Rand Paul In Action

[homersapien 11,366]

The threat is having a large percent of the population is unprotected. The idea of quarantining the country from measles is crazy. It will eventually find it's way here regardless.

On the other hand, if people have the same fear that you do regarding immigrants, maybe it will convince them to get vaccinated.

Hey! Silver linings!

Beware the Brown Menace! Get your kids inoculated against them before it's too late!

Actually fear works much better than education. This thread is proof of that.

[AUUSN 823]

I feel sometimes I'm in the twilight zone. The same "conservatives" who were screaming at the top of their lungs when Ebola broke out to force the stopping of flights, and forced containments now worry about government overreach?

LOL!!! Yeah, they wanted to quarantine Africa as I recall.

They get so twisted in their ideological sand box screaming at Obama that they don't know whether to wind their butt or scratch their watch (h/t Steel Magnolias)

[JoeBags7277 734]

People should be free to choose not to vaccinate their kids. They should also be held criminally liable if said choice results in an outbreak, and their children should be withdrawn from public schools. This is one area where healthy skepticism of government- necessary and long absent as it has been- has gone wrong.

And here in the 21st century, an age of unprecedented availability of information, can we finally dispense of the notion that dirty foreigners do nothing but spread diseases?

[AUUSN 823]

"But at the end of the day, I don’t try to convince parents of the anti-vaccination movement to vaccinate because I am raking in money or because I am a public health nazi, as I have been accused of. Rather, I work to convince them because I truly care. I have walked in their shoes, read their articles, and even believed their philosophies for a portion of my life. I worry for the anti-vaccination community that I grew up in. With most of these highly contagious diseases infecting 80-90% of the unvaccinated children and adults who come in contact with them, epidemics are not far away. In fact, California declared a pertussis epidemic last month. These diseases are lurking in our neighborhoods, and I have to speak out. I love what Jeffrey Kluger wrote in TIME magazine, “Vaccines save lives; fear endangers them.” http://www.kidnurse.org/my-journey-leaving-the-anti-vaccination-movement/

[AUDub 11,147]

Stop with the whole "stupidity".... If you think pandering a message that government should have limitations is stupid then I'd say you DO believe they should be able to strip kinds from parents if they deem it so.

I'm not stopping. I am calling a spade a spade.

There's really no practical way to do it, but if I had a suggestion, things like school attendance and which doctor's offices you'd be allowed to visit would be contingent on vaccinating your child. I hate that the kid gets caught in the crossfire because of the parents' "mental deficiency" ( ;)/> ) but that's what it may take.

His entire argument is based on Liberty. He stated several times that he believed in vaccinations but not through mandates.

Liberty my ass. Not vaccinating your kids puts them and others at risk, which is very dangerous. Other people's rights are at risk here! How does that fly over the head of one that claims to be Libertarian?

Lol! I knew you would get your knickers ruffled up over this one. I think I stated my case earlier but your emotions have bested you. Like I said before....I'm on the fence with the government mandate. I believe it should be strongly advocated but I don't see government in the same light you do so chill out.

This is no more about personal liberty than the "right" to drive while drunk. After all, we can't have the government taking a parent away from their children. :-\/>

This is an excellent analogy, and I can't believe it didn't occur to me first.

[aubearcat 2,137]

Ben, I need to ask a question for clarification. While again, I'm not advocating for or against vaccination (mainly government over reach is what I'm concerned about), I have a question concerning the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. You're in the medical field and have at least some qualification to answer. Okay, the question I have is this, if you and I, mine and yours are vaccinated, do we really have a worry of contracting disease from the unvaccinated that we are already supposed to be protected from through our vaccinations? I'm not meaning to be agitating or anything of the sort, but is an honest question. If I'm vaccinated and supposed to be protected from the measles, then I should be okay if I'm in a room with somebody with measles right? That is the intended purpose of vaccinations isn't it?

