Forced Vaccination is Wrong

[CabinetMaker]

You know, I used to get really annoyed at some of the things you said until I realized you are completely oblivious to the inanity of much of what you say.

If the state makes you buy insurance then that transaction involves a third party; you, the insurance company and the state. In Texas this is illegal, according to the Uniform Commercial Code which supersedes all other state law. If you think that is private then I'm sure you won't mind the state directing your traffic the next time you wish to exercise your masculine prerogative with your wife.

Tell 'em I said hi. :wave:

Do you think responding to one sentence in a post makes you look well informed? Try again only this time at least make an attempt to deal with the whole post.

 

[fzappa13]

Do you think responding to one sentence in a post makes you look well informed? Try again only this time at least make an attempt to deal with the whole post.

Translated:

"Well, ya got me on that one so let's talk about something else."

:chuckle:

 

[CabinetMaker]

Translated:

"Well, ya got me on that one so let's talk about something else."

:chuckle:

That's twice you have resorted to an ad hominem fallacy rather than address what I actually said. I accept your concession.

 

[fzappa13]

That's twice you have resorted to an ad hominem fallacy rather than address what I actually said. I accept your concession.

http://flamewarriorsguide.com/warriorshtm/artfuldodger.htm

 

[1PeaceMaker]

As there is absolutely no analogy between risks associated with activities and risks associated with infectious diseases, there is no point in discussing this in this thread.

Considering that it affects society as a whole when we have casualties and hospital bills stemming from both, they do both share that concern in common.

If we consider the common good of society so important as to mandate a tetanus shot, might as well address a big risk for death and hospital bills. Horses are next up. How would you like to be denied health insurance because you own and ride horses? How would you like social services calling your horse-owning lifestyle a health hazard to your children?

I did ask a similar question several pages ago, that was pointedly ignored, dealing with insurance contracts. Insurance is a private contract. Does an insurer have the right to refuse coverage for certain activities and lifestyles that they find risky? This is a hugely interesting can of worms to open.

Does the insurer have the right to deny you health insurance because you own a horse?

 

[1PeaceMaker]

If the state makes you buy insurance then that transaction involves a third party; you, the insurance company and the state.

Nailed it.

And while fascism doesn't seem so harmful when it doesn't directly affect health related purchases, when it comes to being required to have insurance that requires you be vaccinated, we are very far gone into the unhealthy realm.

 

[fzappa13]

You know, this guy tries to do a lot of discussing for someone who repeatedly says there is no point in discussion.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Do you think responding to one sentence in a post makes you look well informed?

If you say something that torpedoes your logic then that's all we need to quote.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

You know, this guy tries to do a lot of discussing for someone who repeatedly says there is no point in discussion.

:chuckle:

 

[CabinetMaker]

Considering that it affects society as a whole when we have casualties and hospital bills stemming from both, they do both share that concern in common.

If (when) I fall off my horse, I get hurt. When I refuse to vaccinate my kids because I don't like the idea of vaccinations, I can spread that disease to hundreds some of whom may die. Sorry, not seeing the commonality.

If we consider the common good of society so important as to mandate a tetanus shot, might as well address a big risk for death and hospital bills. Horses are next up. How would you like to be denied health insurance because you own and ride horses? How would you like social services calling your horse-owning lifestyle a health hazard to your children?

Actually, the horses are a real health hazard to my youngest. She is alerhic to horses. Anaphylaxis is a real concern. She is taking allergy shirts which, surprise, surprise, work like vaccinations. Guess what? They work. She can be around horses without compromising her breathing.

In any case, horses do not represent a public health threat so, once again, any analogy you attempt falls laughably short.

Does the insurer have the right to deny you health insurance because you own a horse?

Yes. They also have the right to add a ruder to the policy that charges me more. There are certain activities, like sky diving, that are not covered by many companies.

 

[CabinetMaker]

If you say something that torpedoes your logic then that's all we need to quote.

