Vaccinations and Religious Exemptions

[IndigoChild5559]

What? The foreskin is part of the genitalia.

It is not the complete genital. It is an incredibly small and completely insignificant part. It doesn't matter to the function of male genitals which is urination a procreation, or even sexual pleasure. Again, the equivilent of FGM is the removal of the penis, or at least the penis head.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Sorry, can't do that if you're doing things to people without their consent.

Western Culture imposes things on people without their consent all the time. Don't be such a hypocrite. And it's for the same reason -- it's for the best (either for society or for a protected minority). For example, our society forces employers to hire regardless of race, religion, national original, sex, age... That impinges on the freedom of employers to hire whomever they choose. I'm not saying that this isn't how things should be -- I agree it's for the best of society. I'm saying you haven't thought this through. Your posts are an example of ethnocentrism.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

You don't want non-Jews to consider Jews part of their community?

I thought we are a multicultural community, a nation with a core of common values, within which there is further diversity? Freedom of religion is part of the common values, and further diversity underscores our individuality as a People.

We are like other tribal peoples, such as the Lakota or the Navajo, who are part of this country, but we maintain our tribal distinction.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

What I'm having a hard time wrapping my mind around is that some God creates baby boys with foreskins and then requires adults to cut off parts of it when the babies are born.
If it's so important for people not to have foreskins, why does God make humans who have them?

He does NOT require baby boys to have their foreskins removed. At least not 99.98% of them, which pretty much makes it the rule. Jewish boys are 0.02% of all baby boys in the world. They are the exception to the rule.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

It is not the complete genital. It is an incredibly small and completely insignificant part. It doesn't matter to the function of male genitals which is urination a procreation, or even sexual pleasure. Again, the equivilent of FGM is the removal of the penis, or at least the penis head.

Are you saying that because most FGM is more extensive, then circumcision is not mutilation? If that is so, then one only need to find a more extensive form of mutilation to compare FGM to and it would no longer be mutilation either.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I'd like to see a discussion about vaccinations and exemptions, mostly the religious ones, but also exemptions on any grounds. I've placed this in the Science and Religion section, but remember that the overwhelming majority of religious people such as myself vaccinate.

The stakes are high. Measles is back, and every time there is measles, there are always some deaths. Same with the flu. Here in the Los Angeles area, believe it or not, we are actually having a typhus epidemic. Typhus is a disease that spreads where ever there is trash, because rats eat the trash and the fleas on the rats spread the disease. In other words it's a disease of pre-modern eras before cities had garbage pickups and vaccinations. Tthe shame on Los Angeles for its treatment of the homeless is fodder for another thread. But at any rate, the fleas have spread to places such as police offices and even city hall. Fleas that bite those that are infected and then spread the disease to others.

When people are not vaccinated they obviously put not only themselves at risk, and put all others who are not vaccinated at risk, but they put a small percentage of the vaccinated public at risk, because no vaccination is 100% effective. My daughter had all her vaccinations, including TDaP, and yet as an adult she still caught whooping cough (pertussis) and nearly died. In generations past, when nearly everyone was vaccinated, we had what was known as a herd protection, where those whose vaccinations had failed were still protected because no one was really getting the disease, but that has now ended because of the growing prevalence of anti-vaccinators.

So weigh in with your comments, pro and con.

I'm pretty extreme. I see this as a public health issue and a child neglect issue. I do not think there should be any exceptions for vaccines except allergies to the vaccines themselves. Those who don't want to vaccinate should be forced to 1. for the health of the community (their right to throw a punch ends where my face begins) and 2. for the general welfare of their kids. If they continue to refuse, they should be fined, a child welfare case opened, and their kids taken and vaccinated against their will. Yeap, I'm serious about this stuff. I have no patience with those who are too stupid to recognize paranoid conspiracy theories.

