Mandatory Vaccines: Should They Truly Be Compulsory?

Post Reply New Topic

Um, yes they are legally immune from lawsuits unless "willful misconduct" can be proven (which is nearly impossible), look up the Bioshield Act. And I have heard that they are doing reasearch on a vaccine against CA, look that up, too.

There is a specific federal fund set up to compensate anyone who has been damaged by vaccinations (as paranoid loons like yourself are fond of pointing out). In the extraordinarily unlikely chance that you suffer an adverse reaction to a vaccine, you have a way to have that problem addressed, without jumping through quite as many legal hoops as the typical lawsuit entails.

Would you have a problem with such a vaccine? From what little I've read, it's actually used to help recovering cocaine addicts avoid falling off the wagon again. Gee, those evil dastardly scientists, trying to help drug addicts improve their lives.

[quote="LiberalJustice"And as far as the Cocaine addiction vaccine, I would have a problem with it since I do not intend to use the drug, It would really anger me if it was made a "requirement" for school entry, as most vaccines on the market are already on the list of "required" immunizations.

It's not. It is only given to recovering cocaine addicts.

Are you going to ever give solid evidence for any of your claims, or are you just going to continue with vague accusations and innuendos?

Not so.

First, how do you declare a disease "contagious?" Go back 50-100 years, I'd be inclined to trust a government official's declaration. Lately, there is much hype about the risk of a disease. "Pandemic" is the new buzz word that is blatantly used to create pork barrel spending for products not needed or unproven and to pass laws granting broad and unjustified power for yet another government program or agency.

Today, I'd not trust the claim of a "pandemic" until I saw the body count...I'm that cynical from all the effort to whip the general public into a state of non-stop hysteria over the latest possible virus in the world.

Second, what protects the public from reckless vaccination. I understand how vaccination works. I've had my shots. I don't doubt that in the past they did more good than harm.

Still, in the past, if a shot resulted in serious complications, you had rights against the company that made it. Now, they want blanket immunity (no pun intended) for any civil liability that might arise from complications from untested vaccinations. Do you want to submit to injection of unproven vaccination products knowing you have absolutely no rights or recourse if they inflict horrible side effects on you?

I suggest you do some research into Gulf War Syndrome. I know of many vets who were given a battery of shots before deploying to Saudi Arabia, and they were told nothing of what was put in their bodies, and all the problems of Gulf War Syndrome started shortly after that. The military cares nothing about your health 10-20 years down the road...it only cares about your survival in the battlefield for the next 24 months. They don't hesitate to compromise one interest (yours) for another (theirs). Tanks use depleted uranium in their armor to improve combat survivability. Anyone operating tanks that use DU must have regular blood tests to check for excessive radiation exposure.

Informed consent exists for a reason. The more information I have, the less inclined I am to accept any of these new vaccinations they want to push upon the public.

As I have said, look up the Bioshield Act.

What an individual takes into, or has put into his or her body should always be the choice of that individual.

+1

"Mandatory" vaccinations should have the following.

1. Stringent testing with openly published results.

2. Either government must pay for any and all medical care for any and all complications and/or the manufacturer must be 100% liable for complications.

Currently, a lot of new vaccinations don't have that much testing as compared to what used to be done, and the move to grant vaccine manufacturers immunity from damages is just garbage if you're going to make any of them compulsory.

Public safety and health trump your personal preferences.

ruveyn

What about people who can't take vaccines due to a medical condition? Shouldn't they be exempt from vaccination?

One thing that bothers me is that mandates for vaccines is that they are aimed at everyone, and not just those who are likely to benefit. Shouldn't there at least be medical exemptions in a pandemic? It would be logical if we could allow those who will most likely be harmed to avoid them.