Boston Herald calls for government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER naturopaths, scientists and journalists who oppose mercury in immunizations
From the Boston Heralds editorial staff.
It’s one thing for Hollywood celebrities to wear their anti-vaccine pride like just another fashion trend. It’s another thing when anti-vaccine activists start preying on vulnerable people, particularly within immigrant communities.
Yes, the anti-vaxxers appear to be plying their trade with the Somali community in Minnesota — and the result, sadly, is a dangerous outbreak of measles.
The recent outbreak is now up to 41 kids, all of them under 10. The Washington Post reported Friday that the number of children of Somali descent in Minnesota who have received the vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) plunged from 92 percent in 2004 to 42 percent in 2014 — not nearly enough to immunize against those diseases.
Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).
But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.
These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/e...
It’s one thing for Hollywood celebrities to wear their anti-vaccine pride like just another fashion trend. It’s another thing when anti-vaccine activists start preying on vulnerable people, particularly within immigrant communities.
Yes, the anti-vaxxers appear to be plying their trade with the Somali community in Minnesota — and the result, sadly, is a dangerous outbreak of measles.
The recent outbreak is now up to 41 kids, all of them under 10. The Washington Post reported Friday that the number of children of Somali descent in Minnesota who have received the vaccination for measles, mumps and rubella (MMR) plunged from 92 percent in 2004 to 42 percent in 2014 — not nearly enough to immunize against those diseases.
Skepticism about vaccines within Minnesota’s Somali community goes back a decade, the Post reported, after parents raised concern about possible higher rates of autism among their children (research later indicated that wasn’t the case).
But it seems that was all the truthers needed to hear. When Somali parents sought answers to explain autism, anti-vaccine activists were delighted to fill in the information gap. The disgraced British doctor who once reported a link between vaccines and autism — which was deemed fraudulent and cost him his medical license — has met with families, the Post reported. Even amid this latest outbreak, anti-vaccine groups have fanned the flames, making it hard for public health officials and doctors to be heard above the noise.
These are the facts: Vaccines don’t cause autism. Measles can kill. And lying to vulnerable people about the health and safety of their children ought to be a hanging offense.
http://www.bostonherald.com/opinion/e...
Previous comments... You are currently on page 2.
So I'm having trouble understanding how it could wind up in my email this morning.
Or perhaps it just goes to show I'm too obtuse to give a happy damn what you think.
The editors understand that billions of lives have been saved by modern preventative medicine, including billions of individual children, despite occasional side effects that occur in all medicine. It isn't a plot to "risk your child for the greater good" versus the false alternative of Christian Science abandonment of medical science.
Every editorial "indicates" what the writers would like people to think -- that is what editorials are for, as is most writing. It is not a conspiracy for thought control to stop people from realizing that "alien Vaccines are coming for us", cynically suppressing The Truth with "execution squads".
The campus minister at the college I went to once said, "if the Jews weren't persecuted they would lose their identity". Religions have their own identities with or without their cycles of mutual persecution, but despite the inter-religious warfare of his antisemitism, he certainly captured the nature of a common fringe mentality.
Anyone can see how stupid this is, but this nonsense should not be taken seriously or condoned in any way on an Ayn Rand forum where people come to find out more about Ayn Rand's ideas and may not know any better about her and the intellectual movement she started -- which has nothing to do with paranoia, conspiracy theories, emotional outbursts, anarchy or the rest of the junk that we find promoted here.
The intent of the editorial board is clear. The state science institute has determined what risk to your child is appropriate for the greater good. The editors are indicating how we all should think about it.
Do we not have a First Amendment right to voice unpopular opinions without fear of government interference and punishment (not to mention a pre-existing natural right to the same)? This rag is advocating government violation of the Constitution - punishing speech with death - and you're defending it. Maybe it was just a joke, or an exaggeration for effect, but I don't find it funny. I find it sinister. Especially considering it's the second time a paper has published this view.
Nevertheless, people on all sides just plain need to stop making insinuations that can be perceived as threats unless they are saying what they mean.
That "hard core cadre of ideological leftists" being globalists definitely wants to see rest of the world obediently on their knees, imprisoned or dead. Whatever that editorial meant about about "a hanging offense," I'm certain leftists who read that just loved envisioning such in their evil indoctrinated sick heads.