I read online an certain interchange. A woman who was anti-vaccination was asking what she could do to protect her children. The answers were harsh and to the point. One in particular was right on the mark. It said take your kids to the edge of the flat earth where the earth was fresher.

I understand that some people have religious objections to vaccinations and others are ignorant, confused and afraid. There is a risk. But everything has risks. There is a risk to doing nothing as well.

I am in favor of vaccinations too. The cost of reducing them or eliminating them is too high. The loss of benefits too great. All my children have been vaccinated.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Vaccines are a controversial topic with much misinformation circulating and emotions charged on both sides of this argument. So what are the facts and who has them?

• The Facts:
  The National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act has paid approximately $4 billion to families with vaccine injured children, and it's continuing to grow. The act protects pharmaceutical companies from being held accountable and just compensates victims.
  
  
• Reflect On:
  With all of the science, documented examples of scientific fraud and injury, why are vaccines still marketed as completely safe? There are multiple concerns to be addressed, so why are we told that "the science has spoken?" What's going on here?
  
  
  $4 Billion & Growing: U.S. Payouts for Vaccine Injuries & Deaths Keep Climbing

No doctor I ever spoke with represented vaccines as completely safe. The risks were discussed before decisions were made.

I consider them safer than taking your chances with disease. Especially in letting my children take their chances when they rely on me to provide for them.

 

[Deeje]

No doctor I ever spoke with represented vaccines as completely safe. The risks were discussed before decisions were made.

What if it was your child who died or was permanently damaged by way too many vaccinations? How would you feel then?
Wouldn't you like more testing to see who may have an adverse reaction BEFORE getting the shot? Once the damage is done, its permanent.....there is no reversing it. More testing is what the many parents want. Is it unreasonable? I don't think so.

I consider them safer than taking your chances with disease. Especially in letting my children take their chances when they rely on me to provide for them.

We are all free to make our own choices, as it should be. But no one should be forced to have something injected into their body that is not proven to be safe and effective. Its as simple as that. If vaccinations are such a wonderful thing then why are unvaccinated children such a risk to vaccinated kids and adults? The vaccinations are not a guarantee that you will not get the disease.....those who are vaccinated but still get sick can spread the diseases just as much as unvaccinated people. Is this ever discussed?

Are the risks being exaggerated to make sure that the emotional response in people will make them accept something that may or may not affect them and their children for the rest of their lives?

What the medical profession should be doing is teaching people how to build a strong immune system....that would be the best strategy, but they know that people do not have access to unpolluted food, grown in unpolluted soil with unpolluted air and water. Everything we eat or drink is exposed to human contamination. The vitamin and mineral content is severely depleted by the way it is produced and sold. Add to that our addiction to fast food (devoid of almost all nutrition) and you have a reason to worry about your health in the first place.

Add to that the financial incentives for vast vaccination programs where Pharma companies rake off huge profits and you have a good reason to doubt the propaganda. Why do you think there is appeal to emotion? Who wants to feel like a bad parent? Follow the money trail.

There is so much more to this issue than most people realize.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

What if it was your child who died or was permanently damaged by way too many vaccinations? How would you feel then?
Wouldn't you like more testing to see who may have an adverse reaction BEFORE getting the shot? Once the damage is done, its permanent.....there is no reversing it. More testing is what the many parents want. Is it unreasonable? I don't think so.

I would feel the same way, though maybe not as bad as I would if they died of some disease, because I failed to protect them. These things are tested.

We are all free to make our own choices, as it should be. But no one should be forced to have something injected into their body that is not proven to be safe and effective. Its as simple as that. If vaccinations are such a wonderful thing then why are unvaccinated children such a risk to vaccinated kids and adults? The vaccinations are not a guarantee that you will not get the disease.....those who are vaccinated but still get sick can spread the diseases just as much as unvaccinated people. Is this ever discussed?

We also have to rational and weigh risks. I have done that and benefited from it. My children are benefiting from it. Scare tactics are not the answer.

