It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Help ATS via PayPal:
learn more

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

page: 4
<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in


posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 03:46 PM

originally posted by: Flesh699
a reply to: doompornjunkie

Good history lesson: The corps creating those shots started in Germany. Mandatory vaccination started in Nazi Germany. People loved it, they looked down upon people that refused. They smiled going into the gas showers too. What's good for the country was good for them.

No, that's a Bad history lesson (for bad, substitute "incorrect").
In the US, mandatory school vaccination was started in 1850, for smallpox. In Massachusetts I believe.
If my history serves me well that was a long time before that national socialist party took power in Germany.
As was the law making smallpox vaccinations compulsory in the UK shortly after.

But don't let facts get in the way of misinformation/lying eh?

Just how often has Godwin's Law been invoked in this thread already and it's only a few pages long?

edit on 13/4/15 by Pardon? because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 05:43 PM

originally posted by: Flesh699
a reply to: doompornjunkie

Good history lesson: The corps creating those shots started in Germany. Mandatory vaccination started in Nazi Germany.

Just what is your source for that false claim? Do you even have a source?

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 06:37 PM
a reply to: rukia

Like, it isn't genocide. You elected them.

The thing is after the elections all these nasty policies come to light that were not part of the election campaign.
Its like spicy food, awhile after you have eaten it you get indigestion but there is no help for you by then but to suffer after the fact. S&F to the OP .
Regards, Iwinder

edit on 13-4-2015 by Iwinder because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 07:03 PM

originally posted by: anogiant
a reply to: ItVibrates

Oh wauw, isn't that blackmailing?

I wrote an article about it. When you are vaccinated you can make people sick with a weak immune system. Also, there are cases of brain damage. The vaccines are not 100% clean, that's for sure. As parent, you have the right to refuse.

I call it, the modern holocaust

you're calling it what it is

the US medical system kills 225,000 people every year. That’s 2.25 million killings per decade. (Dr. Barbara Starfield, JAMA, July 26, 2000, “Is US health really the best in the world?”)
The Starfield paper can be downloaded freely (as a .pdf) from here(via The paper is fully cited as Starfield B. Is US health really the best in the world?. JAMA. 2000; 284(4):483-4. Dr. Barbara Starfield’s wiki page is here.

seems as if whether you vaccinate your kids or not BIG PHARMA WILL BE PAID ONE WAY OR ANOTHER

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 07:14 PM
a reply to: Grimpachi



Hail to the group! The group is all!

The concept of herd immunity (protection for the population) is often used by vaccine addicts as a way to push guilt at people who don’t line up, with their children, like robots for their shots.

From the point of view of protecting people who are already vaccinated, herd immunity is flat-out absurd.

Little Jimmy, whose parents have decided not to vaccinate him, will pass diseases on to kids who are already vaccinated? Oh, you mean those immunized kids aren’t really safe? Then why did you vaccinate them in the first place?

From another point of view, herd immunity is the idea that people who “can’t be” vaccinated (for example, those who are obviously allergic to elements contained in vaccines) will gain a measure of protection, if larger and larger numbers of others are vaccinated.

The vaccinated protecting the unvaccinated.

This is foolish, because what actually protects people against disease is the strength of their immune systems, and that strength has nothing to do with vaccination.

If a person has a weak immune system, he will get dangerously sick, and it doesn’t matter how many people around him are vaccinated against how many diseases.

So even if one accepts the (false) premise that vaccines are effective and safe, the premise of herd immunity is ludicrous.

Vaccination is, in fact, a cover story used to conceal the fact that the health of populations has everything to do with good nutrition, adequate sanitation, and an absence of toxic elements in the environment.

There are many doctors who know this, but they refuse to speak out, because they know they’ll suffer consequences.

Vaccination, as a propaganda strategy, is used to medicalize the population—to assert that good health is fundamentally a medical matter.

It isn’t.

the-worship-of-vaccination-in-the-holy-temple< br />

n past articles, I’ve covered all major aspects of the fake science of vaccination… so-called herd immunity, “safe and effective,” etc. (see #Vaccinegate)

Here I want to look at the overall pattern that successful organized religions have been following for centuries—because vaccination occupies the same platform, deploying the same basic strategies.

This is no accident.

If it works in the religious realm, it can work in the secular venue, by stimulating the urges and fears of programmed humans.

First, there is ceremony of anointing— vaccination—which confers privileged status on the recipient. Privileged status, and most importantly, protection.

Protection against evil and danger.

The Holy Substance is the vaccine. It will ward off the enemy most widely promoted in the High Church of Medicine: the germ. Everything evil comes from the germ.