[AUDub 11,147]

Ben, I need to ask a question for clarification. While again, I'm not advocating for or against vaccination (mainly government over reach is what I'm concerned about), I have a question concerning the unvaccinated and the vaccinated. You're in the medical field and have at least some qualification to answer. Okay, the question I have is this, if you and I, mine and yours are vaccinated, do we really have a worry of contracting disease from the unvaccinated that we are already supposed to be protected from through our vaccinations?

Likely not. There are some rare situations that it could happen. We could develop an illness or require a treatment that compromises our immune system.

I'm not meaning to be agitating or anything of the sort, but is an honest question.

Honest questions are welcome and happily answered.

If I'm vaccinated and supposed to be protected from the measles, then I should be okay if I'm in a room with somebody with measles right?

You should.

That is the intended purpose of vaccinations isn't it?

Yes, but they also have benefits for society at large. Think about how we quashed polio or smallpox. Two diseases that were effectively eliminated in this country thanks to vaccination.

This is the concept of herd immunity. If fewer kids at Disneyland had not been vaccinated, this outbreak would not have happened. It eliminates the virus's ability to spread to other unprotected folks like the very young, the immunocompromised, or the unvaccinated.

If you eliminate a virus's ability to spread, you can effectively wipe it out. After a while, just like polio or smallpox, the vaccine is no longer necessary.

[channonc 466]

I am not concerned with any of that information. It had to do with government invasion into family decisions. If a child is fed, clothed, loved, etc...that is what "matters". If a family wants to vaccinate until vaccines run out, that's okay. It's equally okay for a family to say no. If you allow the government to intrude even more into your lives, where will it stop? Also, if you are for vaccines and are vaccinated, you should be "safe" from the illnesses of the unvaccinated.

Well, you drew quite a nice little box. Unfortunately, it doesn't fit. I received all relevant vaccinations as a child and young adult... however it was discovered when I was an infant that I was severely allergic to the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccination. Therefore, I am not properly vaccinated for that and not by choice. I am one of those who gets scared whenever I see the outbreaks of whooping cough because doctors have told me that I am at risk. Additionally, I was hospitalized for severe pneumonia as an older child. Since then, upper respiratory illnessnesses hit me harder... if I were to get whooping cough it could be a big deal. People who choose not to be vaccinated put those of us like me at even greater risk.

[autigeremt 6,599]

Stop with the whole "stupidity".... If you think pandering a message that government should have limitations is stupid then I'd say you DO believe they should be able to strip kinds from parents if they deem it so.

I'm not stopping. I am calling a spade a spade.

There's really no practical way to do it, but if I had a suggestion, things like school attendance and which doctor's offices you'd be allowed to visit would be contingent on vaccinating your child. I hate that the kid gets caught in the crossfire because of the parents' "mental deficiency" ( ;)/> ) but that's what it may take.

His entire argument is based on Liberty. He stated several times that he believed in vaccinations but not through mandates.

Liberty my ass. Not vaccinating your kids puts them and others at risk, which is very dangerous. Other people's rights are at risk here! How does that fly over the head of one that claims to be Libertarian?

Lol! I knew you would get your knickers ruffled up over this one. I think I stated my case earlier but your emotions have bested you. Like I said before....I'm on the fence with the government mandate. I believe it should be strongly advocated but I don't see government in the same light you do so chill out.

This is no more about personal liberty than the "right" to drive while drunk. After all, we can't have the government taking a parent away from their children. :-\/>

This is an excellent analogy, and I can't believe it didn't occur to me first.

It works....but it doesn't mean I'm an idiot or lacking of intellectual ability like you so feverishly stated in one of your previous rants. Great teamwork by the way.

[autigeremt 6,599]

I am not concerned with any of that information. It had to do with government invasion into family decisions. If a child is fed, clothed, loved, etc...that is what "matters". If a family wants to vaccinate until vaccines run out, that's okay. It's equally okay for a family to say no. If you allow the government to intrude even more into your lives, where will it stop? Also, if you are for vaccines and are vaccinated, you should be "safe" from the illnesses of the unvaccinated.