Are the risks being exaggerated to make sure that the emotional response in people will make them accept something that may or may not affect them and their children for the rest of their lives?

No. Everything has a risk. What you are saying is that your fear trumps the right of others not to be exposed to diseased people. You are ignoring the value that vaccines have provided this society and how rampant disease would not have resulted in a population that has been growing exponentially for the last 100 years, in part from medicine, including vaccines.

What the medical profession should be doing is teaching people how to build a strong immune system....that would be the best strategy, but they know that people do not have access to unpolluted food, grown in unpolluted soil with unpolluted air and water. Everything we eat or drink is exposed to human contamination. The vitamin and mineral content is severely depleted by the way it is produced and sold. Add to that our addiction to fast food (devoid of almost all nutrition) and you have a reason to worry about your health in the first place.

They do. People do not always listen. Some people are even ignorant enough to ignore what they learn about the values of vaccination.

Add to that the financial incentives for vast vaccination programs where Pharma companies rake off huge profits and you have a good reason to doubt the propaganda. Why do you think there is appeal to emotion? Who wants to feel like a bad parent? Follow the money trail.

There is so much more to this issue than most people realize.

Vaccines do not make that much money for pharmaceutical companies. Using this objection is silly.

 

[Deeje]

I would feel the same way, though maybe not as bad as I would if they died of some disease, because I failed to protect them. These things are tested.

There's the "bad parent" surfacing again. Ask the oldies how many kids died of the childhood diseases that they often organized for their children to "catch" so that they would have immunity for life....and for free.

Growing up, I never heard of a single person or child who died from measles or mumps or chicken pox....but today I know so many people who have kids with autism...sometimes more than one. It is a global epidemic growing exponentially with the use of vaccines. Just a co-incidence? I'd like to know for sure...wouldn't you?

Everything has a risk. What you are saying is that your fear trumps the right of others not to be exposed to diseased people. You are ignoring the value that vaccines have provided this society and how rampant disease would not have resulted in a population that has been growing exponentially for the last 100 years, in part from medicine, including vaccines.

I am ignoring nothing. I am simply asking for more testing to be done so that the risks of severe injury or death are minimized. Perhaps its the amount of vaccines that are pumped into the body of an infant with an underdeveloped immune system, now overloaded with multiple viruses all at once....could that be the problem? Multiple dosing is a cost saving measure, not something designed to make the child safer.
The Vaccine Injury Compensation Scheme has already paid out over 4 billion dollars to parents of damaged children.....do you think that these payments would be made if there was no legitimate case made?

People do not always listen. Some people are even ignorant enough to ignore what they learn about the values of vaccination.

I have explored both side of this argument and I find that those who push vaccinations trust the medical profession implicitly and believe whatever propaganda they release to the public. Again I say...follow the money trail. What do the anti-vaxers have to gain by sounding a warning about the risks?What is in it for them?

vaccines do not make that much money for pharmaceutical companies. Using this objection is silly.

Are you sure about that?

"Even in an industry dominated by a few huge companies, disruption happens sometimes—and 2017 was one of those times. GlaxoSmithKline surpassed Merck to top the vaccine industry by sales, generating $7 billion compared to Merck's $6.5 billion.

It stands to be a long-term switch, too; analysts predict the U.K. drug giant's momentum in the field will continue. The company doubled down on vaccines in 2014 with its massive Novartis asset swap, and GSK is now heading to nearly $11 billion in vaccine sales by 2024, according to a recent report."

What about the fluvax?

"....in the megablockbuster pneumococcal field—now dominated by Pfizer's Prevnar 13—Merck is making moves with a shot that guards against 15 viral strains. The company kicked off a head-to-head phase 3 trial this year against Pfizer's star shot. Pfizer, for its part, is advancing a 20-valent shot, now in midstage testing. Still, Pfizer’s Prevnar 13 is the bestselling product in the vaccine world, generating $5.6 billion last year, and it’ll be years before a new shot can challenge it.

