The Republican Primary Race Is Filling Up

[rambone]

Hone school 99.7% of the kids because of .3%? That seems reasonable.

Most people vaccinate, so I fail to see why they would be so afraid of disease that they would stay home.

Life is full of trade-offs. You know before you take your kid to get vaccinated what the risks are and you know if you don't, you may not be allowed to send them to school. Make your decision based on all of the information at your disposal and live with the consequences. Freedom demands that you live with the consequences of your choices.

You know the consequences of not buying health insurance. Do we call this freedom now?

As to your other argument: You're arguing apples and oranges. The feds have no constitutional authority, with all due respect to SCOTUS, to enforce SCObamaTUS-care. The states do have the authority to require you send your kids to schools...unless that's hiding in the commerce clause or 14th amendment too.

So pretend we're talking about state-level bullying. Like Massachusetts's individual health insurance mandate.

Romneycare equivalent to the thing you're defending.

 

[rambone]

You made the choice to have children, so you have to deal with the consequences and choices. If you don't have time to homeschool but don't want to vaccinate your kids then your either going to have to give up your kids or get another job that's more friendly with your time.

Comparing this statement to what you said about abortion is startling. Before it was "keep your laws off my body!" Now, its "you made the choice to have children..." (so your medical decisions are the government's to decide).

Very disappointing.

 

[BugI02]

It is compulsory if you choose not to home school. If people are so afraid of vaccines then they should home school their kids. It all depends on what they value most. Send your kids to school, get them vaccinated against the very small chance of something happening. I can understand why some people are afraid of vaccines, but the chance is just too small to justify IMO.

Life is full of trade-offs. You know before you take your kid to get vaccinated what the risks are and you know if you don't, you may not be allowed to send them to school. Make your decision based on all of the information at your disposal and live with the consequences. Freedom demands that you live with the consequences of your choices.

MisterC and GFGT, I think Steveh has eloquently made the point that government agencies are actively working to skew any ACCURATE perception of the risk of vaccination. I personally believe that an HONEST evaluation of the circumstances would still reveal a small risk but am quite disturbed by an inferred desire by government to suppress ANY scientific perception of a risk. If this is due to an attempt to limit gov't liability these people should be shot for valuing the children of hard working American's so little.

 

[MisterChester]

Comparing this statement to what you said about abortion is startling. Before it was "keep your laws off my body!" Now, its "you made the choice to have children..." (so your medical decisions are the government's to decide).

Very disappointing.

Not exactly. You did make the choice to have children, and you can make the choice to have an abortion too. Getting vaccinations as a requirement to send your kid to school is not forcing you to do anything.

 

[rambone]

Not exactly. You did make the choice to have children, and you can make the choice to have an abortion too. Getting vaccinations as a requirement to send your kid to school is not forcing you to do anything.

Nobody is forcing anything... except when they enforce IC 20-33-2-44. The law pretty frank about it; the word "compulsory" is right in the title. Vaccines are listed as a "requirement." Combine the two, and you have forced vaccinations.

Indiana Code - Chapter 2: COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

 

[MisterChester]

Nobody is forcing anything... except when they enforce IC 20-33-2-44. The law pretty frank about it; the word "compulsory" is right in the title. Vaccines are listed as a "requirement." Combine the two, and you have forced vaccinations.

Indiana Code - Chapter 2: COMPULSORY SCHOOL ATTENDANCE

Vaccines are a requirement to attend a public school. Attendance is compulsory if they are registered students. Homeschooling requires neither.

 

[rambone]

Vaccines are a requirement to attend a public school. Attendance is compulsory if they are registered students. Homeschooling requires neither.

Homeschooling is great, but not everyone can homeschool. Refer to post 227.

The parents who "chose" not to abort their children, and are incapable of home-schooling, now are forced into vaccinating in compulsory state schools.

Look, you are firmly fixed to your position, and that's fine, but you are in denial about it being forced.

If you don't have time to homeschool but don't want to vaccinate your kids then your either going to have to give up your kids or get another job that's more friendly with your time.

See? Either comply, or lose your family. There is no clearer example of state compulsion.

 

[BugI02]

So if I understand you, you want all the benefits of state schooling but you don't wish to be governed by any/all the rules attached to program?

 

[jamil]

So if I understand you, you want all the benefits of state schooling but you don't wish to be governed by any/all the rules attached to program?

No, I don't think that's what he's saying at all.