In this climate, the Boston Herald would have far been better off ending that editorial with something like "--ought to be marginalized as silly Chicken Littles" instead of anything that remotely suggested the stretching of necks, jailing or punishment in any form or fashion.
So methinks someone needs to yell, "Hey, don't write that kinda crap!"
There are a lot of threats too dangerous to ignore, but not the ones made up like hysterical inflammatory false accusations of a newspaper claimed to advocate "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER". That only serves to discredit those associated with it. Any sensible person attracted to Ayn Rand and coming here for more information who sees that as representative will only go off in another direction, writing off Ayn Rand supporters as another group of kooks.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2OBjk...
Don't give them an inch. Don't ignore or tolerate any "--ought to be a hanging offense" or any "--ought to go to jail" either.
Ayn Rand strongly supported science, and for that reason opposed 'state science institutes' as well as forcing companies to support them. She did not oppose vaccination and supported quarantines for those who would spread a communicable disease without them. She did not support conspiracy theories.
Glad you like my writing style.
Rather than get into things that won't be resolved in this medium I'll say that when you look at topics like this, go with Objectivism. What would an Objectivist say about hanging people who don't agree? What would an Objectivist say about forced medical treatment? What might Ayn Rand say about studies being done in "science institutes" on products when the manufacturers are paying for those studies? Don't waste your efforts trying to answer me here. Ask yourself.
The Herald did not did not say it advocates "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER" and obviously does not want to "hang" people, despite the desperate attempts to misrepresent the clear meaning of the editorial. There is no excuse for the hysterical misrepresentation. Perhaps if the Herald editors had believed that their readers were too obtuse to understand the editorial they would have worded it differently, but beyond the fringes nothing helps. Sometimes obtuseness is deliberate.
The same clowns hysterically misrepresenting people on behalf of their emotional anti-science "cause" here are on a rage 'downvoting' the facts here in a fit of further lashing out. They lack objectivity, to say the least.
Wakefield's a good man. He's certainly not a liar. Listen to his speeches yourself and REALLY focus on the words. What has been reported on him is so far off that it'd be laughable if he weren't such a good guy.
When I write, the Obamanation should be tried for treason (for a list of things!) and face what used to (Eddie Slovak/the Rosenbergs) come with that sort of a magnitude, I mean it.
Should I ever write something is a hanging offense, I will most certainly mean it.
Howie Carr is well known in New England. Warren Brooks died prematurely in the 1990s, but is still remembered. One of the last series he published in the Herald was an excellent series of articles on property rights, including exposing the anti-private property rights corruption of The Nature Conservancy nationally and a major US Fish & Wildlife Service/land trust hit job against a private landowner in Maine. I talked to him several times when I was first starting out in this battle, providing him with a lot of good written documentation that he used very well. It's a shame we lost him shortly after that.
The recent Herald editorial on the anti-vaccine fad was very brief, and as an editorial was of course opinion but not dishonestly manipulative like so much is. It wasn't controversial with much of anyone other than a few perpetually frenzied kooks out of the region like the Natural News website. It didn't otherwise generate a backlash and would not have no matter what side it was published from.
Being for or against vaccines and modern medical technology is not particularly conservative or liberal, but does show up as one of the stock emotional movement outbursts. Taking a flaky anti-vaccine position got conservative Michelle Bachmann in a lot of trouble, embarrassing and discrediting her politically.
Ironically, Warren Brooks died of simple pneumonia because he was a follower of Christian Scientists and refused medical treatment that would have saved him.
The Herald editorial concluded, as has been explained previously, with the phrase "ought to be a hanging offense" as a metaphor to emphasize the seriousness of the dangerous fad phobia it denounced. No sensible person believes anyone is advocating "hanging". Even in states with the death penalty for murder "hanging" is no longer used, which ought to serve as a clue to those incapable of figuring it out on their own, and it never did involve "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER".
The Herald did not did not advocate "government-run execution squads to MASS MURDER" and anyone can see that and the rest of the hysteria in this thread. Instead of acknowledging that you are defensively trying to turn it into a personal feud.
Load more comments...