The top 5 vaccine companies by 2017 revenue"

Not small bikkies.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

There's the "bad parent" surfacing again. Ask the oldies how many kids died of the childhood diseases that they often organized for their children to "catch" so that they would have immunity for life....and for free.

Growing up, I never heard of a single person or child who died from measles or mumps or chicken pox....but today I know so many people who have kids with autism...sometimes more than one. It is a global epidemic growing exponentially with the use of vaccines. Just a co-incidence? I'd like to know for sure...wouldn't you?



I am ignoring nothing. I am simply asking for more testing to be done so that the risks of severe injury or death are minimized. Perhaps its the amount of vaccines that are pumped into the body of an infant with an underdeveloped immune system, now overloaded with multiple viruses all at once....could that be the problem? Multiple dosing is a cost saving measure, not something designed to make the child safer.
The Vaccine Injury Compensation Scheme has already paid out over 4 billion dollars to parents of damaged children.....do you think that these payments would be made if there was no legitimate case made?



I have explored both side of this argument and I find that those who push vaccinations trust the medical profession implicitly and believe whatever propaganda they release to the public. Again I say...follow the money trail. What do the anti-vaxers have to gain by sounding a warning about the risks?What is in it for them?



Are you sure about that?

"Even in an industry dominated by a few huge companies, disruption happens sometimes—and 2017 was one of those times. GlaxoSmithKline surpassed Merck to top the vaccine industry by sales, generating $7 billion compared to Merck's $6.5 billion.

It stands to be a long-term switch, too; analysts predict the U.K. drug giant's momentum in the field will continue. The company doubled down on vaccines in 2014 with its massive Novartis asset swap, and GSK is now heading to nearly $11 billion in vaccine sales by 2024, according to a recent report."

What about the fluvax?

"....in the megablockbuster pneumococcal field—now dominated by Pfizer's Prevnar 13—Merck is making moves with a shot that guards against 15 viral strains. The company kicked off a head-to-head phase 3 trial this year against Pfizer's star shot. Pfizer, for its part, is advancing a 20-valent shot, now in midstage testing. Still, Pfizer’s Prevnar 13 is the bestselling product in the vaccine world, generating $5.6 billion last year, and it’ll be years before a new shot can challenge it.

The top 5 vaccine companies by 2017 revenue"

Not small bikkies.

My mother nearly died from whooping cough. Suffering from it changed her life. She made sure her children were protected. She was no foolish zealot, ignoring reality and cherry picking. Between 50 and 100 million people were killed in the 1918 flu pandemic. Think of how many vaccines would have saved, had they existed. I can get up tomorrow and go to cemetery that includes the graves of five children that all died within weeks of each other from disease easily prevented by vaccine. Your inability to name victims does not mean they do not exist.

Prior to 1986, drug manufactures had all but gotten out of the business because it was not profitable. The companies you list are not making their profits from vaccines.

 

[Deeje]

My mother nearly died from whooping cough. Suffering from it changed her life. She made sure her children were protected. She was no foolish zealot, ignoring reality and cherry picking.

My daughter and granddaughter both got whooping cough even though both were immunized......do you think that they would have been less infectious to others just because they had had their shots?

Between 50 and 100 million people were killed in the 1918 flu pandemic. Think of how many vaccines would have saved, had they existed.

Both my mother and my husband had extremely bad reactions to the flu shots.....my mother almost died. She was told never to have one again. Do you know how many strains of flu there are? You cannot possibly be immunized for all of them.

I can get up tomorrow and go to cemetery that includes the graves of five children that all died within weeks of each other from disease easily prevented by vaccine. Your inability to name victims does not mean they do not exist.

