"katy" wrote in message
...
Capt. JG wrote:
"katy" wrote in message
...


Neither was the polio vaccine, but it saved countless lives. The fact is
that there exists things like rape and incest, which has nothing to do
with abstinence:

http://www.paralumun.com/issuesrapestats.htm

In part...

Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the
U.S. Department of Justice.
In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault.
(NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.
Department of Justice, 1996.)
Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a
rape or sexual assault. (National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of
Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.)
The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States
wereraped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime
Statistics, 1996.)



That's a weak argument to convinve anyone they should vaccinate
themselves with something that hasn't withstood the test of time...like I
said, we still haven't figured out the possible causation of autism from
the MMR vaccine yet and that's been well over 20 years...it's also a well
known medical fact that people who live negative paranoid lives, worrying
and stress filled, are candidates for cancer...so let's make some more
paranoia for tjem so they contract it for sure...let's tell them all
they'll get cancer if they are raped! Let's hav ewomen worry more that
they may be raped...God, this world is really becoming a very pathetic
depressing place...I prefer to live my life thinking positive thank
you...



The polio vaccine is a weak argument? Rape stats are a week argument?

As far as MMR goes, there is absolutely no evidence that it causes
autism. This has been looked at over and over.

And hasn't been decided conclusively...my sister inlaw teaches autitic
kids...we have two autistic kids in the fa,ily and my other sister is a
foster care mother with 2 auristic kids...believe me, they all know what
the research going on is... that book is by no means closed...

There is no such thing as "conclusively" when it comes to anything. The
tobaco companies are still using that argument.
Your sister is, I'm sure, a fine person, but anecdotal evidence isn't worth
much.


You still haven't said why it's a problem if there's an opt out for
parents who don't agree morally or on religious grounds.

Becasuse a person as a parent shouldn't have to use religion or their
morality to make health decisions of that sort for their children. This
is not a disease that is spread in the schoolyard like mimps or measles or
even chicken pox...it is not polio which is transmissable in the
environment or like TB...this is a cancer that invades the body from a
specific activity, sex...the vector for it is very limited...your average
child is not going to contract it on the playfround (one would hope)...

Why not? People use that for lots and lots of things. Christian Scientists
try to use it for preventing life-saving intervention.

I think the key phrase is "one would hope." Why hope when you can prevent
it? Sounds awfully like faith-based pseudo-medicine to me.


--
"j" ganz @@
www.sailnow.com