First confirmed Measles death since 2003

[pfluffenmeister]

No. It does not. Nobody is required to drive. You have a choice.

true, but if you choose to drive, you are required to drive sober.

[doughboyshredder]

true, but if you choose to drive, you are required to drive sober.

You're being obtuse. You don't have to take something to be sober.

Your straw man is so dry it would catch on fire if you placed it in direct sunlight.

[doughboyshredder]

And nobody is required to send their kids with communicable diseases in to places with other kids................

A kid without a vaccine doesn't equal a kid with a communicable disease.

More hyperbole.

[mtngirl79]

You're being obtuse. You don't have to take something to be sober.

Your straw man is so dry it would catch on fire if you placed it in direct sunlight.

Your lame attempt at intelligence is pathetic. So pathetic that you don't even get it.

[doughboyshredder]

Your lame attempt at intelligence is pathetic. So pathetic that you don't even get it.

You're too stupid to realize how stupid you are. Pathetic loser.

[mtngirl79]

You're too stupid to realize how stupid you are. Pathetic loser.

Lol.

[doughboyshredder]

Lol.

Laughing at yourself.

[mtngirl79]

You're too stupid to realize how stupid you are. Pathetic loser.

I know you are but what am i?

[pfluffenmeister]

You're being obtuse. You don't have to take something to be sober.

Your straw man is so dry it would catch on fire if you placed it in direct sunlight.

No, I am not.
I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your reasoning.
Perhaps you recall the following ongoing dialogue:

let me blow your mind--> the law requires people TO drive sober.

No. It does not. Nobody is required to drive. You have a choice.

true, but if you choose to drive, you are required to drive sober.

If a person chooses to drive, they are required to be sober; simple.
You'll note I made no comment regarding the merits of vaccinations.

[doughboyshredder]

No, I am not.
I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your reasoning.
Perhaps you recall the following ongoing dialogue:








If a person chooses to drive, they are required to be sober; simple.
You'll note I made no comment regarding the merits of vaccinations.

In order to be sober to you have to ingest something? Or do you have to not ingest something?

[stfu&gbtw]

A better analogy is that everyone is required to wear seatbelts if they choose to drive. You don't have to drive, but if you do, seatbelts have been repeatedly demonstrated to save lives. It couldn't be said that no one has ever died as a result of wearing a seatbelt, but the risk of wearing a seatbelt is dwarfed by the risk of not wearing one. Unfortunately, the individual's decision about vaccines has much greater import for the community than their decision about seatbelts.

There are few scientific theories that are so well supported, and have produced so much benefit for mankind as have germ theory and vaccines. I'm curious DBS... If you doubt this, what else makes your list of dubious scientific claims? Relativity? Quantum Mechanics? Evolution? Astronomy?

[frorider]

Actually your seatbelt analogy isn't very helpful here, since it logically implies that riding motorcycles should be illegal since they increase the risk of death to the driver.

The seatbelt law analogy is a bit more relevant if one considers the increased financial cost of healthcare for the dumbass driver who drove w/o seatbelt, and the research that shows that a belt increases the odds of the driver retaining some control of the car eg avoidance of a secondary head-on collision.

I lean libertarian on many issues...but I dislike the idea of medtards deciding how best to fuck up their kids' vaccination, only in the sense that they're degrading herd immunity. So my reasonable compromise is that we designate a state as an unvaccinated state--Kansas maybe--and the antivaxxers can move there, or vaccinate.

[MagnificentUnicorn]

Actually your seatbelt analogy isn't very helpful here, since it logically implies that riding motorcycles should be illegal since they increase the risk of death to the driver.

The seatbelt law analogy is a bit more relevant if one considers the increased financial cost of healthcare for the dumbass driver who drove w/o seatbelt, and the research that shows that a belt increases the odds of the driver retaining some control of the car eg avoidance of a secondary head-on collision.

I lean libertarian on many issues...but I dislike the idea of medtards deciding how best to fuck up their kids' vaccination, only in the sense that they're degrading herd immunity. So my reasonable compromise is that we designate a state as an unvaccinated state--Kansas maybe--and the antivaxxers can move there, or vaccinate.

This is sound reasoning, let's move forward with the plan.