Well, you drew quite a nice little box. Unfortunately, it doesn't fit. I received all relevant vaccinations as a child and young adult... however it was discovered when I was an infant that I was severely allergic to the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccination. Therefore, I am not properly vaccinated for that and not by choice. I am one of those who gets scared whenever I see the outbreaks of whooping cough because doctors have told me that I am at risk. Additionally, I was hospitalized for severe pneumonia as an older child. Since then, upper respiratory illnessnesses hit me harder... if I were to get whooping cough it could be a big deal. People who choose not to be vaccinated put those of us like me at even greater risk.

That's unfortunate. I'm sure the parents that lost a child due to a reaction to one of the various vaccinations would come from a different view but I agree with your assessment in principal. People "should" get vaccinated. I do, however, think it is a slippery slope if the government mandates it. My opinion.

[autigeremt 6,599]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

[AUDub 11,147]

Stop with the whole "stupidity".... If you think pandering a message that government should have limitations is stupid then I'd say you DO believe they should be able to strip kinds from parents if they deem it so.

I'm not stopping. I am calling a spade a spade.

There's really no practical way to do it, but if I had a suggestion, things like school attendance and which doctor's offices you'd be allowed to visit would be contingent on vaccinating your child. I hate that the kid gets caught in the crossfire because of the parents' "mental deficiency" ( ;)/> ) but that's what it may take.

His entire argument is based on Liberty. He stated several times that he believed in vaccinations but not through mandates.

Liberty my ass. Not vaccinating your kids puts them and others at risk, which is very dangerous. Other people's rights are at risk here! How does that fly over the head of one that claims to be Libertarian?

Lol! I knew you would get your knickers ruffled up over this one. I think I stated my case earlier but your emotions have bested you. Like I said before....I'm on the fence with the government mandate. I believe it should be strongly advocated but I don't see government in the same light you do so chill out.

This is no more about personal liberty than the "right" to drive while drunk. After all, we can't have the government taking a parent away from their children. :-\/>

This is an excellent analogy, and I can't believe it didn't occur to me first.

It works....but it doesn't mean I'm an idiot or lacking of intellectual ability like you so feverishly stated in one of your previous rants. Great teamwork by the way.

Hey, you snarked, I snarked back. Get out of the kitchen if you can't take the heat.

[AUDub 11,147]

I am not concerned with any of that information. It had to do with government invasion into family decisions. If a child is fed, clothed, loved, etc...that is what "matters". If a family wants to vaccinate until vaccines run out, that's okay. It's equally okay for a family to say no. If you allow the government to intrude even more into your lives, where will it stop? Also, if you are for vaccines and are vaccinated, you should be "safe" from the illnesses of the unvaccinated.

Well, you drew quite a nice little box. Unfortunately, it doesn't fit. I received all relevant vaccinations as a child and young adult... however it was discovered when I was an infant that I was severely allergic to the pertussis (whooping cough) vaccination. Therefore, I am not properly vaccinated for that and not by choice. I am one of those who gets scared whenever I see the outbreaks of whooping cough because doctors have told me that I am at risk. Additionally, I was hospitalized for severe pneumonia as an older child. Since then, upper respiratory illnessnesses hit me harder... if I were to get whooping cough it could be a big deal. People who choose not to be vaccinated put those of us like me at even greater risk.

That's unfortunate. I'm sure the parents that lost a child due to a reaction to one of the various vaccinations would come from a different view but I agree with your assessment in principal. People "should" get vaccinated. I do, however, think it is a slippery slope if the government mandates it. My opinion.

Might not be a bad idea for you to compare the number of deaths from the vaccines to the number of deaths from the disease itself.

[AUUSN 823]

More GOP Senators want in on the publicity: A freshman GOP senator argued this week that the government should not require food workers to wash their hands after using the toilet, saying "the market will take care of that."

Sen. Thom Tillis (R-N.C.) called routine hygiene rules an example of government overreach at an event hosted by the Bipartisan Policy Center on Monday.

