Texas doesn't care about young women.........

[chuam]

Texas lawmakers vote 118-23 they would sooner see young women die a horrible, painful death than admit their daughters might touch a penis someday

Link to article (http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070314/ap_on_re_us/cancer_vaccine_texas)

Texas lawmakers vote on cancer vaccine By APRIL CASTRO, Associated Press Writer
Wed Mar 14, 12:53 PM ET



AUSTIN, Texas - Texas lawmakers are fighting to block the governor's order requiring that sixth-grade girls be vaccinated against the virus that causes cervical cancer, with the House giving final approval to a bill to make the shots strictly voluntary.

Gov. Rick Perry's executive order has inflamed conservatives who say it contradicts Texas' abstinence-only sexual education policies and intrudes into family lives. Some critics also have questioned whether the vaccine has been proven safe.

The House voted 118-23 on Wednesday to approve a bill that would keep the vaccine off the list of required shots for school attendance. The measure now heads to the state Senate, where more than half the members are co-sponsoring an identical bill.

The 118 votes for the bill Wednesday would be more than enough to override a veto by the governor.

The vaccine protects girls against some strains of human papillomavirus, or HPV, a sexually transmitted virus that causes most cases of cervical cancer. A February report by the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention estimated that one in four U.S. women ages 14 to 59 is infected with the virus.

Perry's order directed Health and Human Services Executive Commissioner Albert Hawkins to adopt rules to vaccinate all girls entering the sixth grade as of September 2008. Parents could have refused the shots for their daughters.

Lawmakers said the governor circumvented the legislative process.

The House bill "will not take away the option for a single girl or a single family in this state to choose to vaccinate a child," said Republican Rep. Dennis Bonnen of Angleton, the lead author of the bill. "It simply says a family must make that choice, not a state government."

The governor's office has estimated that only 25 percent of young women in Texas would get the vaccine if it is not mandatory.

Critics also have argued that the vaccine, called Gardasil, was too new and its effects needed to be further studied before mandating it for Texas schoolgirls. The Food and Drug Administration approved Gardasil last year.

Elsewhere, a New Mexico bill that requiring the shots for sixth-grade girls is expected to be signed by the end of this week by Gov. Bill Richardson, spokesman Gilbert Gallegos said. And Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine has said he would sign a similar bill passed by his state's Legislature.

Although the Wyoming Legislature recently rejected a request for $4 million specifically to fund HPV vaccination, the state's Department of Health intends to continue offering the vaccine to eligible girls with existing funding until the money run out.

In other states, Massachusetts Gov. Deval Patrick's budget proposal, unveiled in February, proposed offering free shots in a voluntary program to all girls ages 9 to 18. A California Assembly committee on Tuesday put off voting on a bill that would require girls entering the seventh grade to be vaccinated against HPV.

[los mentirosos]

It might be the right thing to do, but I'm still glad I live in a state where I can inhale and exhale without the state mandating I do it just so! I have 2 girls and they will probably both get the vacine. I'm just not sure they should tie it to being able to get an education past 5th grade?

[Twobittxn]

Chaum,

If you have a daughter, you are free to voice your opinion. You are free to voice your opinion if you don't, but don't tell me I don't care about my little girl if I have a problem with her getting this vaccine.

[firefyterx]

Just another way the government tries to gain control of our lives.

[Swimsuit]

i think the most beneficial thing about this is that it's forcing people to realize what hpv is. it's fantastic that there's a vaccine that can prevent it & will, in turn, most likely prevent cervical cancer. it's even more fantastic that people now know, or will find out, what hpv is, how it is passed, & how infection can be prevented. whether or not the shot is required, it makes parents & children aware that it exists & able to take whatever steps they deem correct to prevent it. the most important thing out there that I think people should know about is that there is NO reliable test out there to determine if males are carrying hpv. flat out, your daughter is not safe unless she 1) gets the vaccine, 2) is a virgin for life, or 3) uses condoms that are somehow 100% effective for her entire life. given the option, i'd take the vaccine, although i'm not sure what age i think is really appropriate to administer it. i'll leave that to the parents out there.

[firefyterx]

I definately think parents should get their girls innoculated, I just don't like the government trying to parent our children.

[MichaelBaranows]

Are there any side effects of the vaccine?