The germ is presented as the Devil. It is the source of fear, accorded its due by the priest, the doctor, who administers the injection.

Only the doctor (and his superiors, the researchers) can gauge the effectiveness of the holy vaccine. The doctor is endowed with that special and secret knowledge.

The priest (doctor) offers immunity from evil to the recipient. No one else can.

No one else.

Those who say the germ is not to be feared are naysayers, betrayers. They deny the existence of Satan. Thus, they have become agents and allies of Satan, working to conceal his power in the world. They must be recognized for who they are.

They must be cast out from the group of worshipers, from the body of believers.

“I understand you didn’t vaccinate your little Jimmy. Vile parent! We will no longer allow Jimmy to play with our blessed and protected daughter Sally. Jimmy and you carry the mark of Satan, which is the non-neutralized germ. We will tell the other neighbors and report you to the Inquisition (Child Protective Services). You are the unclean! Filthy! Get thee from our sight!”

If in public little Jimmy sneezes or coughs or wipes his nose, he is demonstrating the presence of Satan the germ.

His parents are suspected of meeting with other non-vaccinating parents and hardening their opposition to the Holy Word (the CDC schedule of vaccines).

These non-vaccinating parents must be members of the Army of Satan, working to destroy the legitimacy of the Host of Angels (public-health spokespeople, elite media anchors, medical experts who appear on television).

The most ardent spear carriers for the Holy Church of Medicine are the “science bloggers.” Having fallen short of attaining the priesthood themselves (never went to medical school), they hurl imprecations at the non-vaccinating parents, in order to achieve a measure of value in the eyes of the Holy Church.

The war goes on.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 08:05 PM
a reply to: AdamuBureido

Thanks for pointing out spellcheck screwed me as far as the excerpts from Jon Rappoport's blog I couldn't care less.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 09:02 PM
a reply to: Grimpachi

that all you got?

i guess logic isn't your bag then,
or JAMA for that matter...

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 09:23 PM
I'm sorry, but I tend to not be too sympathetic with anti-vaxxers..diseases that used to cause major problems have been essentially wiped out of existence...get your kids vaccinated...

I myself don't get flu vaccines and the like...but the basic vaccines for children? Come on.
edit on 13-4-2015 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)

edit on 13-4-2015 by TheJourney because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 09:36 PM

originally posted by: AdamuBureido
a reply to: Grimpachi

that all you got?

i guess logic isn't your bag then,
or JAMA for that matter...

Ad-hom? No

Before accusing someone of such it would be pertinent to make sure it actually applied.

My post didn't even resemble an ad-hom.

It is the simple truth that I honestly don't care what Jon Rappoport wrote in a blog.

If you have something from the Journal of the American Medical Association I may be inclined to care. So until then you know where I stand.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 09:43 PM
I don't think this has anything to do with the vaccinate / don't vaccinate argument.

I think this is an employer / employee contract.

My employer mandates the flu shot. If I want to continue to receive my paycheck I either get the shot or provide paperwork to prove why I didn't get it. It seems like they are asking the same. If you want to continue to get your "paycheck" or "government check" then you have to follow your "employers" rules. Don't like it, get a new job.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 10:17 PM
a reply to: Martin75
Except in this case, the people are employing them, not the other way around..... That would be like employees getting to dictate to management what they have to do.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 10:24 PM
a reply to: TKDRL

I think it is a shareholder working for the company. They may have say in the policies that are put in place, but as an employee they will have to follow even the policies that they did not support.

edit on 4/13/1515 by Martin75 because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 10:28 PM
I'm shocked to see how many people in this thread haven't got the foggiest clue what the hell this "childcare rebate" actually is, why it's in place, and the purpose it serves on a grander scale (the economic benefit of it).

Hint: It's not a welfare cheque folks.

posted on Apr, 13 2015 @ 11:52 PM
The amount of paid shills on ATS is scaring me, especially in these types of threads.

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:04 AM
a reply to: ItVibrates

The childcare rebate is what a large number of working families rely on to survive--if that is taken away then you are creating an underclass. But sure keep them poor if they dont tow the line.

This is a very good point and a strong argument against the scheme. While I am absolutely in favor of vaccinations, and consider those who refuse to vaccinate their kids as anti-social recalcitrants with no redeeming value to humanity what-so-ever (narrow exception for religion based conscientious objection allowed), using an elephant gun to kill a fly is really rather pointless.

