| windsock |
01-28-2019 05:31 PM |
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls
(Post 2038493)
Why only if? So if you don't feed your kid or if you let them play in traffic that's cool, as long as they don't get hurt?
|
I said if because if all anti-vaxxers had to do was not vaccinate their kids to get legal charges, that's basically the same outcome as if there were forced vaccinations- ultimately vaccinating your kids would be mandatory but with just more steps.
I believe in the liberty (however much I may find it retarded) of anti-vaxxers not to undergo vaccination as I support many other liberties of the populous. So if you want to not vaccinate your kid go right ahead (again however much I may find it retarded), but if your child becomes sick and/or infects other children your should be held responsible under the law. That's just my take.
I think your equivalency is a bit loose but for the record I do not think it would be cool to let your children play in traffic. But we're talking specifically legal bindings here so ultimately I have no say in what a parent does with their children, though I still believe they should incur the severe penalty and punishment if and when their child meets their demise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwnWthVwls
(Post 2038494)
Ive never even heard of IFLS. I just recently heard about this vaccine fine and grabbed the first link I saw.
|
It was the big, hip science page with obnoxious pseudointellectuals on Facebook a while back. I don't know what it's about know but I certainly haven't lost my disdain from the bygone days.
|