It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The push to make you vaccinate your children

page: 9
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 03:28 AM
link   
no one wants to play now?




posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 06:49 AM
link   
a reply to: wyrmboy12

Well if you are going to doubt the CDC's numbers, you are going to have to show me some numbers and figures that conflict with the CDC's numbers. You can't just say that they are wrong because you want to.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 07:56 AM
link   
a reply to: randyvs

Considering my husband has the education and training to understand that segment and know that it's pretty accurate ... yeah. That's what I offer you.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 08:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: fernalley
and why?
Adults born before 1970 generally are considered immune to measles and mumps.


Because adults born before the vaccines generally got the disease as children. Duh! But even that immunity is only about as foolproof as their immune systems. Some of them will be at risk of getting it again.

It's like chicken pox.

Basically, everyone's immune system is different. It reacts with varying degrees of vigor and the response confers differing degrees of protection. That's why they do titer tests in some cases to check whether or not you need a booster for some shots.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 08:03 AM
link   
a reply to: fernalley

I'm more worried about the toxic sodium and chloride in my everyday diet. How can I eliminate this poisonous gas and highly toxic metal completely?



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 08:50 AM
link   
I think there should be license to breed. im all for natural selection and that, and surely with wide spread immunisation it will take away from the bodies natural ability to prevent disease, but seriously if ya gonna have kids have good ones and don't let them suffer.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 09:49 AM
link   
First of all, for anybody who sincerely values the pursuit of knowledge, the obvious reality here is the subject is complex. I respect the intelligence of the members of this board enough to see an on-going contentious argument between said members as evidence that this subject has no black and white. So, given this reality, I must first make an appeal for a more collaborative discussion with a larger dose of empathy to the opposite side of that which you align with.

My thoughts on "social responsibility" and suing:

"Social Responsibility" is an interesting concept and is not invulnerable to infusion of one's own subjective viewpoint. For instance, if the refusal to vaccinate resulting in another child's infection is grounds for suing based on social responsibility, do I then have the same right to sue everyone and anyone for dumping toxins into my child's environment? Via your taxes you subsidize and, according to "vote or shut-up" individuals, consent to massive amounts of chemicals being dumped into the water table and making its way into my body and that of my child's. Or do I also have the same right to sue those who are driving vehicles because of the resultant brake dust and carcinogens emitted? I should leave society and move out into the sticks you might say? Perhaps those who are in fear of getting a virus from other humans should do the same because the enemy here is the virus, not the people who are understandably unsure of the long-term effects of mostly-recent cocktails of adjuvants and preservatives designed and promulgated mostly with the interest of money by a group of industry and government agencies historically known to be untrustworthy, hasty, and self-serving.

Perspective.

Life is complex and dangerous, and I empathize with the fear of a parent who perceives an unvaccinated child as a threat as acutely as I empathize with the fear of a parent who has no, long-term, holistic understanding of what substances are now being injected into the object of their deepest love and hope and at which point there is no return from. I really do, and I don't know the answer to this complex subject. Perhaps there will be ways to bridge the two sides and we can lay a path of changes that put both sides at ease, but please don't look at one another as fool-hardy or fascist, respectively, because deep down you know it isn't true. Educated, caring people exist on both sides of this debate.

As an aside, I would also like to honestly petition members on this board who understand the subject more than I do for help regarding the contents of aluminum in vaccines. More specifically, any sources for mind-easing that directly show intramuscular injection has been fully vetted, long-term and, if possible, in view of the entire body's systems as they relate to each other.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:30 AM
link   
a reply to: coldkidc

We're talking about 100 children now. you know how desease works, right? It spreads, (before there was 100 infected children, there were less than 100. See how that works?). So, in order to prevent as much spread as posible, yes, the whole country is now focused on vaccinations. I hope that clears it up for you.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:32 AM
link   
a reply to: Yeahkeepwatchingme

Because you stupid rules wind up infecting the rest of us, Einstein. Here's an idea, how about everybody who subscribes to the 'Our Body, Our Rules' credo move out to that tiny little island? The rest of us, you know the vast majority of reasonably intelligent folks, will all be a lot better off. Thanks.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:39 AM
link   
Lets just say vaccinations such as the MMR do cause negative health effects in SOME people, the way i see it the people who dont vaccinate there children would rather them die from a horrific disease, than have a disability that can be helped and is not life threatening.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 10:58 AM
link   
IMO this isn't about the MMR vaccine or vaccines that have been tested and around for decades and are common amongst the majority. Rather this may be a push to demonize individuals that are against commonly accepted vaccines to portray anyone as not accepting this as a loon.

