Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
According to the CA Constitution, every child has a right to an education. Are they going to amend the Constitution to say they are only have that right if the child has certain vaccinations? Are they going to amend it to say that they only have that right if the parents bow to every demand the state decides to make? No? Then they are 100% going against the state constitution.
Sure they do, but no right is absolute. If your kid acts disruptively in class, he gets booted, if you send your kid to school with a "**** the world" t-shirt on, he gets sent home. Rights are never absolute, we can and do apply restrictions to them. You have no unlimited "right to free speech", there are limits to everything.
This is simply one such restriction. As far as precedent goes, courts have consistently landed on the side of legislative bodies when it comes to public health and vaccination. If a legislature passes a law supporting vaccination, courts have been loathe to interfere in the decision, this precedent goes back over 100 years. This is one area where no court has wanted to wade into, the precedent is cut and dry, when it comes to vaccination, the laws that are passed through a legislature are pretty much sacrosanct and that even with mandatory vaccination, none of your rights are being violated.
The results of the most recent challenge to vaccination laws from NY:
Quote:
That’s when the three parents joined forces and mounted a constitutional challenge to New York’s vaccination requirement. They threw the book at the state, arguing, among other things, violations of their rights under the First and Fourteenth Amendments, as well as under state and municipal law. The rub of their arguments: that the state was infringing on their liberty and religious interests. A federal judge in Brooklyn dismissed all their claims.
That’s when the Second Circuit court, as it’s wont to do on appeal, took up all of these grievances anew and rejected them one by one. Citing Jacobson v. Massachusetts, the 1905 case,a three-judge panel ruled in a short opinion that New York was well within its “police power” to mandate vaccinations for schoolchildren. Since immunizations are “in the interest of the population as a whole,” the court said they trump the parents’ individual wishes. The court brushed aside their claim that “a growing body of scientific evidence demonstrates that vaccines cause more harm to society than good,” noting that only the legislature—and not the parents or the court—could make the call on the alleged body of evidence.
Bill Koski, a Stanford University professor of law and education, said the bill raises "complicated tensions between a parents' right to raise their child as they see fit and a child's right to education, and the state's right to regulate public health."
He believes any legal challenge to the proposed legislation would face "a lot of hurdles." But he said the "unconditional right to go to school is not unconditional." One extreme example, Koski cited: Even if a student with a "concealed-carry" permit had a right to carry a gun, "the school could reasonably say: We don't allow guns on campus." Reiss, at UC Hastings, emphasized that SB 277 is not "forcing" parents to do anything. Rather, she said, parents have a choice -- to vaccinate or not -- and decide the consequences for their children's education. "You make your choice and pay the consequences," she said. "It does not mean you make your choice and someone else has to pay."
The vaccinators have to call names dismiss and try to bully anyone that doesn't agree...all those tactics mean they cannot uphold their argument.
I asked a few questions a way back and they all REFUSE to even acknowledge those question...WHY? Hmmm...
Quote:
Because you and the rest of the mouth-breathing collective continually fail to comprehend that there are those who cannot be vaccinated for legitimate health reasons as has been stated no less than a hundred times in this thread.
Name calling...
I comprehend that the vaccines can hurt some people by your own admission...why is that? Why aren't they safe for everyone?
The vaccinators have to call names dismiss and try to bully anyone that doesn't agree...all those tactics mean they cannot uphold their argument.
I asked a few questions a way back and they all REFUSE to even acknowledge those question...WHY? Hmmm...
Name calling...
I comprehend that the vaccines can hurt some people by your own admission...why is that? Why aren't they safe for everyone?
The bolded part is the fundamental flaw. It's not an argument. It's scientific fact vs baseless fears.
Its thousands of scientific studies against "celebrity" led completely debunked conspiracy theories. Its PROOF through prevention of diseases and less than one in a million serious adverse reaction. NOTHING in life is risk free. The fact that you can't comprehend that simple fact is why you're struggling here.
You know what IS proven to be harmful? Measles and the other diseases we vaccinate for. Ask your grandparents how it felt to bury their siblings.
You are accepting a known and deadly risk for the possibility (less than the likelihood of your kid being a BILLIONAIRE) that they might be harmed. That's absurd, and it's not reasonable to pretend it's valid. You may be able to do that for your kid (poor child) but mandates prevent your irrational decision making from harming the health of more vulnerable kids while they're at school.
Preventing disease is thought by most reasonable people to be a good thing.
[quote=Cyborgt800;40694170]The vaccinators have to call names dismiss and try to bully anyone that doesn't agree../quote]
It get old seeing the same paranoia derived BS repeatedly brought up over and over, your comments in this thread have indicated that you don't have the slightest clue as to what you are talking about when it comes to this subject.