 

[mrjarrell]

Vaccinations are not mandatory in Indiana schools. All a parent has to do is fill out a very short form stating that they have an objection to them for whatever reason and their children are excused from having the required vaccinations. They get to attend school. I know a couple of families who have done it. One of them had a measles outbreak in their family a few years ago and caused no small amount of grief for their school, that resulted in decontamination of classrooms that they were in. The only state I know of where they draw a hard line is California, (maybe Washington or Oregon) and that's recently passed legislation. Even that has outs for parents, due to medical only reasons as I recall.

And the "religious" exemption is so broad that even an athiest could use it.

Indiana Code 20-34-3-2
Immunization Exception for Religious Objection
“Except as otherwise provided, a student may not be required to undergo any testing, examination, immunization, or treatment required under this chapter IC 20-34-4 when the child’s parent objects on a religious grounds. A religious objection does not exempt a child from any testing, examination, immunization, or treatment required under this chapter or IC 20-34-4 unless the objection is:








1.made in writing;
2.signed by the child’s parent; and
3.delivered to the child’s teacher or to the individual who might order a test, an exam, an immunization, or treatment absent the objection.”


The written document, signed by the parent, must state that the objection to immunization is based on religious grounds. There is no requirement that the statement must be from the pastor of a church, appear on church letterhead, or provide proof that they are members of a religious organization. The Indiana State Department of Health policy requires that the written statement be verified by the parent each year.

 

[MisterChester]

Homeschooling is great, but not everyone can homeschool. Refer to post 227.

The parents who "chose" not to abort their children, and are incapable of home-schooling, now are forced into vaccinating in compulsory state schools.

Look, you are firmly fixed to your position, and that's fine, but you are in denial about it being forced.



See? Either comply, or lose your family. There is no clearer example of state compulsion.

Not even that, no one is going to take your family. Let's walk through it so I can explain my position a little clearer.

You have a job? Great! An SO of the opposite sex? Alright, you can make kids. A distrust of vaccines too? That's your belief.

So you have a kid. Old enough to start school next year, so you start readying the paperwork. The school tells you that your child must be vaccinated but you distrust them, so you choose not to vaccinate your kids. You have a couple of options:

1. Vaccinate them anyway, because your current lifestyle doesn't permit you to homeschool.
2. Find a private school that doesn't have vaccine requirements.
3. Homeschool and change your lifestyle to conform to your beliefs. No vaccinations!

What do you pick? Change your belief or lifestyle. What is more important to you.

Rambone, as much as I respect you and your opinions I just cannot agree with you here. This is just crying "I'm a victim of the government!!" Without considering your own personal responsibility to yourself, family, and beliefs. Sometimes your lifestyle or beliefs are holding you down and you just don't know it (I'm not saying you as the literal you Rambone, just a general you). If the belief was strong enough there'd be no problem changing lifestyle to conform to it instead of whining that the government won't conform to what you think is best. Just my 2 cents.

 

[BugI02]

Homeschooling is great, but not everyone can homeschool. Refer to post 227.
The parents who "chose" not to abort their children, and are incapable of home-schooling, now are forced into vaccinating in compulsory state schools.
Look, you are firmly fixed to your position, and that's fine, but you are in denial about it being forced.
See? Either comply, or lose your family. There is no clearer example of state compulsion.

No, I don't think that's what he's saying at all.

Jamil, how else should I interpret it. He's speaking of people who have children, find home schooling impossible/impractical (and so I assume wish to avail themselves of public schooling for their children,no?) but do not wish to vaccinate them (whether all vaccinations or just the ones in disrepute). I fail to read anything more than his rye-eeets are being compromised because the schools have requirements that he does not feel he wishes to meet, so he is being co-erced. It seems to me some alternate choices are available but he wishes the rules to be changed to accomodate his desires


ETA: School is only compulsory in aggregate, your child must receive an education but not necessarily in an institution that requires vaccination. You still have a choice, albeit a more limited one than you might wish

 

[mrjarrell]

Kasich is going to alienate the TEAvangelicals and the folks who are tired of wasting blood and treasure in the Middle East.

Kasich: 'I don't read a Bible to figure out what I think' - CNNPolitics.com

 

[MisterChester]

Kasich is going to alienate the TEAvangelicals and the folks who are tired of wasting blood and treasure in the Middle East.

Kasich: 'I don't read a Bible to figure out what I think' - CNNPolitics.com

Kasich is probably the most Christian out of the bunch.

 

[ArcadiaGP]

Kasich is probably the most Christian out of the bunch.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Kasich is probably the most Christian out of the bunch.

I think I'll let God decide that.

