Is it time to consider compulsory vaccinations?

Vaccines do not cause or promote autism. Period, 30, end of story.There are a few adverse effects. We're waiting for the details of your claim that there are ways to reduce those adverse reactions all-naturally.
Yeah, you much prefer many many more people having many more serious reactions. That would sure soften the impact on me if I were in that situation!"At least Johnny didn't die because we had him vaccinated, he died because we didn't have him vaccinated. So that's OK then.".

We're saying "They are much more safe than any alternative and here's the evidence for it". The fact that you don't comprehend written English and refuse to look at evidence is not our problem. We've presented plenty of evidence that they are safe relative to any alternative. You haven't listened.But you claim there are better additives that aren't used because they cost too much. I'm listening. What are these additives and what evidence shows that they are as effective or better at their job and still safer ?

Don't you see the glaring contradiction?How would you know that "some isn't" if you're not interested in checking out the research about vaccines' safety?Obscures websites, fearmongering and anecdotes are not reliable research despite what you think.

Hi Faith. I think you might like to read the following re: this study. http://www.translationalneurodegeneration.com/content/3/1/22

Faith made it explicitly clear that she thinks that retraction was just part of the vast conspiracy. No evidence, of course.

Oops.I missed your post. Telling, isn't it?

What just me? That doesn't seem fair but ok. If I am the only selfish non-vaccinator then what's the big deal? I must be missing your point. If living in a healthy society is beneficial to the individual member then pushing for others to be healthy is personally beneficial.Just having children is potentially harmful to others. I certainly accept that not immunizing them is a failure to eliminate a potential disease vector. How is this any different from being a potential accident when we take to the highway?I agree that we are better off as individuals and as a society if people choose to be vaccinated. We would be better off if they choose to live in smaller houses or to consume less. It is a better society only when they choose those things as opposed to being forced into them.I have no problem with assigning the real cost of a choice to that choice. I do have a problem with making up costs in order to get people to agree with you.

Yes and I was agreeing with you. No they do not share the same goal. Earning a living is not the same goal as stealing one.I have made this comparison earlier but blaming an unvaccinated victim of disease is like blaming the victim of a mugging because they didn't have a gun and failed to stop the mugger from mugging again.

You aren't the only selfish one. And the problem is not caused in particular by selfishness. It is the aggregate of inexcuable non-vaxxers that is the problem.I've explained in detail why I call you, in particular, selfish. I'm not going to rehash those reasons again. Please re-read the posts I have already made. I'd like not to make any more posts along those lines.

Yes, and we take stepsby forceto try to make driving as safe as possible. Just like California is trying to make going to school as safe as possible. That's not necessarily true.Sometimes the benefits of particular social behaviors outweigh the negativities of using force to make them happen.I think vaccination and driving sober are such behaviors.

And vaccinating is not the same goal as not vaccinating.Have your cake or eat it. No it isn't.

From my point of view it seems you all are wishing adverse vaccination effects on other children with your dogged insistence that there is no problem. Not intentionally I'm sure, but for all intents and purposes.And it would be nice if my point was recognized, which isn't that I'm ignoring the research out of sheer stubbornness, but because nobody is seriously acknowledging the problems with vaccines, just insisting that they're fine fine fine and that the research supposedly proves it. Well, I'm convinced (from the movie) that some of the research that has supposedly proved it has been manipulated, and since there's no way to know in any particular example I'm not paying attention until this possibility is acknowledged.At the very least since there used to be mercury in some vaccines that you all agree has been removed, how about simply acknowledging that they used to be unsafe though they were said to be safe back then too? Otherwise why remove the mercury? Somebody gave assurances of safety that turned out to be false, perhaps outright lies, and until you acknowledge THAT and consider that we could still be getting false assurances, why should I believe anything about their safety? You put way too much trust in research. Maybe I can get another copy of the movie and this time I'll take notes on how research was manipulated by the vaccine manufacturer.Somebody wanted to know how I would ever be assured of their safety considering that I'm not inclined to listen to the research. Well, the reason I'm not inclined to listen is that nobody is acknowledging the history of former lack of safety as above, the real possibility of fraudulent research by vested interests, the suspicious fact that vaccine manufacturers are exempt from lawsuits, and so on. So if you want to persuade me you have to start with acknowledging these facts and show some genuine concern about them and interest in the question of how to go about making them convincingly safe. This constant refrain about how they are safe safe safe just sounds like the same old fraud.However, a new issue has come up: Fetal cells from aborted babies? What is that all about? THERE's a Christian objection I would have to take seriously. You're going to have to remove that too. I would think the very thought would turn stomachs other than a Christian's.Edited by Faith, : No reason given.

It was recognized. But it is a very weak point.Sure, as a parent, I was aware that bad reactions to vaccination are possible. But the risk of that is miniscule, compared to the risk of the disease that the vaccination protects one against. Yes, but it was at a low level that was not a health concern.I am continuously exposed to mercury that is in the silver-mercury amalgam fillings in my teeth. But that's also at a low enough level to not concern me. The mercury in the atmosphere, from burning coal by electrical utilities, is probably a greater risk.Some sort of balanced perspective is needed. Just about anything is toxic at high enough levels.

Well, there you go again with all the assurances I've already come to view with distrust. Going to have to do better than that.I have mercury amalgams also, and didn't like it at all when the dentist put them in years ago. But why would anyone want to add another source of mercury on top of that? The movie lists that source and the atmospheric source of mercury as problems too.

Still haven't figured out the different forms of mercury, I see. It matters.Chlorine is a deadly poison. Sodium is a deadly poison. Sodium chloride is essential for life.Think about it.Edited by JonF, : No reason given.