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.

 

Childcare rebates could be denied to anti-vaccination parents under new Federal Government laws

page: 2
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 02:47 AM
link   
Vaccinate your children or else you lose your benefits.
and don't forget to smoke cigarette's and suck dry our public health care system!


edit on am247308132015-04-13T02:47:55-05:00022015p by Agit8dChop because: (no reason given)




posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 03:09 AM
link   
Not really a fan of policies that feel the need to separate religious people. Also I don't believe vaccinations in generation are harmful. Still, I can imagine it would be an impossible choice for a parent if they thought they were harmful ...

On one hand, not being vaccinated might introduce other people to risk in theory. On the other hand, subjecting someone to something they consider a risk is a bit worrying. At what point should the government intervene when a person is taking up risky behaviours?

Question for the thread, where is the line for you?



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 03:12 AM
link   
a reply to: DYepes

I wouldn't laugh too some. It may not yet be federally mandated in the U.S.. Many states have mandated vaccinations, California is posing it as we speak in legislature.

In Washington St. where I live they mandate it for all students in their school system. Religious exemptions only. We home school so it's not an issue....so far.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 03:39 AM
link   
a reply to: Pinke



Not really a fan of policies that feel the need to separate religious people.


The policies don't separate religious people. The religious people try to separate themselves from the policy.. big difference really.

The only times policies end up with religious exemptions is when religious groups sue to have the exemption added. So again, the religious people are still the ones separating themselves despite it being made law.
edit on 13-4-2015 by doompornjunkie because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 04:16 AM
link   
a reply to: ItVibrates

I saw this and I agree, this is outrageous. This is simply evidence that there is a government above government and the Australian government are doing what they have been instructed to do.

Unfortunately I don't see anything happening about resistance to this. It would take a massive resistance effort to overturn this. The worst of it is that this trend to enforce compliance to government instructions or loose money, privacy, rights and perhaps all of these, will continue.

By taking this action the government is demonizing people who disagree with them. forget about the trivial aspects such as the un vaccinated are a risk to the vaccinated, that's just the distraction to mask the fact that there is a higher level of government than government.

The most effective think we can do is make sure we do not vote for the politicians who vote for this, on any future occasion. IMO the only long term solution to defeating this NWO stuff, is to demand more and more referendums on things like this. We must constantly reiterate that governments are SERVANTS not RULERS and that they should see themselves as servants and not rulers.

If we are to have government of the people by the people, we must have more and more referendums. This way we will marginalize the NWO's ability to exert power and influence over the government.

we must spread the concept that we the people are the real "upper house' or the Senate. Democracy is much more that casting a vote every few years and then be relegated to spectator on the sidelines. Democracy is about participating in the government process during the term of the government on a day-to-day basis.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 04:24 AM
link   
Not Al vaccinations are bad but thet doesn't make it right to force them on people. It's still should be a choice to vaccinate or not.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 04:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItVibrates


Parents who refuse to vaccinate their children will miss out on government benefits of up to $15,000 per child under a new measure announced by Prime Minister Tony Abbott.

Childcare rebates could be denied to anti-vaccination parents under new Federal Government laws.


Fascism creeps.

Something I forgot to mention in my first reply.

Having no hesitation in financially penalizing people for not complying with "what government wants' certainly proves that the governments concern for our physical security ( re terrorism) is a lie.

On the one hand the government claims they want to protect us against terrorism but on the other hand they don't give a stuff about our financial security. Do you see the lie?



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:03 AM
link   
Wow, lots of hate saying I should not have kids, well I dont have kids nor do I plan on ruining my life with any--this is not about kids, this is about rights!. People have the right to say what they put into their system. If you want to start forcing big pharma products on kids I guess you are the same "good parents" shoving amphetamines down their kids throat because some paid-off doctor told you your kids have ADD.

No, I will not let the government tell me what can and can not be put into my body. Jeez, so many people have drunk the vaccine cool-aid.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:13 AM
link   
What about those better-off families who don't claim any benefits, where is the law to force those people to vaccinate?

There's no point forcing only people on benefits to vaccinate and not others, because you still haven't eliminated the risk, you're still in exactly the same situation as before this law. It's just plain senseless.

It seems to me that this is a law that targets a specific section of society, in a word, discrimination. Which is illegal.
edit on 13-4-2015 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:22 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItVibrates
Wow, lots of hate saying I should not have kids, well I dont have kids nor do I plan on ruining my life with any--this is not about kids, this is about rights!. People have the right to say what they put into their system. If you want to start forcing big pharma products on kids I guess you are the same "good parents" shoving amphetamines down their kids throat because some paid-off doctor told you your kids have ADD.

No, I will not let the government tell me what can and can not be put into my body. Jeez, so many people have drunk the vaccine cool-aid.


What about the rights of the kids who can't be vaccinated?
Are you not bothered by that?



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:24 AM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll




What about those better-off families who don't claim any benefits, where is the law to force those people to vaccinate?


Those people should be able to pay for their own medical care when they get sick.

It makes perfect sense.

I see a lot of people claiming vaccinations are being forced and that is at best hyperbole at worst a straight lie.

They all still have a choice so lets see how much their unfounded beliefs are worth.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:25 AM
link   

originally posted by: doobydoll
What about those better-off families who don't claim any benefits, where is the law to force those people to vaccinate?

There's no point forcing only people on benefits to vaccinate and not others, because you still haven't eliminated the risk, you're still in exactly the same situation as before this law. It's just plain senseless.