On Monday, the California Department of Public Health issued a warning, particularly to prospective mothers, about the prevalence and danger of pertussis, also known as whooping cough, and the need to increase the vaccination rate against the disease.
Whooping cough can be deadly for infants and is responsible for one infant death already this year, according to Karen Smith, director of the state Public Health department.
Smith said, so far this year, there have been 126 infant hospitalizations due to whooping cough, along with the death of one baby -- and they're preventable, she said.
"Right now, it's estimated that fewer than half of all pregnant women in California are vaccinated against whooping cough," Smith said. "We need to increase that number to help improve the health of our children and of our communities."
Pregnant women need to receive the whooping cough vaccination in the last trimester of each pregnancy, Smith said, because the immunity decreases over time. Getting the vaccine is critical to stemming the spread of the illness, she said, which can be particularly dangerous for children under the age of one.
"Vaccinated mothers pass protective antibodies to their infants during pregnancy," Smith said.
The whooping cough vaccine called Tdap is designed to prevent tetanus and diphtheria, as well as pertussis. Whooping cough causes a severe, persistent cough, sometimes strong enough to make infants vomit. The 2014 outbreak of whooping cough in California featured the highest rate of disease since the 1950s, Smith said.
Pertussis continues to spread at above-normal levels in California following a major epidemic in 2014, when reported disease rates were the highest seen since the 1950’s. Infants under the age of one are at greatest risk for the disease, according health experts.
State health officials urge expecting mothers to receive the vaccine known as Tdap. Not only is it a vaccine against pertussis, but it also covers tetanus and diphtheria. Prenatal vaccination will help protect newborn children until they are old enough to receive their own vaccination against pertussis, according to the state’s health department. Experts say because immunity decreases over time, women should receive the pertussis vaccine in the last trimester of each pregnancy.
Pertussis can cause a severe, persistent cough. Historically, unvaccinated children with pertussis would cough hard enough to cause vomiting or a “whooping” breath after a coughing spell.
Symptoms of pertussis vary widely by age and vaccination history, officials said. Very young infants may not have typical pertussis symptoms and may not show to have a severe cough. Instead, they may have difficulty breathing, suffer episodes in which they stop breathing, or their faces may turn purple.
CDPH says it’s working closely with local health departments, schools, and other partners to inform providers and the public about the importance of vaccination against pertussis, especially for pregnant women. State health officials are also reminding parents that Tdap vaccination is a requirement for all students entering the 7th grade, under California law.
There are risks on both sides. The decision to vaccinate carries risks and decision not to vaccinate carries risk. Some illness carries a stronger risk of complications then others. Some vaccines are riskier then others. Some complications are easier to avoid then others. Parents should have the right to weigh all of the risks and information themselves and then decide what to vaccinate for or what not to vaccinate for. It's not a case of "one size fits all" . It's not black and white and it clearly is controversial. People feel strongly about vaccines on both sides. Let people decide. Mandates are unnecessary and only open the door to future things that we may or may not agree with. We already have one pro vaccine, pro mandate poster who is concerned about HPV mandates. Some of us care about protecting our right to choose. Vaccine mandates use coercion, not choice.
For about the hundredth time, no choice is without tradeoffs.
Frankly instead of worrying about homeschooling because they deny their child vaccinations, the parents should be MORE worried about them contracting (and spreading) deadly preventable diseases. Having junior learning at the kitchen table doesn't seem like the biggest inconvenience but I guess parents can "choose"...
Hmmmm... So apply your reasoning to sex.
Rape: Forced
Date Rape: Coercion (drugs, "I love you", etc.)
Consensual Sex: Choice
Notice that in this case, Coercion and Choice are waaaayyyy different.
If a family cannot homeschool, for whatever reason, then they are being coerced into a choice they would otherwise not have made.
Oh geez, stop with the fear of our impending deaths by thousands of Measles cases. Stop believing all the media hype. You pro vaxers are so terrified of the future what ifs that you might lock up all those who refuse vaccines in anti vax camps. Juram wants them huddled in diseased groups, Suzy wants armed nurses going door to door. Lighten up. The U.S. is in no danger of this, not even close. This isn't Sudan, comparisons like these are just more fear tactics. It's so overboard and overstated its becoming cult like.
Don't Believe Everything You Read About Flu Deaths*|*Lawrence Solomon
Just like the thousands of flu deaths reported by the CDC every year warning you to get your flu shot.
Way off base, and way out of reality. Scarring people into medicine they don't want is becoming common place.
We already voluntary vaccine enough to thwart disease armagedon. Calm down, we do a good job here in America. We also do a great job attacking each other. We should learn to have civil conversation, and respect for those who simply disagree with commercialized medicine.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
