Discussion
  • Read More
    ComfortablyDerpSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:19am

    ok so to be a republican president, you have to cater to people who are:

    - racists

    - anti-vaccine

    - don't believe in man-made climate change

    - homophobic

    ?????

    how many people are actually like this? is the republican party completely wrong in reading their audience?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      SoveryoldComfortablyDerp
      2/02/15 10:28am

      No.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      TraceComfortablyDerp
      2/02/15 10:31am

      I often wonder this. And I think this is exactly why they keep losing, because by catering to the fucking insane nutjob portion of their base, they're alienating the moderate Republicans who are being put in the uncomfortable position of either voting for the other party or voting for the guys who think abortion should be illegal always or whatever stupid shit people get hung up on when it's none of their business. My brother-in-law is a moderate Republican. He has not voted in ages because he doesn't agree with Democrats on economy stance shit but also thinks every Republican they've shoved out recently are insane.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GoodForALaughSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:25am

    He's right that the government can't force people to be vaccinated however the flip side of that is that schools can deem those unvaccinated kids too much of a risk to allow them to attend school.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      chattygalGoodForALaugh
      2/02/15 10:47am

      As I saw mentioned on The Concourse last week, if schools* can remove children from the premises because of the potential health hazard to others from a child having a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with them, schools can and should remove children from the premises because of the potential health hazard to others of not having MMRV.

      *And any other public space that prohibits peanuts to safeguard the lives of those with allergies; the nuts who don't vaccinate need to be blacklisted as well.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      benjaminalloverGoodForALaugh
      2/02/15 11:50am

      Are unvaccinated children currently allowed to attend school in the U.S. and if so, why?

      This is the law in Canada. You have to show your immunization schedule to attend any private or public school, and also to work in certain jobs you have to show it again as an adult. Maybe we should start asking about vaccines at the border, just like we ask about travel history during the ebola outbreak.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    VectoriousSam Biddle
    2/02/15 11:02am

    Yes, you have a choice. But your freedom and choices fucking end when they infringe upon other people's health and well-being.

    You don't want to vaccinate your kids? Cool. All choices have consequences. Go live off the grid in the forest or in some wide open prairie and live off the land so you don't have to come into contact with the general public. That's your choice.You think you know better than all of science, then please do without all of its advancements. You get sick? Oh well, there won't be any doctors to help you since those idiots don't know what they're talking about anyway. Go rub some tree sap on it or something.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      TheHoopoeVectorious
      2/02/15 11:29am

      there is only one response to anti- vaccers.

      " causes autism you say? Poor dear, is that how you got this way?"

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      VectoriousTheHoopoe
      2/02/15 11:47am

      Sounds like the beginning of a Dr. Suess book about vaccines.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Taint NuttinSam Biddle
    2/02/15 11:12am

    Now that society has had its fill of these idiots and has finally started hammering them the past few weeks, they appear to be pivoting everything to that "choice" angle. This is no longer a public health issue, it's all about tolerance! Why must you people be so intolerant of your neighbors who just want to unilaterally roll back hundreds of years of scientific progress?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      benjaminalloverTaint Nuttin
      2/02/15 11:36am

      Let's stop calling them anti-vaxxers and start calling them pro-polio or measles-lovers. anti-science disease-mokeys. Petri douches!

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      whirlygirlygirlbenjaminallover
      2/02/15 12:36pm

      "Petri douches." ++++

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    SkipperydoodaSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:18am

    I was all ready to come here and be irritated but I think you're being a bit dramatic. He's simply acknowledging someone's desire for choice, not supporting their decision in any way. He's being a politician, what do you expect?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Harvey Keitel's Detachable DongSkipperydooda
      2/02/15 10:24am

      I think Christie is the first high-profile politician to openly pander to the anti-vax movement. That's kinda news.

      Also, this isn't really the same as pandering to racists or whatever. Anti-vaxxers can do some serious damage and should never be tolerated, much less pandered to.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      formergrSkipperydooda
      2/02/15 10:33am

      Vaccines only work because of herd immunity, and there is no "choice" when it comes to achieving herd immunity. There are already people who can't be vaccinated because of allergies to the ingredients, pre-existing conditions, or age, and the only way to protect these folks who legit *can't* get vaccinated is for EVERYONE ELSE to get vaccinated. Or it doesn't work. See: measles outbreak, Disneyland.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Major ShadeSam Biddle
    2/02/15 11:48am

