• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Rubella outbreak at...

I guess they were pretending to be Christians after all.
 
That's one of the things I find the most confusing about the anti-vacc for religious reasons. Do they not think of the effect of exposing a pregnant woman to their disease-infested children? So much for 'sanctity of life'.

Although I think it's an example of natural selection at its best.
 
Jas said:
Although I think it's an example of natural selection at its best. [/B]
Click to expand...

So true.

Well, except this is natural selection of ideas instead of genes.
 
Jas said:
That's one of the things I find the most confusing about the anti-vacc for religious reasons. Do they not think of the effect of exposing a pregnant woman to their disease-infested children? So much for 'sanctity of life'.

Although I think it's an example of natural selection at its best.
Click to expand...

I posted a similar statement elsewhere, and got the expected and welcome responses about the children being at the mercy of their parents. Many would like to see people charged with neglect when children are harmed by a preventable cause.

But you have these parents that want a "choice". It's their belief system, so they want to be left with it.

I still can't help but feel they deserve to suffer the consequences of their "choices". The people involved smugly feel their babies will be safe even though 9 pregnant women have been exposed. Their god won't allow them to be harmed since they avoided trying to thwart disease through this "unnatura" vaccination process. Sorry guys, but your god doesn't control the virus. The virus laughs at your god! These 9 babies have a 90% risk of harm because you don't believe your god would allow this to happen.

Then there is the point that when the outbreak dies down, then 9 months the babies will be born with brain damage, loss of hearing or sight. What will they attribute that to? We will forget the moms were exposed to rubella. The moms can get away with saying "toxins" or whatever else caused the baby's problems. I figure this is possible since most adults don't show symptoms of rubella when the virus passes through.

Then there is the inevitable result when there is a break down in herd immunity. Not all people build up adequate immunity even when immunized. What if a pregnant mom who did get the vaccine still gets an injured child from this outbreak? Their choices affect hers.

Well, for the those who reject vaccination because they believe their god has reasons for sending around the disease will learn the hard way.

http://www.ssr.com/cgi-bin/ezmlm-cgi?1:mss:98620:lagllndgdlfakkbbimoh
 
Eos of the Eons said:
Then there is the point that when the outbreak dies down, then 9 months the babies will be born with brain damage, loss of hearing or sight. What will they attribute that to? We will forget the moms were exposed to rubella. The moms can get away with saying "toxins" or whatever else caused the baby's problems.
Click to expand...

They might decide it's a punishment on them for thinking, even for an instant, that they might go ahead and get vaccinated. Such a lack of faith brings divine wrath.

And, of course, they'd be mad at whoever offered them the vaccine and tried to talk them into it, for tempting them into losing faith. Devil!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom