Except school children in California. Why did you knowingly make a statement that wasn't true? You've just had this explained to you in another thread.
Wait....you demand that someone be free of consequences for their decision???? Its like you have the right to get an abortion. But what if you cant afford it? Well too bad
FoxHastings said: ↑ No, it doesn't. A fetus is part of a woman's body. An abortion doesn't harm the "HERD". A measles/polio/etc. outbreak harms many in the "herd'. It affects society adversely.. Are you willing to pay for the medical care of the victims of an epidemic that could've been stopped by vaccinations? I still don't see any point to the thread. Being Pro-Choice only means one thing, women have a right to choose abortion or gestation. Pro-Choice is not a club or organization where it's required to believe the same way about every aspect of life. OMYGAWD! I knew Anti-Choicers are dishonest by definition but to prove me wrong show me EXACTLY WHERE IN THE POST OF MINE YOU QUOTED WHERE I SAID "" its only promoting the freedom to choose abortion""" IT'S QUITE OBVIOUS I SAID THE EXACT OPPOSITE SO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MAKES YOU....: Thank you for proving my contention about Anti-Choicers being TRUE Funny how you couldn't address the rest of my post , embarrassed at your abysmal spelling skills? No, it doesn't. A fetus is part of a woman's body. An abortion doesn't harm the "HERD". A measles/polio/etc. outbreak harms many in the "herd'. It affects society adversely.. Are you willing to pay for the medical care of the victims of an epidemic that could've been stopped by vaccinations?
You said "Being Pro-Choice only means one thing, women have a right to choose abortion or gestation." No, Im not willing to pay for others blanket medical care. Nor am I willing to pay to coerce them to be vaccinated. Make cleaner safer vaccines, educate people, and perhaps offer vaccine subsidies. Let people choose from a fully educated and informed position.
Do you know what "or" means? It doesn't look like it. YOU: modernpaladin said: ↑ So 'Pro-Choice' is not the promotion of the freedom to choose... its only promoting the freedom to choose abortion?""""" I responded : Being Pro-Choice only means one thing, women have a right to choose abortion or gestation. For there to be a CHOICE there has to be at least two things to CHOOSE from... Well, in real life we ALL pay for epidemics.....in one way or another..
The old apples and oranges. One is a public health issue and the other isn't. I am required to get a flu shot to keep my job for the public's greater good. I can choose whether to continue the pregnancy or not for my greater good.
"For there to be a CHOICE there has to be at least two things to CHOOSE from..." Yes. Exactly. So why on earth would you presume that I meant abortion was the only choice? Obviously, I was referring to that choice, not inferring abortion was the only choice. Lets try from a different angle... hopefully one that won't cause you to just assume I'm trying to attack abortion... What would you say to people who claim they are pro-choice regarding abortion because they value body autonomy and free will, and support the freedom for individuals to choose for themselves in all aspects of life, not just abortion or gestation. Because that used to be what being 'pro-choice' was about.
One can logically be "pro-choice" when that decision involves only the life of the person making that choice and still support immunization policies when it impacts the lives of hundreds or thousands of people other than the one person making the choice. There is no hypocrisy to that stance.
'when that decision involves only the life of the person making that choice' is an entirely subjective situation. If by slightly increasing your chances of getting sick, my refusal to get vaccinated empowers you to intercede in my freedom of choice to protect your health, how does that same situation not apply to population growth (as just the easiest example) in the dynamic of things like resource availability, carbon footprints, climate change, social safety nets, etc? How do we prevent this direction of 'reason' from progressing to China's 'one-child' policies and forced abortions? Lets try it this way... assuming you support forced/coerced immunizations and aren't just playing devils advocate, would you support an alternative (to ensured immunization) that communities could 'opt out', so long as they posted notification signs at all travel points into and out of their area, so folks worried about the spread of disease could avoid areas lacking herd immunity?
Ah. So you're 'pro-choice' in the abortion forum, but you'd be 'anti-choice' in a vaccination forum, correct?
Are you willing to isolate yourself to that degree? No contact with the outside world at all? No travel outside your zone? No contact with delivery people or outside doctors? Then I would not have problems with it. Unfortunately, that's not really a very logical solution, is it? Do you believe that my rights stop where your nose begins? Do I have the right to infect you? Cause that's what you are arguing for - your right to infect others.
LOL! That's the most illogical "desperation" stretch imaginable. ALL Anti-CHOICERS believe that NO one should ever have a choice over their bodies concerning anything ...correct?
will those residents be confined within those borders, or will they be free to mingle with everyone else outside of their community?
And yet you still refused to answer. ALL Anti-CHOICERS believe that NO one should ever have a choice over their bodies concerning anything ...correct?[/QUOTE] Of course not. Many of them only believe that for abortion and vaccination. How they can logically justify that, I've no clue... I answered your question. Are you 'pro-choice' or 'anti-choice' on the issue of vaccination?
Abortion affects NO PERSON except for the woman who has one. It does not kill nor sicken nor AFFECT other people. Contagious diseases do sicken and kill and affect OTHER people.
everyone will still be free to travel. the herd immunity will protect the vaccinated regions from large scale outbreak, and the unvaccinated regions will have chosen to risk large scale outbreak.