There's a huge difference between a common well researched vaccine compared to ones just out of clinical trials.

If there can be a law against anyone not submitting to vaccination, then when the time comes for new drug vaccine combo, fresh out of clinical trials, and we're faced with an emergency situation, what do you do then.

Taking choice away today, for a vaccine that is common amongst the population, sets us up for a future scenerio where new vaccines can be introduced and mandatory.

This isn't about tested and we'll researched vaccines, such as MMR, this is about vaccines and drugs that are being worked on now and not yet in use or through clinical testing, IMO.

The whole spectacle looks like one giant commercial for pharmaceutical companies.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: alexkelsey92
Lets just say vaccinations such as the MMR do cause negative health effects in SOME people, the way i see it the people who dont vaccinate there children would rather them die from a horrific disease, than have a disability that can be helped and is not life threatening.

"The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few"

It really sux if you are one of the "few", but the alternative of a major epidemic is far worse.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:27 AM
link   
a reply to: ketsuko




Considering my husband has the education


Is that supposed to matter?


edit on Ram20515v29201500000033 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 11:50 AM
link   
a reply to: fernalleya reply to: fernalley

Why don't you formally address the person your speaking too?
Do you see how I'm replying to you? where it says a reply to?

WTF? That's just weird!
edit on Ram20515v54201500000051 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:06 PM
link   
a reply to: TownCryer




Because you stupid rules wind up infecting the rest of us, Einstein. Here's an idea, how about everybody who subscribes to the 'Our Body, Our Rules' credo move out to that tiny little island? The rest of us, you know the vast majority of reasonably intelligent folks, will all be a lot better off. Thanks.


How so will all you reasonably intelligent folk be a lot better off?
Please explain that to me with your reasonable intellect? PLEASE?
What's happening currently that you would say such a thing?

edit on Rpm20515v07201500000000 by randyvs because: (no reason given)



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:16 PM
link   
a reply to: SlickMcFavorite




Perspective.

Life is complex and dangerous, and I empathize with the fear of a parent who perceives an unvaccinated child as a threat as acutely as I empathize with the fear of a parent who has no, long-term, holistic understanding of what substances are now being injected into the object of their deepest love and hope and at which point there is no return from. I really do, and I don't know the answer to this complex subject. Perhaps there will be ways to bridge the two sides and we can lay a path of changes that put both sides at ease, but please don't look at one another as fool-hardy or fascist, respectively, because deep down you know it isn't true. Educated, caring people exist on both sides of this debate.



Now that sounds like a reasonable intellect to me.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:27 PM
link   

originally posted by: imnotanother

originally posted by: ispyed
a reply to: jude11


Its called social responsibility. What right do parents have to allow their children to be vulnerable to what can be potentially dangerous diseases? What right do parents have to spread disease through their non vaccinated children?

It is socially irresponsible to not have your child vaccinated and the government quite rightly pressurises parents through the media to get vaccinated.

Although people do no like the government not getting your child vaccinated is not a very intelligent way to express your dis-satisfaction.

What rights do parents have to put a needle in someone else's arm? Your child is their own person from birth. They might not want that vaccine.


then go live in Africa, you don't have to worry about getting vaccinated there, very few people do. by the way, your child IS NOT THEIR OWN PERSON FROM BIRTH, that's why they can't drive a car by the age of nine, or buy cigarettes at 8 years old, or sign a contract at the ripe old age of 12.....and another by the way, I don't want your infectous disease infested kids around me or my family.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:31 PM
link   

originally posted by: thesaneone

originally posted by: johnnyBgood
I think we should forcefully inject a good dose of lead into those who believe they have the right to forcefully inject mercury into children.


You should do a bit of research on the mercury in the vaccine before you spout nonsense.


Research? So you are saying there is nor mercury in the vaccines? Or do you mean there is a safe level of mercury that can be injected into an infant and if so what level is acceptable and who decides that level of acceptability? It certainly was not me. I already know the acceptable amount and it is zero.

You see, I did research and did not "spout nonsense" as you seem to be guilty of.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:33 PM
link   

originally posted by: johnnyBgood
I already know the acceptable amount and it is zero.


Then you best stop eating, drinking...and breathing.
2nd.



posted on Feb, 5 2015 @ 12:35 PM
link   
a reply to: johnnyBgood

In other news, a Palatine Illinois kinder-care reports that 5 children have tested positive for measles.

chicago.cbslocal.com...
edit on 5-2-2015 by thesaneone because: Add link.

edit on 5-2-2015 by thesaneone because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
39
<< 6  7  8    10  11  12 >>

log in

join