The nation really is slipping, and California is leading the way.

This morning I took the family in to update their passports. I needed to pay about $180 cash to the lady at the post office. As I pulled my wallet out she barked, "If you don't have the cash I'll just rip up your paperwork and we'll start over later." Oh, I had the cash. AND, on every $100 that passes thru my wallet I write, "Who is John Galt?"

California is giving us so many reasons to leave, and very few, to stay. The corruption, ignorance and statist attitudes towards people in this state have continued for decades, as have their problems. This ain't over, even if it does pass.

It's comin'. It passed the Health Committee yesterday. This should be very entertaining!!!

I do believe in vaccinations but no one should force parents to do so. This debate is ridiculous. This is the government showing us it will do as it wants.

I appreciate all the replies! I have learned so much about this subject of vaccines over the past decade. But, the question here is one about the application of force. I know this is tough, especially for Objectivists who believe that there is zero risk with vaccines, and that there are only benefits. Some may even believe that vaccines may not protect them from the unvaccinated. I know people are very afraid these days, based on what we see in the news. But, this is a very important milestone for our nation, and few in the general public even know it's happening.

Once again, thanks. I sincerely hope that the little ones in your lives have great health and a strong start to their own lives. They only get one shot.

Interesting. Thanks for that.

That’s all right. It is all the same thing. They all get filed under: a nasty bug that rots of your favorite bit parts.

Thanks for that note Ducky. You get it.

Oregon tried it and it failed there, about three weeks ago.

About nine months.

I'm against forced vaccination, period.

You are right, Mimi. I didn't have my facts straight.

Hmm. How long after the shot did you get Shingles?

Bulls-eye!!

It all boils down to the principle of the proper use of government in a free society. (And when you say government, you must think "force" and be sure to add "at the point of a gun," because that is ALWAYS implied when laws are enacted.)

Once you placed that principle (proper use of government) as your foundation, then you can talk about the concretes--the most rational way to go about vaccines and other options for disease prevention, their safety, how schools should decide policy, etc.

Thank you for highlighting that principle--you illustrated perfectly how the pragmatic approach can end up in disaster, on this one topic alone.

Hell yes. When your child can make a lot of others sick, it is not your private decision unless you keep him at home.

OK. I generally assume that we need to continue with public schools as a price for living in a literate society. I am more than willing to 'not pay' for a service for which I am not a primary user.

One of the other considerations re not paying for schools is the difficulty in tracking. In order for me to legitimately not pay, the gov has to know who has kids and what ages they are...but we are pretty much 'there' anyway...

Jan

I think public schools are a farce to be honest, but that's just me.

Honestly we're getting to the point where we can educate children better than public schools can in 1/4 the time with online schools. Take classes at your local library if you have to if you don't have a computer, etc...

So, should you receive a school voucher? You shouldn't have to pay for schools to begin with. That's my take. Charities started schools long long ago to pay for the kids who couldn't afford it, and it worked remarkably well considering the limitations at the time.

The factor that nobody brings up is this:

When I was a child in 1971 there was one vaccine suggested by the CDC prior to kindergarten. Now, 35 vaccinations are required before kindergarten. Since 1985 when the schedule started really being augmented autism increased by 13,000%. Meanwhile, the vaccine schedule has never been tested regarding developmental disabilities. I know this because I've spent almost a decade looking for such a study. It doesn't exist. I am opposed to the use of force until the proper studies are done.

And, FWIW there is only one other environmental suspect that occurred during that 13,000% increase. It hasn't been tested either.

Autism grew right along with childhood asthma, something I think is also worthy of more study.

I could get into the science of vaccines but that seems to just get people wound up. How much adjuvant is safe? Well, we don't know. This thing is a real Pandora's box...

So, if one is in favor of force - how many vaccines are too many? The facet I'm asking about Mamaemma is one of "how many?" If the schedule expands to 100 vax by the age of 4 do we swat team families and take their kids? How deep down the hole do we go? Are we already too deep? This can't be answered here...yet, it's worthy of discussion.

I think "mooching" is the perfect word.

Yes. They're all non-excludable to those who don't pay.

Since I don't want to use gov't to force them to contribute, I view it as a cost of freedom, which as the cliche goes, isn't free.

#2 has been debunked. http://www.publichealth.org/public-aware...

Illegals...not so much. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact...

Hospitals do. Are teachers required to have vaccinations?

I thought of this on the way home: I don't have any children (and it is unlikely that would ever do this). Would you think that it would be fair for me to receive a school voucher? One that could be used for any government service, say?

Jan

If it was limited to having your own kids dying of horrible preventable disease, it would be one thing, but we're having things like people who can't be vaccinated, or babies too young to be vaccinated, or people with immune system problems, catching the diseases because of the unvaccinated.

Ilegals have brought the need for a whooping cough vaccine in the carolinas for infants.