You can say things like that when you fail to read and deal with entire posts. Instead, you and frank take things out of context and then attempt to declare victory. Go back and read the entire pits and deal with the actual points made.

 

[CabinetMaker]

Nailed it.

And while fascism doesn't seem so harmful when it doesn't directly affect health related purchases, when it comes to being required to have insurance that requires you be vaccinated, we are very far gone into the unhealthy realm.

You two are totally ignorant regarding insurance. Pay attention. You are legally required to carry auto insurance that covers liability only so that if you damage something, your insurance will pay for it. You are not legally required to carry comprehensive coverage. If you fave a loan, your bank will require you to carry comprehensive insurance to protect their investment.

Aside from laws requiring you to carry insurance and laws governing how insurance companies operate, the state is not a party to the contract between you and your insurance carrier. It is a private contract between you and your insurance company.

Don't believe me? Call your insurance carrier and talk to them about it. There is no legal requirement for your insurance carrier to offer you coverage nor preventing them from dropping you.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

If (when) I fall off my horse, I get hurt. When I refuse to vaccinate my kids because I don't like the idea of vaccinations, I can spread that disease to hundreds some of whom may die. Sorry, not seeing the commonality.

When you claim voluntary immunization works, you pretty much shoot yourself over forcing the issue. You aren't going to get hundreds of people sick when measles couldn't produce more than 30-odd secondary cases after D. Land, and only a dozen secondary cases or so were not in close familial contact with the 150 sufferers. Nobody died because of this year's D.L. outbreak.

Plus, your horse can bite or trample others.

Actually, the horses are a real health hazard to my youngest.

They are hazardous to all your kids and moreso than bunk-beds. Social services.... they should put you on their naughty list if they are going to harass parents over bunk beds and vaccine schedules.

In any case, horses do not represent a public health threat so, once again, any analogy you attempt falls laughably short.

They used to contribute to the spread of disease, much as unvaxxed people allegedly were.

Yes.

All people should get access regardless of vaccination status if all horse owners can, too. Especially if health insurance is a forced issue.

 

[CabinetMaker]

When you claim voluntary immunization works, you pretty much shoot yourself over forcing the issue. You aren't going to get hundreds of people sick when measles couldn't produce more than 30-odd secondary cases after D. Land, and only a dozen secondary cases or so were not in close familial contact with the 150 sufferers. Nobody died because of this year's D.L. outbreak.

Look back a few posts to where I delt with why the Disnetland outbreak was so small based on a sample size of 100. I will actually be quite surprised if you actually do.

Voluntary works provided that vaccination rates are over 90%. Less than that greatly increases the risks for everybody.

Plus, your horse can bite or trample others.

I see you know as much about horses as you do the other subjects you claim expertise in.

They are hazardous to all your kids and moreso than bunk-beds. Social services.... they should put you on their naughty list if they are going to harass parents over bunk beds and vaccine schedules.

Why do think this? Riding horses comes with risk but less so than playing football. Horse tiding is not a contact sport and, believe it or not, horses are trained not to throw people and riders are trained to stay on horses when that little walnut brain shorts out. Not without risk, but then, nothing is.

They used to contribute to the spread of disease, much as unvaxxed people allegedly were.

Pleae, enlighten us all, exactly what diseases do horses spread?

All people should get access regardless of vaccination status if all horse owners can, too. Especially if health insurance is a forced issue.

once again you lack the integrity to deal with the actual point I made. Based on what I actually said, insurance companies could deny coverage or add a rider based on vaccination status.

 

[fzappa13]

You two are totally ignorant regarding insurance. Pay attention. You are legally required to carry auto insurance that covers liability only so that if you damage something, your insurance will pay for it. You are not legally required to carry comprehensive coverage. If you fave a loan, your bank will require you to carry comprehensive insurance to protect their investment.

Aside from laws requiring you to carry insurance and laws governing how insurance companies operate, the state is not a party to the contract between you and your insurance carrier. It is a private contract between you and your insurance company.