"I don't have any problem with Starbucks if they choose to opt out of this policy as long as they post a sign that says, 'We don't require our employees to wash their hands after leaving the restroom,' " Tillis said to audience laughter in a clip captured by C-SPAN.

"That's probably one where every business that did that would go out of business," he conceded, "but I think it's good to illustrate the point, that that's the kind of mentality we need to have to reduce the regulatory burden on this country."

Tillis's remark comes as the Republican lawmakers grapple with the mounting debate over another public health issue — childhood vaccination. http://thehill.com/policy/healthcare/231595-gop-senator-government-should-not-require-food-workers-to-wash-their-hands So don't require them to wash their hands but do require them to post a sign? Brilliant Senator, just brilliant!

[AUDub 11,147]

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

No. You're for "letting them choose."

I like how you bought into the disinformation campaign, too. The Health Gazette? Please tell me you just posted the first link you found and don't actually follow that bunk.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct?

Bad analogy.

We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one.

It's perfect.

Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone.

With the exception of once, where I was matching snark with snark, I've limited my responses to calling your argument stupid. Calling an argument or point of view stupid is not the same as calling you or Rand Paul stupid. It's an important distinction.

I'm skeptical of government, as well, but this an area where they need to do their damn job.

Glad I posted this thread......

You shouldn't be. This thread reflects very poorly on you.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

I never stated, or assumed, that you were. This is about RP. I thought?

Not all analogies are good ones. I don't believe either analogy is really helpful.

My point is, sometimes we are so in love with our ideology that we allow that ideology to overrule common sense. In this particular case, the statistical evidence and, professional opinion, is overwhelming. I, generally speaking, like RP (not as much as his father, I think his father was less political and more sincere). In this case however, I believe he is being irresponsible as a politician, and a physician.

[homersapien 11,366]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

EMT, you seem to want it both ways. Your posts support the position of Rand Paul on the one hand and then claim to support vaccination on the other.

This is not an issue of government suppression (taking our children away? :-\ ) but one of science. If someone refuses to have their child vaccinated, then said child should be subject to sanctions regarding their ability to expose other people. And like someone else said, they should be liable for damages resulting from their child transmitting disease to others.

[autigeremt 6,599]

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

No. You're for "letting them choose."

I like how you bought into the disinformation campaign, too. The Health Gazette? Please tell me you just posted the first link you found and don't actually follow that bunk.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct?

Bad analogy.

We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one.

It's perfect.

Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone.

With the exception of once, where I was matching snark with snark, I've limited my responses to calling your argument stupid. Calling an argument or point of view stupid is not the same as calling you or Rand Paul stupid. It's an important distinction.

I'm skeptical of government, as well, but this an area where they need to do their damn job.

Glad I posted this thread......

You shouldn't be. This thread reflects very poorly on you.

Of course it does......thanks again for your comments. I'll take them into consideration along with the ones I get from bammers. Have a nice day.

[autigeremt 6,599]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

I never stated, or assumed, that you were. This is about RP. I thought?

Not all analogies are good ones. I don't believe either analogy is really helpful.

My point is, sometimes we are so in love with our ideology that we allow that ideology to overrule common sense. In this particular case, the statistical evidence and, professional opinion, is overwhelming. I, generally speaking, like RP (not as much as his father, I think his father was less political and more sincere). In this case however, I believe he is being irresponsible as a politician, and a physician.

I posted this for people to reflect on. It instantly became a name calling opportunity....so I couldn't help but throw out some red meat. At some point I couldn't help but make it worse. My bad. LOL

[autigeremt 6,599]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

EMT, you seem to want it both ways. Your posts support the position of Rand Paul on the one hand and then claim to support vaccination on the other.

This is not an issue of government suppression (taking our children away? :-\ ) but one of science. If someone refuses to have their child vaccinated, then said child should be subject to sanctions regarding their ability to expose other people. And like someone else said, they should be liable for damages resulting from their child transmitting disease to others.

