steveh_131
Grandmaster
Many here seem to agree with a particular collectivist on the matter of denying public schooling to children considered to be "risky" by the medical establishment.
The medical establishment agrees that unvaccinated children pose a risk to themselves and others, therefore it is argued that these children should be denied access to public schooling.
It is becoming clear that the intent is not actually to protect schoolmates from these children but to use this rejection as a sort of leverage to manipulate more people into vaccinating. It is essentially a form of extortion, under the guise of 'public health'.
From his article:
This begs the question: What other rights should we allow the medical establishment to extort away from us?
As an example, it appears nearly unanimous among the medical establishment that gun ownership in the home puts children at risk. There numerous examples of children taking a parent's gun to school with them. In fact, the death toll from allowing children of gun owners into schools is rather high, compared to that of allowing unvaccinated children into schools (0?).
The American Academy of Pediatrics makes their views known quite clearly:
The doctors have spoken... do we obey? What do you guys think? Should "risky" children of gun owners be denied access to our schools for the sake of public safety?
Responsible parents need to make their voices heard. Contact your lawmakers and request legislation ending non-medical exemptions.
The medical establishment agrees that unvaccinated children pose a risk to themselves and others, therefore it is argued that these children should be denied access to public schooling.
It is becoming clear that the intent is not actually to protect schoolmates from these children but to use this rejection as a sort of leverage to manipulate more people into vaccinating. It is essentially a form of extortion, under the guise of 'public health'.
From his article:
The evidence on this (like the evidence on vaccinations themselves) is clear. If we end both religious and personal belief exemptions to vaccine requirements for public school attendance, leaving only the medical exemption intact, far fewer children will go unvaccinated.
This begs the question: What other rights should we allow the medical establishment to extort away from us?
As an example, it appears nearly unanimous among the medical establishment that gun ownership in the home puts children at risk. There numerous examples of children taking a parent's gun to school with them. In fact, the death toll from allowing children of gun owners into schools is rather high, compared to that of allowing unvaccinated children into schools (0?).
The American Academy of Pediatrics makes their views known quite clearly:
This statement reaffirms the 1992 position of the American Academy of Pediatrics that the absence of guns from children's homes and communities is the most reliable and effective measure to prevent firearm-related injuries in children and adolescents. A number of specific measures are supported to reduce the destructive effects of guns in the lives of children and adolescents, including the regulation of the manufacture, sale, purchase, ownership, and use of firearms; a ban on handguns and semiautomatic assault weapons; and expanded regulations of handguns for civilian use. In addition, this statement reviews recent data, trends, prevention, and intervention strategies of the past 5 years.
The doctors have spoken... do we obey? What do you guys think? Should "risky" children of gun owners be denied access to our schools for the sake of public safety?