Government claims it owns children, threatens 2nd mom with jail

Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
You don't think removing a persons choice to decide what will or won't go into their bodies is invasive ?
Click to expand...
What’s the point of choice in this instance if you’re dead? Do I value choice for all? Of course. If you had an illness, you’d go to a doctor for some medicine. This prevents the need for that, and contributes to the eradication of disease. When a choice effects many, truly effects them, to value personal choice is to take choice away from others. You’re going to kill innocent people with your choice, and then they’ll never be able to choose again.

I am against gun control, which you might ask about since it effects everyone, because I feel that owning a gun is a good thing, not an issue. The issue is mental health stemming from people valuing ego over each other. If you ban firearms now, they’ll still exist everywhere, and only the law-abiding, well-meaning people will not possess firearms, while predators—if they really want you dead, they’ll do it by any means, be it a truck, an acid attack, knifing you, throttling you—will be the only ones with firearms. I think gun control would prevent people from protecting themselves.
 
Singlemalt

Singlemalt

Well-Known Member
Vacs. are quite a bit more beneficial by magnitudes than they are harmful. As I iterated, diseases I saw as a school kid are rare now expressly because of vacs. If one wants to avail themselves of the benefits of a modern society, they also have a responsibility to help protect it. I'm also in favor of the draft as well.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
What’s the point of choice in this instance if you’re dead? Do I value choice for all? Of course. If you had an illness, you’d go to a doctor for some medicine. This prevents the need for that, and contributes to the eradication of disease. When a choice effects many, truly effects them, to value personal choice is to take choice away from others. You’re going to kill innocent people with your choice, and then they’ll never be able to choose again.

I am against gun control, which you might ask about since it effects everyone, because I feel that owning a gun is a good thing, not an issue. The issue is mental health stemming from people valuing ego over each other. If you ban firearms now, they’ll still exist everywhere, and only the law-abiding, well-meaning people will not possess firearms, while predators—if they really want you dead, they’ll do it by any means, be it a truck, an acid attack, knifing you, throttling you—will be the only ones with firearms. I think gun control would prevent people from protecting themselves.
Click to expand...

So you would have been okay with the government injecting black men in Alabama in order to save lives ?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Singlemalt said:
Vacs. are quite a bit more beneficial by magnitudes than they are harmful. As I iterated, diseases I saw as a school kid are rare now expressly because of vacs. If one wants to avail themselves of the benefits of a modern society, they also have a responsibility to help protect it. I'm also in favor of the draft as well.
Click to expand...
How are you with cannabis laws ?
 
Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
So you would have been okay with the government injecting black men in Alabama in order to save lives ?
Click to expand...
Are we talking about the Tuskegee experiments? Because the two aren’t comparable. We knew during Tuskegee (which was an experiment, not a predictable and beneficial innoculation) that people would die. We knew what we were doing was wrong and did it anyway. Innoculations are meant to save lives.
 
Singlemalt

Singlemalt

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
Are we talking about the Tuskegee experiments? Because the two aren’t comparable. We knew during Tuskegee (which was an experiment, not a predictable and beneficial innoculation) that people would die. We knew what we were doing was wrong and did it anyway. Innoculations are meant to save lives.
Click to expand...
Right, and there is also informed consent, which wasn't given in honest context.
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
Are we talking about the Tuskegee experiments? Because the two aren’t comparable. We knew during Tuskegee (which was an experiment, not a predictable and beneficial innoculation) that people would die. We knew what we were doing was wrong and did it anyway. Innoculations are meant to save lives.
Click to expand...

Why are you saying "we" ? Are you responsible for what they did or are the individuals who did it responsible ? The experiments were meant to save lives, just not the lives of the guys who were deceived.

What if todays vaccines somehow were derived from aborted humans would you be okay with injecting that into a person who had religious objections?
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Singlemalt said:
I know where you are going and it won't work; I've had this debate when you were in diapers. My personal beliefs are a shit ton more draconian than "regular" folk. I believe in responsibility and drastic consequences. I don't think the death penalty is applied enough
Click to expand...
I appreciate your candor...Dracula.
 
Jimdamick

Jimdamick

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Recently in Michigan a 2nd woman faces jail for refusing to vaccinate her child. What's going on here ?

Discuss.
Click to expand...
Simple.
She, and her child are a danger to the community they live in.
The society which she supposedly includes herself in, does not accept disease carrying individuals to live in their midst.
You got a kid? Would you want a child carrying measles or mumps sitting next to them in a class?
Give me an answer, please.
 
Olive Drab Green

Olive Drab Green

Well-Known Member
Rob Roy said:
Why are you saying "we" ? Are you responsible for what they did or are the individuals who did it responsible ? The experiments were meant to save lives, just not the lives of the guys who were deceived.

What if todays vaccines somehow were derived from aborted humans would you be okay with injecting that into a person who had religious objections?
Click to expand...
I say we, to mean our country. The experiments were intended to watch the progression of syphilis and the eventual death of the subject, who were blatantly lied to. If you don’t see a difference between a crime against humanity and a medical innoculation, I dunno what to tell you.
 
SneekyNinja

SneekyNinja

Well-Known Member
Olive Drab Green said:
I say we, to mean our country. The experiments were intended to watch the progression of syphilis and the eventual death of the subject, who were blatantly lied to. If you don’t see a difference between a crime against humanity and a medical innoculation, I dunno what to tell you.
Click to expand...
Don't engage, he's being retarded.

"Vaccines were tested dishonestly a long long time ago, so vaccines are bad" is his "logic".
 
Rob Roy

Rob Roy

Well-Known Member
Jimdamick said:
Simple.
She, and her child are a danger to the community they live in.
The society which she supposedly includes herself in, does not accept disease carrying individuals to live in their midst.
You got a kid? Would you want a child carrying measles or mumps sitting next to them in a class?
Give me an answer, please.
Click to expand...

No I would not want my kid or anyone else's to be exposed to diseases. However I am not in favor of mandatory vaccinations for a variety of reasons.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top