 

[rambone]

So if I understand you, you want all the benefits of state schooling but you don't wish to be governed by any/all the rules attached to program?

If I'm understanding you right, you want my tax dollars to fund public schools, but don't want to respect my family's medical choices?

No, I'm not demanding any "benefits." I want all people to be treated fairly and with dignity. If people's medical choices are not sanctioned by the government for public schools, then those families should get a refund for what they've paid in taxes for those schools, and they should not be threatened with jail for violating IC 20-33-2.

The current system is a complete injustice.

Vaccinations are not mandatory in Indiana schools. All a parent has to do is fill out a very short form stating that they have an objection to them for whatever reason and their children are excused from having the required vaccinations. They get to attend school. I know a couple of families who have done it. One of them had a measles outbreak in their family a few years ago and caused no small amount of grief for their school, that resulted in decontamination of classrooms that they were in. The only state I know of where they draw a hard line is California, (maybe Washington or Oregon) and that's recently passed legislation. Even that has outs for parents, due to medical only reasons as I recall.

And the "religious" exemption is so broad that even an atheist could use it.

This is like pretending the IRS tax code is voluntary because somebody uses a tax exemption. No, it is not voluntary and neither is the school vaccination program. The laws call it honestly: it is called a vaccine requirement and there are two small exemptions to the requirement.

MrJarrell, don't you resent it that atheists are not granted any personal discretion here? Neither exemption truly applies to you; you have to lie to fit the religious exemption. The state writes you off, as an atheist, as just another body that can be bullied. If I were you I would be upset and call for a philosophical exemption, separate from falsely declaring yourself religious. A fairer exemption would apply to anyone, fairly and evenly.

Ironically, the religious exemption is too restrictive for a lot of religious people, who are morally opposed to lying. What I mean is, if a person is part of a religion that does not oppose vaccination, he'd have to lie to claim the religious exemption. That's a bit of a conundrum for someone who believes all lying is a sin. What the objector truly needs is that philosophical exemption so he doesn't have to fabricate something that is not true about his religion.

And furthermore, the fact that we have to search the lawbooks to find an exemption, then jump through hoops just to be left alone seems to be quite opposite to what libertarians usually strive for. We own our bodies, right? And it is none of the government's business what medical choices we make, right? And to have to explain one's religious beliefs in an exemption letter is intrusive, right? Libertarians should be deriding these outrageous mandates for their very existence. The whole program is decidedly un-libertarian; a total slap in the face of free markets and voluntarism.

So you have a kid. Old enough to start school next year, so you start readying the paperwork. The school tells you that your child must be vaccinated but you distrust them, so you choose not to vaccinate your kids. You have a couple of options:

1. Vaccinate them anyway, because your current lifestyle doesn't permit you to homeschool.
2. Find a private school that doesn't have vaccine requirements.
3. Homeschool and change your lifestyle to conform to your beliefs. No vaccinations!

What do you pick? Change your belief or lifestyle. What is more important to you.

This limited subset of options presents an injustice for many families who cannot change their "lifestyle" as easily as educated, affluent families can. Think about all the parents out there in all socio-economic conditions; all educational backgrounds; all familial compositions.

Consider an illiterate single-mom who works as a janitor. She already pays for public schools in taxes -- and there isn't enough money left for a private school. She doesn't have the personal education to run a homeschool. There is only one "legal" option: she must send the kids to public school or go to jail.

And the government does ruin people's lives about school attendance. For example: Pennsylvania mother dies in jail while being punished for kids missing school

I am totally against this kind of social-engineering; literally forcing people to do what's good for 'em.

...whining that the government won't conform to what you think is best.

I am not asking for conformity; just the opposite! I think people should be left alone, free to make their own educational and medical choices. Conformity is what the state demands with its "Compulsory Attendance / Required Vaccine" laws.

 

[MisterChester]

"Now, when you die and get to the meeting with St. Peter, he's probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small. But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. You better have a good answer," -John Kasich

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

"Now, when you die and get to the meeting with St. Peter, he's probably not going to ask you much about what you did about keeping government small. But he is going to ask you what you did for the poor. You better have a good answer," -John Kasich

With all due respect to Mr. Kasich, I don't think forcing, by rule of law, with the implied threat of deadly force, for one person to forcibly extract money from one group of people to give to others is what will count.

 

[MisterChester]

With all due respect to Mr. Kasich, I don't think forcing, by rule of law, with the implied threat of deadly force, for one person to forcibly extract money from one group of people to give to others is what will count.

Plot twist: St. Peter is a Christie fan.