Don't believe me? Call your insurance carrier and talk to them about it. There is no legal requirement for your insurance carrier to offer you coverage nor preventing them from dropping you.

... and that is the cat stool on the living room rug of your intellectual dinner party ... that and the little seat belt law you apparently haven't heard about yet. Guess who bought that legislation. You are definitely not going to get it until riding horses is illegal.

 

[PureX]

This whole issue is just another example of our selfishness and paranoia running away with us.

It's very sad what 'we the people' have been reduced to via the onslaught of greed and stupidity perpetrated by 75 years of mass media.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

Look back a few posts to where I delt with why the Disnetland outbreak was so small based on a sample size of 100. I will actually be quite surprised if you actually do.

I already know what you said. Vaccination. And that's with voluntary (not forced) vaccination!

I see you know as much about horses as you do the other subjects you claim expertise in.[

Now horses don't trample and bite? What's next? They don't even have to do that to be dangerous. One knocked my aunt out cold by whipping it's head up, one broke her back by throwing her off violently. (horse trainers, what to do...!)

Why do think this? Riding horses comes with risk but less so than playing football. Horse tiding is not a contact sport and, believe it or not, horses are trained not to throw people and riders are trained to stay on horses when that little walnut brain shorts out. Not without risk, but then, nothing is.

Yes, those things are also at risk of being chopped for the same reason you want to chop natural living.

Pleae, enlighten us all, exactly what diseases do horses spread?

"Tetanus bacteria live in soil, dust and manure, particularly horse manure"

once again you lack the integrity to deal with the actual point I made. Based on what I actually said, insurance companies could deny coverage or add a rider based on vaccination status.

Only in a free world. Once health ins. is mandated we have unhealthy fascism.

 

[CabinetMaker]

:think:

... and that is the cat stool on the living room rug of your intellectual dinner party ... that and the little seat belt law you apparently haven't heard about yet. Guess who bought that legislation. You are definitely not going to get it until riding horses is illegal.

You still have no idea of the difference between a law and a contract. We have seatbelt laws and helmet laws that have always struck me as essentially anti american. If I want to do something stupid, I should have that right. Seatbelt and helmet laws are written to protect you from you.

Auto insurance laws are different. They are written to protect others from you. The laws only require you to carry liability insurance meaning if are at cause for an accident, they will make the other party hole. Liability only will not repair your car.

To comply with the law, you must enter into a contract with an insurance provider. You choose your carrier and you choose what kind of coverage and policy limits you want. Remember, insurance companies are not required to carry you, they can refuse coverage to you.

There is nothing on the carpet, so to speak. All there is is your profound ignorance regarding the legal requirements to carry insurance and an insurance policy. Ignorance is not a bad word. It simply means that you don't know something. Ignorance is irradicated by knowledge. Go talk to your insurance agent and you will learn.

 

[1PeaceMaker]

This whole issue is just another example of our selfishness and paranoia running away with us.

It's very sad what 'we the people' have been reduced to via the onslaught of greed and stupidity perpetrated by 75 years of mass media.

Where do you stand with forced vaccination, exactly?

 

[1PeaceMaker]

:think:

You still have no idea of the difference between a law and a contract. We have seatbelt laws and helmet laws that have always struck me as essentially anti american. If I want to do something stupid, I should have that right. Seatbelt and helmet laws are written to protect you from you.

You are right about that.

Auto insurance laws are different. They are written to protect others from you.

This shouldn't be exactly the way we have it, if we really want to save lives and money all around.

Two types of behavior can change. One type is the risky behavior itself, resulting in a before the event moral hazard. In this case, insured parties behave in a more risky manner, resulting in more negative consequences that the insurer must pay for. For example, after purchasing automobile insurance, some may tend to be less careful about locking the automobile or choose to drive more, thereby increasing the risk of theft or an accident for the insurer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moral_hazard

This moral hazard also applies to vaccinators. They feel "insured" against disease and so take more risks, with negative consequences.