mandatory vaccinations

[ebia]

I think i can trust a catholic newspaper

Apparently not in this case.

and the guardian is probably the best newspaper here in england

And what exactly does it say?

 

[IHOM]

French couple in court under child cruelty charges for not vaccinating their two children

 

[ebia]

French couple in court under child cruelty charges for not vaccinating their two children

Went to court, or had their children taken away?

The court is the place where what the law says is decided - being taken to court is meaningless without knowing the outcome.

(France is extreme - tetanus doesn't need to be compulsory since there is no herd immunity factor)

 

[IHOM]

It doesnt matter... you can clearly see their intentions

 

[ebia]

It doesnt matter... you can clearly see their intentions

Who's intention?

Yes, it does matter. Courts are places where what the law is gets determined. That's what they do. When a new question goes to court it very much depends on the outcome. If they weren't found guilty, or they were found guilty of something with a reasonable consequence, that's utterly different to your claim.

All being taken to court shows is that somebody want to determine what the law says. By looking at the outcome you find out what law is.

 

[Rhamiel]

I think forcing people to become vaccinated is an infringement of a persons rights

but getting vaccinated is a very good idea, and we should all do that

going to Mass on Sunday is also a very good idea, but I am sure we all agree that the government should not force people to go even though it is a good thing

here is the thing about using aborted babies to make vaccinations
a lot of people are making money off this
and money is a big incentive, it means pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines now have a vested interest in keeping abortion available and protected

 

[ebia]

I think forcing people to become vaccinated is an infringement of a persons rights

but getting vaccinated is a very good idea, and we should all do that

going to Mass on Sunday is also a very good idea, but I am sure we all agree that the government should not force people to go even though it is a good thing

here is the thing about using aborted babies to make vaccinations
a lot of people are making money off this
and money is a big incentive, it means pharmaceutical companies that make vaccines now have a vested interest in keeping abortion available and protected

No it doesn't, because no new vaccines are being developed with new cell lines from newly aborted babies. There are only two cell lines in use, and both date back decades.

 

[ebia]

Just noticed this footnote to the Pontifical Academy paper:

1. This is particularly true in the case of vaccination against German measles, because of the danger of Congenital Rubella Syndrome. This could occur, causing grave congenital malformations in the foetus, when a pregnant woman enters into contact, even if it is brief, with children who have not been immunized and are carriers of the virus. In this case, the parents who did not accept the vaccination of their own children become responsible for the malformations in question, and for the subsequent abortion of foetuses, when they have been discovered to be malformed.

(Emphasis mine)

 

[Rhamiel]

thank you for your help Ebia

I am not really well read on this topic
as I had my vaccinations as a child and I do not have any children of my own, I have not really felt the need to educate myself on this topic past the basics

 

[ebia]

I have a young child, I had to have MMR and some others again because I was working in Nauru, and I'm a school teacher.

 

[ebia]

Summing up:
If you don't immunise your child, there is a reasonable chance they might catch rubella, possibly without ever knowing they have.
If they do, and the come into contact with a mum in early pregnancy who is not immune there is a reasonable chance of passing the disease on.
If that happens, there is nearly a 50-50 chance of some CRS or miscarriage.
If there is CRS then there is a chance the parent will go for an abortion.
If that happens, according to the vatican you are responsible for that deformity, miscarriage or abortion.

Have the injection: you are morally guilty of nothing.
Don't: you could end up morally responsible for an abortion, a miscarriage, or a severely disabled baby.

Which is pro-life again?

 

[Blue Wren]

It's unfortunate, that vaccinations would ever be need to be made mandatory, as sensible people should want them, for themselves & their children. In Sweden we have high immunisation rates, as we see it as a personal good, and common good. As herd immunity has fallen, so much in some areas, it's necessary, to make vaccinations compulsory for attending school, unless a paediatrician has given a medical certificate for exemption. I saw babies, stricken with pertussis, when I was in the US, and doing some research in hospital. It is, so terrible. I've never seen anything, more horrifying, in my life. I'd then come online, read blabbering nonsense from eejits, who would say things like "mother's intuition counts for more, than science evidence." Full of themselves, empty of logic. There are some, who simply cannot be reasoned with, no matter how much you try.

 

[Rhamiel]

It's unfortunate, that vaccinations would ever be need to be made mandatory, as sensible people should want them,

well a sensible person should also want to accept Jesus as their Lord so they can go to heaven
but we do not support forced conversion
people have a freedom to do what they want with their own bodies (that is something you hear liberals argue for all the time)

 

[ebia]

well a sensible person should also want to accept Jesus as their Lord so they can go to heaven
but we do not support forced conversion

Because forced "conversion" doesn't actually convert anyone, where as manditory injections still work?
Because most christians don't believe in herd salvation?

 

[blackribbon]

The problem with vaccines is that you don't know which children it will damage them until you give them the vaccine and it actually does damage them.

Vaccines are mostly good. They have mostly eliminated both rubella and measles from the US. Our so-called BIG measles epidemic in 2014 was less than 600 total cases...more people (thousands to tens of thousands) die of influenza each year than actually even contracted measles. It looks like the numbers are greater in Europe so maybe instituting a better vaccine education program would be more ethical than just mandating everyone get vaccinated...because in the end, it is the parents that will have to live with a disease damaged OR a vaccine damaged child if something goes wrong with either option.