I never said they didn't. All I said was that we need more investigation into the safety of multiple vaccinations given to very young children and what is in them. Would you rather ignore the evidence that vaccines have caused harm to so many children? If there was no harm, then why have a Vaccine Injury Compensation Scheme? Why pay out over 4 billion dollars if these children were not damaged? Can any amount of money compensate a person for losing their life or their physical and mental abilities?

Prior to 1986, drug manufactures had all but gotten out of the business because it was not profitable. The companies you list are not making their profits from vaccines.

Apart from the figures I provided, you are misinterpreting what I said. I am not against vaccinations per se....I am against giving tiny babies more viruses than their immune systems can handle all at once. I am asking that the ingredients (both biological and those used as preservatives) used in these vaccinations be thoroughly tested. Is that too much to ask?

You see, if we were giving them single dose vaccinations, we could easily see which ones if any were causing a problem. And if we gave them single dose vaccinations and the rates of autism went down, we would have a case against the MMR vaccine. How many people do you know that ever got measles, mumps and rubella all at once?

I am for safety, not in trusting big, money-hungry corporations with the health and safety of my children just so that they can make a fortune at the expense of the few who are disabled for life or even killed by a parent's attempt to safeguard them when these big corporations couldn't care less. Just pay the victims to shut them up.

Is that good enough?

This is Dr Theresa Deisher, an expert on vaccination safety.

We need more research......honest research.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I thought we are a multicultural community, a nation with a core of common values, within which there is further diversity?

So did I, but you're asking for a rejection of that.

Freedom of religion is part of the common values, and further diversity underscores our individuality as a People.

Religious initiation rituals for infants, especially ones that involve permanent physical changes, deny both the religious freedom and the individuality of the child.

We are like other tribal peoples, such as the Lakota or the Navajo, who are part of this country, but we maintain our tribal distinction.

Well, no. First Nations groups really are separate legal entities - sovereign states in their own right, even if this legal sovereignty has been eroded - whose relationship with the United States has been established through various treaties.

OTOH, Jews in the United States have the same status as any other citizen.

 

[SkepticThinker]

It is not the complete genital. It is an incredibly small and completely insignificant part. It doesn't matter to the function of male genitals which is urination a procreation, or even sexual pleasure. Again, the equivilent of FGM is the removal of the penis, or at least the penis head.

Yeah, it's part of the genitalia, like I said. You said it wasn't.

 

[SkepticThinker]

Western Culture imposes things on people without their consent all the time. Don't be such a hypocrite. And it's for the same reason -- it's for the best (either for society or for a protected minority). For example, our society forces employers to hire regardless of race, religion, national original, sex, age... That impinges on the freedom of employers to hire whomever they choose. I'm not saying that this isn't how things should be -- I agree it's for the best of society. I'm saying you haven't thought this through. Your posts are an example of ethnocentrism.

Western culture hasn't cut anything off my body without my consent. There's nothing hypocritical about my position against cutting off pieces of infant's genitalia.
Your comparison of genital mutilation to laws against workplace discrimination is absolutely ridiculous.

 

[SkepticThinker]

He does NOT require baby boys to have their foreskins removed. At least not 99.98% of them, which pretty much makes it the rule. Jewish boys are 0.02% of all baby boys in the world. They are the exception to the rule.

Okay. Not sure how that changes (or answers) the question.
Do I seriously have to narrow my question here? Do you not understand it? I hope you're not being intentionally obtuse.

 

[SkepticThinker]

There's the "bad parent" surfacing again. Ask the oldies how many kids died of the childhood diseases that they often organized for their children to "catch" so that they would have immunity for life....and for free.

I did happen to ask my grandfather about this stuff once. He didn't have access to vaccines growing up in the 1920s in rural Canada. Turns out, his baby brother died from diphtheria before he turned one year old.
My grandfather thought people should get vaccinated.

Growing up, I never heard of a single person or child who died from measles or mumps or chicken pox....but today I know so many people who have kids with autism...sometimes more than one. It is a global epidemic growing exponentially with the use of vaccines. Just a co-incidence? I'd like to know for sure...wouldn't you?

