Constitutional Amendment to Require everyone who is not allergic to vaccines to get them.

The Constitution is the rules the government, not of the people.

 

Carriers cannot be cured, anymore than HIV and/or AIDS can be cured. The disease becomes so deeply entrenched in the system of a carrier, no amount of medical effort can eradicate all pockets and traces of the infection. So ultimately what is being proposed on the part of yourself is life sentences for the accused, who are not even provided with notice of wrongdoing or a trial to establish their guilt in line with due process of law. So what is being proposed on the part of yourself is a gross violation of the fifth amendment to the united states constitution.

 

That’s why I take issue with the OP

 

Seems to me that the vaccine issue is partially tied to the crowd that prefers prayer over medicine. Once they started putting people in jail for not getting medical help for their children, the practice died down.

 

Then I guess so, life sentences for people who can't be cured but who are PROVEN to be spreading a disease that was once a pandemic

 

Yep, and this is the point of this amendment. it will kill the Anti Vaccine movement with in a decade

 

Then why has the same failed to eliminate the subset of the united states population that engages in the recreational use of illicit narcotic substances?

 

Why not a Federal law? Do you really need Constitutional Amendment?

What happens what a child dies from a vaccine? Very slim chance, but IT WILL happen.

Who defines "medically exempt"? Who defines "severe allergy"? What is "actively obstruct" and the legal definition?

Are flu shots exempt, or not? Rabies vaccination exempt, or not (I did that, it sucks)? Anthrax vaccination exempt, or not (I did that, in the military)?

What about other adult vaccines? Can we imprison anyone recommended for adult vaccines because the CDC says so?

 

Because there are no money intensives and no one is addicted

 

Because section 2 and 3 are unconstitutional

They won't due to medical exemptions

Doctors. Obstruct would be fleeing or barricading their child to prevent the shots or something preventing law enforcement from taking their children to the doctor

Due to the flue changing every year yes, only the epidemics that are prevented by vaccinations are required

Yes they can be jailed for not getting them

 

Don't follow the government's directive and assert your individual liberty, and you go to prison. Directly out of the USSR.

 

Yes they will, and children will die. Doctors are not infallible. "Medical exemptions" won't change that.

 

It's protecting people from anti science people

 

Like I said, "Don't follow the government's directive and assert your individual liberty, and you go to prison. Directly out of the USSR." Totalitarian marxist government always are "protecting" their people.

 

So you support the anti vaccers?

 

If they would have just aborted the kid they wouldn't have to worry about the effects of a vaccine.

 

One thing I would only I would note this could be in conflict with the 1st Amendment and Section 2 on the advocacy part criminalizes people being stupid like Holocaust Deniers and Flat Earthers so I would remove that bit it wouldn't change things and add in a clear religious exemptions shall not be considered an acceptable reason to refuse the vaccines. Also what about pacing them say the parents agree but want the shots spaced out more or split up to individual vaccines I would make allowances for these requiring manufacturing vaccines for individual diseases and if the doctor and parents agree to alternative schedules it shouldn't be illegal.

 

Exactly, the mob and government are always about selling “protection”, it’s the oldest racket there is. This is how they get The People on board with funding the Pentagon (the military industrial complex) to tune of over $1/2 billion each year despite that they can’t account for over $21 trillion of The People’s money.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin

 

What if the wording was changed to no spreading false medical information. To protected stupid speech not related.

On the other part about scheduling, I would say sure as long as they don't *postpone* it. One postponement and they get charged.

 

So you think the Founding Fathers would support Anti Vaccers?

 

Here's what I love about your threads: they give every person on this forum, left, right, and center, the opportunity to unite in common opposition to your tyrannical authoritarian ideas. Bravo, sir. You are the uniter.

 

This would fly through redification because may vengeful Americans have had it with these idiots so it's not tyrany it's forcing the 0.01% to conform to the demands of the 99.99%

 

This is what the founding fathers supported:

http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/
https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

And part of the 2nd link contains the Bill of Rights, which is a mandate for the US government to protect ALL individual rights and that means the right to refuse to be vaccinated as well as the mandate to government to protect that right, among other rights (see 9th and 10th Amendments). So that should answer your question.

 

What you just described is tyranny of the majority or democracy, the exact opposite of what you claim. Democracy is 2 wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner. In Nazi Germany the 99.99% wanted to eradicate all Jews. This is why the founders mandated a Constitutional Republic (see Article IV Section 4) and NOT a democracy.

 

Thats how you feel now until some idiot gives you small pox.