It seems to me that this is a law that targets a specific section of society, in a word, discrimination. Which is illegal.


No-one's being forced to vaccinate.
They're still given a choice and perhaps this will make the anti-vax community come back into the real world.

As for those who don't claim benefits perhaps they should be made to foot the bill should their child require treatment for a vaccine preventable disease and not take advantage of the free health-care available.
And perhaps foot the bill for any other children their little snowflakes infect.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:05 AM
link   

originally posted by: Azureblue
This is simply evidence that there is a government above government and the Australian government are doing what they have been instructed to do.


Wrong, they are just doing a good thing.


Unfortunately I don't see anything happening about resistance to this.


Why should there be? It is a very good idea.


If we are to have government of the people by the people, we must have more and more referendums.


What good would a referendum do in this case? Do you even know what referendums are used for in Australia?



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:08 AM
link   
"Daycare" is far worse for a child than vaccines are.

How any parent can shove a child in an institution for 8-10 hours a day is beyond me.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: Grimpachi
a reply to: doobydoll




What about those better-off families who don't claim any benefits, where is the law to force those people to vaccinate?


Those people should be able to pay for their own medical care when they get sick.

It makes perfect sense.

I see a lot of people claiming vaccinations are being forced and that is at best hyperbole at worst a straight lie.

They all still have a choice so lets see how much their unfounded beliefs are worth.

But the better-off families will still present this same risk to others as benefit claimants do (newborn babies, and those whom cannot be vaccinated) when they don't vaccinate, whether they can pay for treatment or not.

I'm not arguing for or against vaccinations (my kids were all vaccinated by the way, my choice), I just don't get it why only poor families are faced with the 'choice' of either destitution or to allow their kids to be injected with what they seriously believe is harmful to their kids, and wealthier families are free to refuse vaccines without any consequence at all.
edit on 13-4-2015 by doobydoll because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:30 AM
link   
a reply to: doobydoll

If more people immunize that means heard immunity goes up and therefore vector risks go down.


Even those who are wealthy and forgo he 15K handout can still become vectors and they can foot their own medical bills and I am sure a good part of this is being done as a cost-benefit analysis to the state.

This can be explained as a numbers a sense more than anything. People can call it unfair to those who are not wealthy, just add that to the number of things unfair in life that go along with not being rich.

If it works it will keep more people healthy.
edit on 13-4-2015 by Grimpachi because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   
a reply to: ItVibrates

Here's the deal...

You want to claim the benefits of your society, while actively putting your kids and others at risk of easily preventable viruses and diseases, you deserve a smackdown.

There is no scientific basis in the paranoias of vaccination, when compared to the damage done to our entire society by the refusal to do so. All available evidence shows that vaccination works, and without it the risk of easily preventable infection is increased and puts all of us at risk.

Why should the rest of society just sit back and say it's perfectly fine for individuals to put their own kids at risk, and potentially hundreds of thousands of others, just because they believe the bs on a website and can't be bothered to read and learn for themselves?

The responses to this on here are pretty shocking, reeking in basic ignorance and stinking of bs. People are seriously comparing vaccination to a "holocaust"? What is wrong with you people?

Learn a little about basic biology and disease control, do yourselves a favor and stop believing everything you read, especially when it's written by $cientologists, fanatical Christians and paranoid delusional ranters on blogs.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:39 AM
link   

originally posted by: ItVibrates
Jeez, so many people have drunk the anti-vaccine cool-aid.


There, fixed it for you.

Please offer the scientific evidence of the things you irrationally believe, then maybe you would have more support for your notions about a big bad government trying to murder millions of people.

Funny thing about the anti-vaccine brigade, they keep claiming how dangerous it all is and how this is all a plot against people, yet millions upon millions of us have all been vaccinated against plenty of things, and we're not all dead!

Who'd have thunk it, vaccines NOT killing people?!



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rocker2013

originally posted by: ItVibrates
Jeez, so many people have drunk the anti-vaccine cool-aid.


There, fixed it for you.

Please offer the scientific evidence of the things you irrationally believe, then maybe you would have more support for your notions about a big bad government trying to murder millions of people.

Funny thing about the anti-vaccine brigade, they keep claiming how dangerous it all is and how this is all a plot against people, yet millions upon millions of us have all been vaccinated against plenty of things, and we're not all dead!

The un-vaccinated people are not all dead either lol.

What it all boils down to as far as I can see is it's a case of the anti-vacs don't trust everything their gov and pharma corps say any more. After all, it is not beyond the realms of possibility that big pharma would propagandise and push what is for them a lucrative gravy-train on society. Would corporate pharma put profit before and above people? Of course it would, without hesitation. Its top priority and purpose is to profit.

It is also not beyond possibility that politicians, their families, and/or their friends, might have financial interests in such companies and would benefit unbelievably from this policy.

Many people genuinely and seriously believe that vaccinating would inflict actual harm to their children, or at least place them at risk of harm, they're only trying to protect their kids just as any of us would if presented with what we believe is a danger.

Gov telling them it will starve the entire family to death if they don't let it inject harm into their kids is not really instilling confidence in the deed is it?

I'm just trying to see things from the perspective of the anti-vacs, they think they're absolutely right in what they believe, just as much as you believe you're right.



posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 07:53 AM
link   
a reply to: ItVibrates

Wait you want to be able to refuse service for treating your child on the front end through prevention and think you should be entitled to have benefits on the back end for your neglect?
edit on 13-4-2015 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
21
<< 1    3  4  5 >>

log in

join