 

[Catherineanne]

Where do you guys stand on this issue.. its not effecting the uk....yet!! But its going on in the usa other parts of europe and oz. My kids are vaccinated except for the MMR which is made using aborted fetal cells... i picture it as a kind of satanic sacrafice a mockery of the lords sacrafice.... the injection of the flesh and blood of aborted children sacraficed to satan...

I couldnt in good conscions have my children injected it is against my faith... but what if i dont get them vaccinated they will take my children away

Your thoughts guys

MMR is not made with aborted foetal cells.

Meanwhile, vaccines save lives. We all know that; the evidence is clear enough. Not just the lives of the children who are vaccinated, but also those who cannot be vaccinated because of a compromised immune system.

My personal view is that choosing to not vaccinate children other than on medical grounds is immoral. Ymmv.

 

[Blue Wren]

well a sensible person should also want to accept Jesus as their Lord so they can go to heaven
but we do not support forced conversion
people have a freedom to do what they want with their own bodies (that is something you hear liberals argue for all the time)

Ebia's response, it is perfect.

Adults have more freedoms, to do what they want with their own bodies, yes, this is true. Parents have responsibilities, in their care for their children's bodies, yes? They do not, should not, have absolute freedom, to do whatever they want, to their children's bodies. No person, with their right mind, would argue for that. There are laws, about how parents are to provide for their children already.Parents have denied their children needed medical care, because of religious reasons, and had their children removed from their custody, for doing so. Some have even been charged, criminally. A vaccine, it isn't the same, as a blood transfusion, of course, but it's part of providing care for the child, and for other children.

 

[IHOM]

Actually it wasnt in the paper now that i look but it was from an issued statement by the pontificial acc of life in 2005 regarding objection to mandatory vaccines ..

"However, in this situation, the aspect of passive cooperation is that which stands out most. It is up to the faithful and citizens of upright conscience (fathers of families, doctors, etc.) to oppose, even by making an objection of conscience, the ever more widespread attacks against life and the "culture of death" which underlies them. From this point of view, the use of vaccines whose production is connected with procured abortion constitutes at least a mediate remote passive material cooperation to the abortion, and an immediate passive material cooperation with regard to their marketing. Furthermore, on a cultural level, the use of such vaccines contributes in the creation of a generalized social consensus to the operation of the pharmaceutical industries which produce them in an immoral way.

Therefore, doctors and fathers of families have a duty to take recourse to alternative vaccines13 (if they exist), putting pressure on the political authorities and health systems so that other vaccines without moral problems become available. They should take recourse, if necessary, to the use of conscientious objection14 with regard to the use of vaccines produced by means of cell lines of aborted human foetal origin.

 

[Rhamiel]

as Blackribbon pointed out, some children are harmed by vaccines
and even if you do not get vaccinated, there is not a 100% chance of the child getting infected

so I do agree that children who do not receive needed medical care should be taken away from their parents, such vaccines are not clearly needed, but rather playing the odds
you bet that your child wont have serious complications due to the vaccine, you bet that your child might need this vaccine some time in the future

those are reasonable bets
I am all for vaccines, they are great, we should increase taxes on the rich to pay for poor people who can not afford them
maybe we should even regulate prices of vaccines to make it easier for the middle classes too?
but it comes down to, is this a good bet or a bad bet, this is not clearly something that is needed to save a child's life like a blood transfusion or an organ transplant, it is a bet

forcing people to do this does seem to go outside the bounds of personal freedom

also, no matter how well you take care of a body, the body will die
the soul is everlasting

Because forced "conversion" doesn't actually convert anyone, where as manditory injections still work?

there is a book out now, it is about a Spanish woman who is rediscovering her family roots
she is a devout Catholic, but she found out that her ancestors were false converts during the Spanish Inquisition and her ancestry is actually Jewish
so while the forced conversion did not help the first generation, they still followed the false religion of Talmudic Judaism, the subsequent generations were acclimated into the true Faith
of course that is not the tone of the book, she is confused and saddened by this, probably because of the liberal culture that puts more focus on race rather then the truth of Jesus Christ and His Church

again, I am not for forced conversion
I just think if we are going to strip away the rights of free people, it would be better to focus on the immortal soul rather then the perishable body

 

[ebia]

Actually it wasnt in the paper now that i look but it was from an issued statement by the pontificial acc of life in 2005 regarding objection to mandatory vaccines ..

"However, in this situation, the aspect of passive cooperation is that which stands out most. It is up to the faithful and citizens of upright conscience (fathers of families, doctors, etc.) to oppose, even by making an objection of conscience, the ever more widespread attacks against life and the "culture of death" which underlies them. From this point of view, the use of vaccines whose production is connected with procured abortion constitutes at least a mediate remote passive material cooperation to the abortion, and an immediate passive material cooperation with regard to their marketing. Furthermore, on a cultural level, the use of such vaccines contributes in the creation of a generalized social consensus to the operation of the pharmaceutical industries which produce them in an immoral way.

Therefore, doctors and fathers of families have a duty to take recourse to alternative vaccines13 (if they exist), putting pressure on the political authorities and health systems so that other vaccines without moral problems become available. They should take recourse, if necessary, to the use of conscientious objection14 with regard to the use of vaccines produced by means of cell lines of aborted human foetal origin.

But not when it puts others at risk.