You can thank vaccines for that.

There is no link between vaccines and autism. None. At. All. Yet another massive study has just confirmed this. Again.
Yet Another Study Finds No Link Between Measles Vaccine and Autism | Smart News | Smithsonian

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

He does NOT require baby boys to have their foreskins removed. At least not 99.98% of them, which pretty much makes it the rule. Jewish boys are 0.02% of all baby boys in the world. They are the exception to the rule.

And God is incapable of making the penises of this 0.02% meet his standard without your intervention?

All sorts of things are coded for in DNA. Why do you think he didn't created some "foreskin gene" and turn it off for Jews and on for everyone else?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

There's the "bad parent" surfacing again.

That's right.

Any parent who could easily protect their child from dangerous diseases but chooses not to is a parent who does not have the child's best interests in mind.

I'm not sure why you're trying to make this sound controversial.

 

[We Never Know]

There's the "bad parent" surfacing again. Ask the oldies how many kids died of the childhood diseases that they often organized for their children to "catch" so that they would have immunity for life....and for free.

Growing up, I never heard of a single person or child who died from measles or mumps or chicken pox....but today I know so many people who have kids with autism...sometimes more than one. It is a global epidemic growing exponentially with the use of vaccines. Just a co-incidence? I'd like to know for sure...wouldn't you?



I am ignoring nothing. I am simply asking for more testing to be done so that the risks of severe injury or death are minimized. Perhaps its the amount of vaccines that are pumped into the body of an infant with an underdeveloped immune system, now overloaded with multiple viruses all at once....could that be the problem? Multiple dosing is a cost saving measure, not something designed to make the child safer.
The Vaccine Injury Compensation Scheme has already paid out over 4 billion dollars to parents of damaged children.....do you think that these payments would be made if there was no legitimate case made?



I have explored both side of this argument and I find that those who push vaccinations trust the medical profession implicitly and believe whatever propaganda they release to the public. Again I say...follow the money trail. What do the anti-vaxers have to gain by sounding a warning about the risks?What is in it for them?



Are you sure about that?

"Even in an industry dominated by a few huge companies, disruption happens sometimes—and 2017 was one of those times. GlaxoSmithKline surpassed Merck to top the vaccine industry by sales, generating $7 billion compared to Merck's $6.5 billion.

It stands to be a long-term switch, too; analysts predict the U.K. drug giant's momentum in the field will continue. The company doubled down on vaccines in 2014 with its massive Novartis asset swap, and GSK is now heading to nearly $11 billion in vaccine sales by 2024, according to a recent report."

What about the fluvax?

"....in the megablockbuster pneumococcal field—now dominated by Pfizer's Prevnar 13—Merck is making moves with a shot that guards against 15 viral strains. The company kicked off a head-to-head phase 3 trial this year against Pfizer's star shot. Pfizer, for its part, is advancing a 20-valent shot, now in midstage testing. Still, Pfizer’s Prevnar 13 is the bestselling product in the vaccine world, generating $5.6 billion last year, and it’ll be years before a new shot can challenge it.

The top 5 vaccine companies by 2017 revenue"

Not small bikkies.

While they can't really get a mortality rate of how many would have died if they didn't get vaccines, we can show mortality rate with vaccines.

The United States gives more vaccines to than other countries, has the highest rate of autism, and has the highest mortality rate in children under 5 years old.
Fourteen Studies

Mississippi has the highest rate of vaccination in the U.S.
Mississippi has highest childhood vaccination rates in country - Mississippi Business Journal

Mississippi also has the highest infant mortality rate.
Stats of the States - Infant Mortality

Edit -
Ironically the Unhealthiest State(Mississippi) in America Has the Best Vaccination Rate

The Unhealthiest State in America Has the Best Vaccination Rate: Offit’s Orwellian Logic Fails to Connect the Dots • Children's Health Defense