 |
Re: Here is your real problem
Author: pdxrailtransit
Date: 02-12-2015 - 20:58
OldPoleBurner Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> This really isn't about the public good. It is
> about those who made poor choices (my opinion of
> their choice) now reaping the natural
> consequences. Those who made better choices (the
> rest of the public) are generally not now in any
> real danger. Thus this is still therefore a
> private matter.
>
> Besides, what is the alternative for the public?
> Given the incredibly bad consequences to society
> we have already seen, due to meddling do-gooders
> interfering in the private parent-child
> relationship (thus seriously weakening it), who is
> to say any more such meddling will actually work
> better. So long as the consequences of one
> family's choices are not imposed on other
> families, who did not make that choice (and it is
> not so imposed in this case); compulsion is
> absolutely not justified.
>
> For many reasons people have differing
> perspectives as to what are the best choices for
> their children and themselves. Especially since
> the realities surrounding immunization are not at
> all black and white. Besides, who shall be
> appointed to be the great arbitrator of truth in
> the sky to say otherwise. Who gets to say what
> or who shall be compelled in private matters.
> Well as a matter of fact - no-one! That's why we
> have a constitution, to strictly limit the powers
> of government, so that such powers cannot be so
> easily abused by self appointed know-it-all
> do-gooders.
>
> Though it was my choice to immunize all my
> children; a risky choice, considering allergies
> some had, which the doctors had to find ways to
> work around; I will not impose that choice on
> other parents.
>
> Besides, rather than to try to control the world,
> imposing and compelling one's own views about such
> private matters on everyone; it is usually better
> to just leave things to nature's course (harsh as
> that might seem). And what is nature's course?
> --- Well duh! Natural Selection and survival of
> the fittest!
>
> May our life's choices make us the fittest.
>
> (or sadly, maybe they won't? eh.)
>
> But that is how natural selection works for the
> future good of all. The seeming stupidity of it
> all will take care of itself in due time.
Dude, Social Darwininism, seriously? How Victorian of you. I suggest you go visit an older cemetery and observe all of the child graves where many of the death dates are in a tight range due to local Typhus and Diptheria outbreaks. I am betting if you go back three generations in your family, you will find plenty of examples.
-------------------------------------------------------
> This really isn't about the public good. It is
> about those who made poor choices (my opinion of
> their choice) now reaping the natural
> consequences. Those who made better choices (the
> rest of the public) are generally not now in any
> real danger. Thus this is still therefore a
> private matter.
>
> Besides, what is the alternative for the public?
> Given the incredibly bad consequences to society
> we have already seen, due to meddling do-gooders
> interfering in the private parent-child
> relationship (thus seriously weakening it), who is
> to say any more such meddling will actually work
> better. So long as the consequences of one
> family's choices are not imposed on other
> families, who did not make that choice (and it is
> not so imposed in this case); compulsion is
> absolutely not justified.
>
> For many reasons people have differing
> perspectives as to what are the best choices for
> their children and themselves. Especially since
> the realities surrounding immunization are not at
> all black and white. Besides, who shall be
> appointed to be the great arbitrator of truth in
> the sky to say otherwise. Who gets to say what
> or who shall be compelled in private matters.
> Well as a matter of fact - no-one! That's why we
> have a constitution, to strictly limit the powers
> of government, so that such powers cannot be so
> easily abused by self appointed know-it-all
> do-gooders.
>
> Though it was my choice to immunize all my
> children; a risky choice, considering allergies
> some had, which the doctors had to find ways to
> work around; I will not impose that choice on
> other parents.
>
> Besides, rather than to try to control the world,
> imposing and compelling one's own views about such
> private matters on everyone; it is usually better
> to just leave things to nature's course (harsh as
> that might seem). And what is nature's course?
> --- Well duh! Natural Selection and survival of
> the fittest!
>
> May our life's choices make us the fittest.
>
> (or sadly, maybe they won't? eh.)
>
> But that is how natural selection works for the
> future good of all. The seeming stupidity of it
> all will take care of itself in due time.
Dude, Social Darwininism, seriously? How Victorian of you. I suggest you go visit an older cemetery and observe all of the child graves where many of the death dates are in a tight range due to local Typhus and Diptheria outbreaks. I am betting if you go back three generations in your family, you will find plenty of examples.
