keep them on-the-hook financially for any medical care needed to keep their kids alive. Thats what rw'ers claim to want anyway right? with their "let 'em die" war cry. Personal responsibility rw'ers. You have to pay every thin dime out-of-pocket for any illness gotten due directly to lack of immunization

I would also include those that infect babies and cause their death.

If you cause someone else's baby to die because you didn't vaccinate your kid, you should be held liable for all costs the parents of the baby had to pay. They should also be prosecuted for killing an innocent baby.

This is a slippery slope.

I have never had a flu or pneumonia vaccine. If someone comes in contact with me, gets the flu and dies, am I responsible?

How would you prove cause and effect?

I had the flu every year until I started getting the vaccine. Literally every year. Twice, I was hospitalized with pneumonia when I was suffering from the flu.
Since getting the flu vaccine and the pneumonia vaccine I have not had either. And that covers the last 10 or 15 years. Except the year they ran out of flu vaccine and didn't get vaccinated. That year I got the flu. Now those vaccines may not be doing any good. Maybe it's all coincidence. But that doesn't mean I will stop getting them.

 

[Dana7360]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

we could keep them on-the-hook financially for any medical care needed to keep their kids alive. Thats what rw'ers claim to want anyway right? with their "let 'em die" war cry. Personal responsibility rw'ers. You have to pay every thin dime out-of-pocket for any illness gotten due directly to lack of immunization

I would also include those that infect babies and cause their death.

If you cause someone else's baby to die because you didn't vaccinate your kid, you should be held liable for all costs the parents of the baby had to pay. They should also be prosecuted for killing an innocent baby.

This is a slippery slope.

I have never had a flu or pneumonia vaccine. If someone comes in contact with me, gets the flu and dies, am I responsible?

How would you prove cause and effect?

I'm not talking about the flu.

I'm talking about the measles, whooping cough, polio and other childhood diseases that most of us have been vaccinated for when we were young. When we were most susceptible to contracting it and dying.

Yes the flu does kill but it's really hard to pin point who you got it from. Unlike the diseases I listed above. It's usually easy to find out where a person was exposed to it because it's not something that's common to contract.

You made the conscience choice to not have a flu shot. You're an adult and have the right to make that choice for yourself. You also have an established immune system. However a baby doesn't make that choice. A baby can't make that choice. A baby can't get vaccinated for something if it's too young for the vaccination.

 

[Ravi]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

Yes it is viable.

It was done for at least 2 decades that I know of. I think it was started in the 30s, FDR I think started it, but I wasn't born yet so I can't comment on that time.

In the 1960s and 1970s it was mandatory and taken out of the hands of the parents.

It was done in the schools. All the kids were lined up in either the gym or cafeteria and everyone of them were vaccinated. The only exceptions being those who already had the vaccination.

The result was many childhood diseases that killed so many were eradicated. The only way to do that is for EVERYONE to be vaccinated.

The ONLY reason children are no longer vaccinated for small pox is that it's not necessary anymore. The reason for that is because everyone who was born up to the 1980s has that small pox scar on their upper arm. I know some who have two scars. I have never encountered anyone in my age group or older who doesn't have that scar. That scar and vaccination is the ONLY reason why that disease is eradicated and no one has to get the vaccination anymore.

But hey, people have the right to put babies at risk for death don't they? People have the right to kill other people's babies don't they?

That's who is most open for those diseases because they're too young to be vaccinated. So a child who didn't get vaccinated and has one of those diseases gives it to a baby and that baby dies.

I did not know that, thank you.

 

[NYcarbineer]

The GOP prez hopefuls are suffering from Rightwingphobia.

 

[Dana7360]

If people want to risk their children's lives so be it.

Really?

I'm still not understanding this line of thinking, you're basically saying society has no duty to protect children who are too young to make wise decisions related to their health and safety from the occasional parent who is also not wise enough.

Like if I decided to lock my infant in the car all night outside the strip club since I didn't want go get a baby sitter you'd be okay with it?

Not a bad point.

I am torn on this. I think parents that refuse to vaccinate their children are misguided fools that get their information from non-credible sources.

But I also don't see forcing people to be vaccinated as a viable option.

So the compromise is to keep these people out of the public if the disease is very contagious, as is the case with measles.

Yes it is viable.

It was done for at least 2 decades that I know of. I think it was started in the 30s, FDR I think started it, but I wasn't born yet so I can't comment on that time.

In the 1960s and 1970s it was mandatory and taken out of the hands of the parents.

It was done in the schools. All the kids were lined up in either the gym or cafeteria and everyone of them were vaccinated. The only exceptions being those who already had the vaccination.

The result was many childhood diseases that killed so many were eradicated. The only way to do that is for EVERYONE to be vaccinated.

The ONLY reason children are no longer vaccinated for small pox is that it's not necessary anymore. The reason for that is because everyone who was born up to the 1980s has that small pox scar on their upper arm. I know some who have two scars. I have never encountered anyone in my age group or older who doesn't have that scar. That scar and vaccination is the ONLY reason why that disease is eradicated and no one has to get the vaccination anymore.

But hey, people have the right to put babies at risk for death don't they? People have the right to kill other people's babies don't they?

That's who is most open for those diseases because they're too young to be vaccinated. So a child who didn't get vaccinated and has one of those diseases gives it to a baby and that baby dies.

I did not know that, thank you.

You're welcome.

 

[Synthaholic]

Twelve months old. Keep your kid at home if you don't want him to get sick.

What about FREEEEEEDOM?????

Making your own choices is freedom.

"Keep your kid at home" infringes on their freedom.

Are you being deliberately thick?

 

[Manonthestreet]