    I must be older than most of you, because I grew up in the 50's and 60's when it was no big deal to get the measles, mumps or chicken pox. As a matter of fact, most Moms wanted their kids to get exposed to measles/mumps/chicken pox because their kid would be sick for a few days, get over it, and have immunity for the rest of their lives. Any kid who got sick knew you get to stay home from school for a few days, maybe a week, you ran a temperature for a couple days and that was it. We didn't have measles vaccinations in the 50s but even if we had, probably very few would have needed it. The vaccinations were for the serious diseases like small pox, diphtheria, whooping cough, lockjaw, TB and polio. Measles was nothing to worry about, unless a pregnant woman became exposed. Measles isn't fatal and the child doesn't need to see a doctor, unless the temp is over 101.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      barebranchMajor Shade
      2/02/15 1:38pm

      Well thank god we now have a protocol in place so that all pregnant women are isolated from society for the duration of their pregnancy, instead of just wandering about freely as they were allowed to do in the 50s or 60s.

      Dad, there are a lot of things that are done differently now than they were in the 50s or 60s.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      Major Shadebarebranch
      2/02/15 1:52pm

      OK the vaccination is available for measles NOW that we didn't have then. I get it. Too bad all the moms and dads of today are too stupid and cheap to take advantage of it.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Paul DimitrovSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:20am

    Somewhere in the US a moronic anti-vaxxer mom is shaking her head at Sam Biddle, mumbling "if he only knew what I know!"

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      formergrPaul Dimitrov
      2/02/15 10:42am

      Something something healthcare industrial complex making money off vaccines!

      Which in the case of measles is ridiculous. That vaccine is old enough that I believe the patent has expired, and no one is rolling in the dough off the MMR vaccine. Really, the healthcare industrial complex actually would make *more* money if measles cases start to proliferate, what with the hospitalization costs and everything.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Tabby GevinsonSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:23am

    A re-post of something I posted at Jez —

    Hypothetical:

    Imagine that we are both neighbours and co-workers, so every morning we share the road for the entirety of our respective commutes to work.

    In this situation, how would you feel if I declared myself exempt from traffic laws? Would you be okay with me driving 50MPH over the limit, cruising against the flow of traffic, and doing illegal U-turns on the highway because I missed the exit?

    Would you be okay with responsibility for preventing an accident falling on you and everyone else on the road, just so I could assert my personal view of 'freedom'? If not, would I be able to convince you by citing a dubious study I read somewhere online?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      skefflesTabby Gevinson
      2/02/15 10:36am

      If you've read the articles on Jalopnik, you wouldn't be using that analogy. Guys there are still bitching about how Virginia actually prosecutes people breaking the road rules and are all "yay Texas traffic cops just let you do as you please". Conclusion: some people genuinely do think that traffic laws are optional.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      CaveyTabby Gevinson
      2/02/15 11:01am

      I was having this conversation with my wife. She is a pediatric nurse practitioner and she has to deal with this shit more in the last 2 years than she has in previous 10. She likens it to driving the wrong way on the road, which is fine until you start putting other people on the road, then everyone is fucked.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Rubbish Custard TartSam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:43am

    I'm entirely pro-vaccine, but you can't deny the fact that there is a problem when it comes to personal liberty vs. mandated injections. Comparing vaccines to quarantines, both limit personal freedom, but vaccines are much more invasive because they physically enter your body and are more long-lasting than keeping you isolated for a few days or weeks. Quarantines and vaccines are often solutions to the same problem.

    So I was ready to hate on Christie for whatever this article was about, but I don't think he's done anything too radical here aside from being slightly hypocritical if you choose to interpret him in the harshest way possible.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      cepalgRubbish Custard Tart
      2/02/15 10:53am

      The libertarian mentality, in all its putrescent glory.

      Yes, yes, children are dying of easily preventable illness, but better they die than be FORCED to get a cheap fucking vaccination.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      momofpeanutRubbish Custard Tart
      2/02/15 7:44pm

      Government accepts the need to restrict personal freedom for the benefit of all society all the time. Let's look at the last 40 or so years - mandatory seat belt laws, raising the drinking age, Selective Service, tougher laws against drinking and driving - all laws limiting personal choice because the cost to our society outweighed the benefits.

      The troubling thing about vaccinations is the fact that no one can find a link between vaccines and autism. Desperate parents are grasping onto anything they can as an answer, and while there was a question, it was reasonable to be prudent about vaccines. Now that the anti vaxx crowd has nothing to stand on, there's no need for this continued pandering. Lost in all their noise may be the true clue to the end of autism.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Shut Up!Sam Biddle
    2/02/15 10:32am

    I suspect he'd feel differently if they could put the vaccine in a sandwich.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Joe PShut Up!
      2/02/15 11:24am

      only comment that made me laugh. thanks, I was starting to lose hope.

      Reply
      <