Now, while the people who really need the rebate can 'simply' vaccinate or obtain a genuine exemption, the thing is that the 'wealthy' need do neither. For the Americans amongst us, almost all Australian schools that you might want your kid to go to are private schools, and the top ones are very expensive indeed. This means that wealthy families can go on thumbing their nose at the science of vaccines and the statistics of herd immunization and their schools will be epidemic breeding grounds.

This is yet another example of compliance with 'rules that apply to everyone' affecting the less well off amongst us to a much greater degree than the privileged.

Next they will be withholding it for people who refuse compulsory euthanasia at the age of 70.

That is a silly, unworthy straw-man. Your comment above was well put and to the point. Why ruin it with this nonsense?
edit on 14/4/2015 by rnaa because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:13 AM
a reply to: Martin75

Bull#. A shareholder buys in of their own free will. A tax payer does not. They are held by the gun of the state.

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:21 AM
a reply to: CranialSponge
Of course not. But most people have no clue of any taxes they blindly pay. All they know is that some scumbag will kill them if they do not pay it. Can you really blame them for it? How many have been burned alive for not going along with it? Who is going to resist? Anyone that is prospering? No, people that are suffering, and have balls of brass will resist, and they will be painted as traitors. If it came down to it, I stand alone, my father and mother will disown me and call me a traitor. I do not blame them, they think that acting this way will protect their daughters and granddaughters from the wrath of goobermint. I love my parents, but they trust too much that the goobermint will protect and uphold the law.

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:35 AM
a reply to: anogiant

Oh wauw, isn't that blackmailing?

Maybe. Possibly. Also it might only be altering the 'terms and conditions' of using the service.

I wrote an article about it.

Super-dooper! That and about $4 will get you a cup of coffee in Australia. What makes you such an authority? Certainly not the following three utter falsehoods you assert:

When you are vaccinated you can make people sick with a weak immune system.

No, you cannot. Some people have reactions to some vaccines. That is not the same as getting sick.

Also, there are cases of brain damage.

No there are NOT. Not one. Ever.

I'll repeat that: there has NEVER been a confirmed case of vaccine caused brain damage of any kind.

People spreading this falsehood should have their license to use oxygen taken away. It is inexcusably vile.

The vaccines are not 100% clean, that's for sure.

Ridiculous on the face of it. There is a thing called an 'adjuvant' in some vaccines which act to enhance the antigen properties of the immune system 'learning' to fight the disease against with the vaccine is targeted. It is NOT a contaminant.

Adjuvants were discovered by accident when it was noticed that some vaccine batches were less potent than others. It was assumed that this was a contamination problem, but when stricter anticontamination procedures were followed, it was found that the potency went down. It was the contaminates, now known as adjuvants, that were actually making the vaccine more effective.

This adjuvant processs is humorously known 'in the industry' as the vaccines 'dirty little secret' and while that sounds like it should be ominous, it isn't. It is simply a technique used to improve the effectiveness of the vaccine.

As parent, you have the right to refuse.

Quite so.

And parents also have the right to the best information in order to make those very important choices for their children.

Propagating lies like those you assert above remove that right by putting a metaphorical gun to their head; infusing their decision with fear, uncertainty, doubt, guilt and anxiety. No one deserves that.

I call it, the modern holocaust

That is stupid, immoral, hyperbole.

The anti-vaccine 'movement' is also stupid, immoral, and hyperbolic. Perhaps the pandemics that they are wishing on the planets population will indeed invoke a holocaust.

edit on 14/4/2015 by rnaa because: (no reason given)

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:41 AM

originally posted by: ItVibrates
a reply to: SyxPak
From a legal perspective I'm still trying to work it out (I'm no lawyer but I am enrolled in a Law School). The fact they are still allowing exclusions for religious reasons leads me to think investigating the equal opportunity/discrimination avenue. Other than that, off the top of my head UN international rights of the child??

I dont know, it was the second news story I read when I got up today and I still dont know if I am awake or still in a nightmare???

I know what you mean.

It is actually Orwellian isn't it...not close to or like it, but actually it.

The only thing i can say is there will probably be millions of new religious converts appearing for some reason..who ought to band together 'at their church' and concentrate on getting that bent government out as quickly as humanly possible.

posted on Apr, 14 2015 @ 03:45 AM
a reply to: rnaa

I've not read such a brazenly biased, deluded or just outright pharma backside kissing post as, i don't know how long.

So, thanks for that.

BTW, if you happen to be on medications, I wouldn't drive or operate complicated machinery, it seems whatever it is you're taking or doing, if anything, is screwing up your higher reasoning skills.

No brain injury indeed!

edit on 14-4-2015 by MysterX because: adjusted text

new topics

<< 1  2  3    5  6  7 >>

log in