[frorider]

BTW common sense, or reading relevant articles, quickly dispels the Big Pharma vaccine profit myth. Vaccines make them little or no money, which is one reason they've tended to pull out of that market if they can. http://m.content.healthaffairs.org/c.../24/3/622.full

[hutash]

Stop bringing facts into an illogical argument, DBS's head might explode. Then again, a few facts never stop people like him from arguing his stupid position.

[stfu&gbtw]

Actually your seatbelt analogy isn't very helpful here, since it logically implies that riding motorcycles should be illegal since they increase the risk of death to the driver.

The seatbelt law analogy is a bit more relevant if one considers the increased financial cost of healthcare for the dumbass driver who drove w/o seatbelt, and the research that shows that a belt increases the odds of the driver retaining some control of the car eg avoidance of a secondary head-on collision.

I lean libertarian on many issues...but I dislike the idea of medtards deciding how best to fuck up their kids' vaccination, only in the sense that they're degrading herd immunity. So my reasonable compromise is that we designate a state as an unvaccinated state--Kansas maybe--and the antivaxxers can move there, or vaccinate.

[Game Over]

I am fascinated with the phenomenon known as denialism. These ideas that they come up with are just fucking nuts. Like science can easily be bought off, the illuminati, chemtrails, Monsanto... just simply modern day flat earthers, evolution deniers and moon landing fakers. Shit I have friends who think sunscreen is worse for you than a sunburn.

[DBdude]

unfortunately there are plenty of states that allow vaccination exceptions in public school

In vermont you fill out a form that states what required vaccinations have not been administered, whether it is religious or philosophical, and whether you have read the required pamplet.

pretty fucking onerous standard

[mtngirl79]

Some states are now requiring a form to be signed by a doctor to get an exemption. Basically, the doctor explains what an idiot they are being and if the parents STILL won't vaccinate, they get the doctor to sign that they tried and then they get their exemption.

Ironically, it seems to lower the rate of non vaxxers as it requires more work.... non vaxxing maybe just laziness?

[doughboyshredder]

A better analogy is that everyone is required to wear seatbelts if they choose to drive. You don't have to drive, but if you do, seatbelts have been repeatedly demonstrated to save lives. It couldn't be said that no one has ever died as a result of wearing a seatbelt, but the risk of wearing a seatbelt is dwarfed by the risk of not wearing one. Unfortunately, the individual's decision about vaccines has much greater import for the community than their decision about seatbelts.

There are few scientific theories that are so well supported, and have produced so much benefit for mankind as have germ theory and vaccines. I'm curious DBS... If you doubt this, what else makes your list of dubious scientific claims? Relativity? Quantum Mechanics? Evolution? Astronomy?

What specifically do you think I doubt?

[doughboyshredder]

Good god, but DBS remains right up there with the biggest morons on TGR.

Nobody requires kids to get vaccinated.

Nobody, ever, in the history of history, has trie to require every child to get every possible vaccination. So jus tput that red herring back in the ocean.

You stupid fuck, I never claimed that there was a requirement. I reacted to asshole goat's statement that any parent that doesn't vaccinate should be charged with child abuse. (I.E. that vaccinations should not only be required but that there should be severe penalties for parents that don't follow the law.)

The red herring you're talking about was presented by asshole goat, not me.

[mtngirl79]

Tell that to the parents of the children who end up with serious developmental disabilities from contracting measles from an unvaccinated kid. Or polio. Even chicken pox can have serious consequences.

[doughboyshredder]

Tell that to the parents of the children who end up with serious developmental disabilities from contracting measles from an unvaccinated kid. Or polio. Even chicken pox can have serious consequences.

Tell them what, genius?

Have I ever said that a child shouldn't get vaccinated for measles?

In fact, the only vaccine that I have voiced an issue with is the hep-B vaccine, which I think is ridiculous to give to your kid, if the mother is not at risk for contracting Hep B.

Again, just to make it completely fucking clear. My issue is with asshole goat stating that any parent that doesn't vaccinate should be charged with child abuse. Fuck him and fuck you if you agree with that ridiculously hyperbolic bullshit statement.

[mtngirl79]

Tell them DBS said the government should not require vaccines proven to be safe to protect everyone at a schedule decided apon by medical doctors.

Because it's the uneducated citizen's right to risk their child's life as well as the publics cause of hysteria and paranoia.

[stfu&gbtw]

What specifically do you think I doubt?

Only what you've stated. You fill in the blanks.

If it were up to me to guess, I'd bet you don't doubt much. Few people are as certain as the obnoxiously ignorant.