Wah, somebody said something bad about me because I'm okay with millions of children becoming infected with a deadly disease that used to kill thousands, and still kills hundreds of thousands in underdeveloped countries where vaccines are not available. Freedom! You fucking twit. You remind me of General Sline from that scene in Spies Like Us: Keyes: By your actions, sir, you are risking the future of the human race! General Sline: To guarantee the American way of life, I'm willing to take that risk. And yes, I'm upset, and frustrated, because I'm looking at a normally rational, reasonable human being essentially advocate "fuck you healthy people, I have a right to be a disease carrier and infect you all."
You have to compare apples to apples ... or at least try to get pretty close. It's inaccurate to say that one person's choice to not vaccinate, by themselves, endangers tens of thousands. The entire concept of herd immunity is that it's the quantity, the critical mass, that matters. The fact that a statistically significant portion of the population chooses not to vaccinate does put a lot of people at risk. That is basically indisputable. And if every single person who's medically able to get vaccinated did so, it would cut that risk a lot. However, try to make an apples-to-apples comparison with driving. In 2012, there were over 33,000 car accident fatalities in the United States. If driving were forbidden -- that is, if there were a mandatory no-driving rule for the entire population except for emergency responders and the professional trucking industry -- chances are nearly every single one of those 33,000 lives would have been saved. But most people would consider a universal, mandatory no-driving policy to be too big a restriction on their freedom.
Analogies between cars and diseases do not work, because diseases function on an entirely different level. If I live on the 4th floor of an apartment building, and you live on the 1st floor, your driving skills don't harm me. However, if you've got a communicable disease that is airborne, then I am in great danger up on the 4th floor. What's worse is that one person can infect thousands of people.
You unbelievable bastard. How can you even consider convenience when THOUSANDS OF LIVES hang in the balance?!? Sorry, had a John moment there for a sec...
Hyperbole about what? Have you seen the numbers for measles worldwide where vaccines aren't available? It's in that link I posted that I doubt you read, just as I doubt you read O2C's post, or anyone else's post. You've decided freedomfreedomfreedom, and have shut out everything else.
So, it's settled then. You'll never go outside. IF YOU'VE GOT are the operative words. Not if you could potentially have.
You can't even fucking read. Goddamn, why are you so stupid and stubborn on this? Read this, and don't respond to me until you do: http://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/vac-gen/whatifstop.htm
And you're unable to see that arguing against mandatory vaccination is not arguing against vaccination. You don't want to deal with my actual argument, so you continually fall back to extolling the virtues of vaccination...WHICH I DON'T DISPUTE.
My rebuttal is what I've said. O2C expresses a principle based on his personal preference and follows it through to his opinion. I don't share the principle and so have a different opinion.
If you don't want to get measles, perhaps you should erect a fence on the US/Mexican border, because millions of unvaccinated illegals are flocking across that border and many of them have measles.
Why don't you highlight the parts of his post you disagree with and respond to it? Ya know, debate instead of just digging in your heels and repeatedly bleat the party line. Be refreshing.
A different level, but not necessarily a higher one. You happened to pick a scenario where disease transmission occurs, but where driving ability is irrelevant. But turn it around ... if I'm driving my car and you're driving yours, and you have a communicable disease, that probably doesn't harm me. If I'm driving my car and you're driving yours and you're a shitty driver, it might.
Obviously vaccination should be as near to universal as possible, but there are different ways to acheive this goal. Generally speaking, education is preferable to coercion. However, since there are children involved the state has a greater interest in ensuring their health and wellbeing. Any parent who refuses vaccinations is practically inviting the scrutiny of child welfare authorities.
This discussion has been quite illustrative of the flaw in libertarianism, and damn it, Paladin intends to go down with the ship.
Thoughts like this are why I throw the LOLtarians in with the Democrats and Republicans as being fucking idiots. By the way Cars require mandatory licensing to lesson the chance of killing people.
You realize Patient Zero that brought it to Disneyland was traveling abroad and brought it back to America? The person was an American citizen.
Libertarianism is not a philosophy that concerns itself with outcomes. That's its fatal flaw. Well, one of them.
Yep, no concern for outcomes, and an Ahab-like obstinacy in the face of overwhelming evidence of a very bad outcome.
The same is often said of liberalism. As long as you can FEEL good because there is a program for a problem...whether it fixes the issue or not.
Incorrectly. Liberalism is concerned with liberty and equality, while at the same time struggling being to find the best balance between the two. Libertarianism is concerned with liberty exclusively. But go ahead, try to make this about donkey and elephants. I'm gonna take a nap.
Being in favor of vaccines and being in favor of compulsory vaccinations are two separate issues though.
