Confession: I have a LOT of blogs in my feed reader. I’ve tried to cut down but I’ve managed to get it to the “bare” minimum of about 120 blogs, the ones I absolutely cannot do without. So why not take advantage of my obsessive oversubscribing and post some of the most interesting posts/stories each week? This post has links from the last few weeks.
- Jen McCreight (aka Blag Hag) visited the Creation Museum along with 100+ atheists. She gives a talk on what she saw. What struck me was the contradiction of: (1) the museum denigrating reason very explicitly as “man-made” and not to be trusted (2) their appropriation of scientific-sounding jargon to make their creationist nonsense sound scientific and credible.
- While countries like USA, UK and Australia have a strong anti-vaccination movement, Saudi Arabia is mandating the polio vaccine for people going on Hajj (pilgrimage). As someone who thinks vaccines should be mandatory I am in the icky position of squarely agreeing with the Saudi theoplutocracy.
- Think the internet is helping democratise the world? This talk presents a counterargument: repressive regimes have used the internet to their advantage to make things even more repressive. I still think the internet may have a net positive effect on freedom, but it’s important to remember this is not automatic, and is already being used very cleverly by the baddies.
- A nice rundown on where our pedophilia moral panic has gotten us to: most US sex offenders are teens who will forever be branded for “crimes” such as having teenage sex, sending naked pictures of themselves to their boyfriends/girlfriends etc. Lovely.
- Remember the great 40s, 50s and 60s where the biggest problems in schools were students talking out of turn? The good old days before heavy metal, atheism and the pill started making kids go on shooting sprees? Oh wait, such a fantasy world never existed.
- Marty Klein visits Azerbaijan to give some talks on sexuality. A window into a world where 21st century technology rubs shoulders with a 5th century honour killings mentality (Part 1|Part 2)
7 comments ↓
“As someone who thinks vaccines should be mandatory…”
Say what now?
Enforced medical treatments on mentally capable adults by the state?
Do you even read your previous posts?
Certainly — I don’t think a person has a right to put the health of others at risk which is what abstention from vaccination results in (except for when there’s a medical reason).
With vaccination rates falling below the herd immunity because of new-age anti-vax nonsense, in many areas public schools are considering (or maybe even have) mandated that all students be vaccinated.
If I opt out then I think society has a right to quarantine me until I’m not harming others by my presence.
I guess it’s a matter of defaults — we consider it an invasive procedure only because of anti-vax nonsense. I don’t think anyone would consider cutting the umbilical cord of a baby to be an overreaching imposition — I see vaccinations of babies as being on the same level.
Vaccination of baboes is an entirely different area – on that one I see the state as having a right to put the interests of ALL children/citizens ahead of the rights of an individual parent.
However when it comes to adults the state has no right to enforce medical treatment on an unwilling, mentally competent adult.
As for treating un-vaccinated people like they are infected, that is wrong on so many levels.
If outbreaks of diseases happen then it is 99.9% likely it will happen to people who have not been vaccinated. It was their choice, their risk and hell mend them.
PS. What are baboes???
BABIES, you muppet.
Ok, just realised the adult thing is largely redundant. In my hypothetical utopia (which is obviously going to come true any minute), all people in a country will be vaccinated as babies and all immigrants will be required to have a vaccination if they don’t already. So the hypothetical adult who opts out will be almost nonexistent.
However if such a person is found I do not object to quarantining them — because they are not just harming themselves. Diseases like the flu mostly strike old people whose immune systems are weary — and a healthy unvaccinated adult could well be the carrier of a virus, not notice any symptoms themselves and then get an older person sick.
I’m not sure if this applies to childhood diseases but my hypothetical utopia would have mass distribution of every major seasonal vaccine and at the very least those who opt out would have to disclose this in some way. At worst, it’s a [much] milder case of someone who has HIV and engages in unprotected sex with others without disclosing (which in my opinion is attempted murder).
So you may go so far as to decide which vaccinations are important? e.g. If I choose to not take an HIV vaccination then that isn’t important because everyone else will be vaccinated and it only affects me, but if I choose not to have a flu shot then I am potentially placing vulnerable people in danger so should have my liberty curtailed?
NB. I am absolutely NOT anti-vax!
Many vaccinations have a health risk assosciated with them. Most vaccinations in future will be also include adults (as they haven’t been invented yet) so you would restrict a person’s liberty because they weighed up the relative pros and cons of a medical decision and chose differently to the way you wanted?
Maybe we could put a bell round their necks that they have to ring in case any old people or children may be nearby. And have a flashing light too, in case the child or OAP is deaf.
Sorry, my body is mine and I will use and abuse it as I see fit. If that realistically puts other people at risk then that is something we have to work on but it has to be a proportionate response and not crazy scaremongering.
Not to mention the fact that a cure for AIDS will only come about from the repeated exposure of unprotected people to the disease to find some people with a natural immunity. But that is way off-topic…
Well yes, cases where you’re likely to make other people sick can’t be treated in the same way as diseases where you can only do yourself in — can anyone expect it to be any other way? This is how we evaluate all policies to do with harm: based on the extent of the harm.
Of course I’m not suggesting some blanket one size fits all policy — the vaccination of children is as much as I can hope for in my lifetime. But even then I would imagine you would agree with me for certain combinations of disease/vaccination: it’s just a long continuum.
I think what I’m saying sounds more extreme because we see it as a personal choice — I guess what I’m talking about it is based in a world where vaccination is considered as much a default as cutting the umbilical cord (the analogy is imperfect because it is about children specifically).
Not sure where you’re getting this idea of where an HIV cure can/can’t come from?
Leave a Comment