I'm being an ass.....but thanks for jumping into the fray and supporting Ben. He's a good guy, does good work and has the best of intentions. I do have some reservations but I wouldn't keep my kids from getting vaccines. I don't like the "stupidity" comments and how someone isn't intelligent because they disagree with you (generalizations).

[homersapien 11,366]

I agree that "ignorant" would have been a much more appropriate term. Anyone who isn't aware of or doesn't understand the evidence is ignorant but not necessarily stupid.

But then you do have some folks who are capable of understanding the evidence but refuse to accept it or subordinate it to some libertarian political principle. I think that's where stupidity entered into the discussion.

But I agree it's an alienating term. I frequently try different ways of avoiding it when discussing anthropogenic global warming on this forum. It's difficult.

[AUDub 11,147]

I agree that ignorant would have been a much more appropriate term. Anyone who isn't aware of or doesn't understand the evidence is ignorant but not necessarily stupid.

But then you have some folks who are capable of understanding the evidence but refuse to accept it or subordinate it to some libertarian political principle. I think that's where stupidity entered into the discussion.

But I agree it's an alienating term. I frequently try different ways of avoiding it when discussing anthropogenic global warming on this forum. It's difficult.

Rand Paul is an MD. He knows better than to say something so off the wall.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

When your political ideology begins to compromise public health, you have become an ideological idiot.

I love Libertarian ideals. However, the Libertarian ideologues, not so much. They refuse to acknowledge that government, by it's very nature, is a socialistic endeavor. The most extreme, ultimately sound more like anarchists.

Wow. I love how all of you can create this idea that someone like myself is against vaccinations. Hilarious. I've had more than most in this forum.

And since we like to use analogies....the Patriot Act should be received with the same vigor as vaccinations. Public safety and pubic welfare....correct? We can all drum up the drunk driver without the seat belt. It's an easy one. Ya'll (yee haaa) can call me all the names directly or indirectly, and you can try and shed doubt on my ability to think clearly (or accurately in this case), but I have a more skeptical view of government than you do and I'm not alone. Glad I posted this thread......

I never stated, or assumed, that you were. This is about RP. I thought?

Not all analogies are good ones. I don't believe either analogy is really helpful.

My point is, sometimes we are so in love with our ideology that we allow that ideology to overrule common sense. In this particular case, the statistical evidence and, professional opinion, is overwhelming. I, generally speaking, like RP (not as much as his father, I think his father was less political and more sincere). In this case however, I believe he is being irresponsible as a politician, and a physician.

I posted this for people to reflect on. It instantly became a name calling opportunity....so I couldn't help but throw out some red meat. At some point I couldn't help but make it worse. My bad. LOL

Understandable. It is kind of, "what we do", here. When I said, "ideological idiot", I didn't mean you and, I didn't mean idiot in the normal sense. I think you know by now that I can't stand it when people try to make every issue fit neatly into their ideology. To the best of my knowledge, there has never been a political ideology the perfectly suited every set of circumstances, every condition. Ideologies are fine until people start believing they are absolute and perfect.

[autigeremt 6,599]

I agree that ignorant would have been a much more appropriate term. Anyone who isn't aware of or doesn't understand the evidence is ignorant but not necessarily stupid.

But then you have some folks who are capable of understanding the evidence but refuse to accept it or subordinate it to some libertarian political principle. I think that's where stupidity entered into the discussion.

But I agree it's an alienating term. I frequently try different ways of avoiding it when discussing anthropogenic global warming on this forum. It's difficult.

Rand Paul is an MD. He knows better than to say something so off the wall.

I thought it was one of those "gotcha" moments that he will wish he didn't state it in those terms or just believes it in general. It was the reason why I posted it....along with his back and forth with the broadcaster.

[JoeBags7277 734]

Mighty interesting how Rand said basically the same thing Obama and Khristie Kreme said on the matter, yet he's the one being skewered. I'm sure its all about vaccines, though.

https://twitter.com/markknoller/status/562686461620011009