It isn't that we don't care for our young ladies. We just don't think the governement to tell us what you do with our kids. Personally the vaccine should be something the parents and their daughter talk about decide when and if they get the vaccine.

[Wayward Son]

There are risks. this is a new vaccine & we really don't know if it will in fact turn out to be beneficial or harmful in the long run. But so long as we have the state to choose to use our young as lab rats, we don't need parents to have to be bothered making any decisions.

[gumshoe]

Would an appropriate title for this thread also be:

"Texas votes that parents should make decisions about their own children"

instead of:

"Texas doesn't care about young women..."

I'm not saying that vaccines are a bad thing, but am skeptical of anything that's required for children to attend school - unless it's to prevent something communicable between classmates.

Althought HPV certainly is, it's hardly measles/mumps in scope and effect on schools if there's a "break out."

[Scubaru]

So Chuam, I guess it's a mandatory vaccination in your's and every other state, just not in Texas? The vaccination is a good idea, but the particular Vacc. they were trying to throw out there is only effective in a minority percentage of HPV strains. Gov. Rick Perry just threw that shit out on the table without any research or prior mention said this is how it's gonna be which pissed everybody off, and he was immediatley realized to make substantial monetary gain from the pharmaceutical company to be awarded the vaccination contracts. But I don't care about my daughter? Whatever dude. We got a saying around here, you mighta heard about it- Don't mess with Texas.

[Scubaru]

Jess, if you & Keez broke up today, would you get the Vaccination tomorrow?

i think the most beneficial thing about this is that it's forcing people to realize what hpv is. it's fantastic that there's a vaccine that can prevent it & will, in turn, most likely prevent cervical cancer. it's even more fantastic that people now know, or will find out, what hpv is, how it is passed, & how infection can be prevented. whether or not the shot is required, it makes parents & children aware that it exists & able to take whatever steps they deem correct to prevent it. the most important thing out there that I think people should know about is that there is NO reliable test out there to determine if males are carrying hpv. flat out, your daughter is not safe unless she 1) gets the vaccine, 2) is a virgin for life, or 3) uses condoms that are somehow 100% effective for her entire life. given the option, i'd take the vaccine, although i'm not sure what age i think is really appropriate to administer it. i'll leave that to the parents out there.

[Mikerotch]

I'm quite sure I need not say a word on this one. Glad to see many believe parents should have the ultimate say when it comes to their children. Welcome to one of the fundamental principles of Libertarian philosophy.

Mikerotch, More Libertarian Each Day

[chuam]

The reason this should be mandatory is people are too stupid to not get their kids vaccinated. They figure only 25% of people would actually get their children vaccinated. This vaccine works against the four worst strains of HPV. The only way to wipe out HPV is to give this vaccine.

The worst argument I have heard against the vaccine is people saying it will make women more promiscuous. What a load of shit.

We definitely need the govt to save us from ourselves sometimes.

Now I know some of you who can think and form sentences can make an educated decision on this and see the benefits of it or not. It is not you guys who I have the issue with. It is all the other morons out there who don't read the science on it or listen to a religious leader say it will make women more immoral that need to have this made mandatory.

[Bill McIntyre]

I'm quite sure I need not say a word on this one. Glad to see many believe parents should have the ultimate say when it comes to their children. Welcome to one of the fundamental principles of Libertarian philosophy.

Mikerotch, More Libertarian Each Day

Just curious- are there any vaccinations at all that you would agree should be mandatory to permit your kid to go sit next to other kids in school?

Or put another way, does the state have any right at all to insist that the children of others be protected from stupidity? Do those parents of other kids have a collective right to ask the state to keep their kids safe from your kid's diseases?

I can see the rationale for this Libertarian philosophy, but is there any limit? The state won't let you exercise your individual right to drive drunk, presumably because of the possible effect on society at large. Do you have a problem with that?

[Mikerotch]

Now I know some of you who can think and form sentences can make an educated decision on this and see the benefits of it or not. It is not you guys who I have the issue with.

Chaum, we are on a very slippery slope here. For a moment, assume I qualify as one of the ones who can make an educated decision. For sake of argument, also assume that my wife and I decide against the shot for our daughter for whatever reason, biological, religious, or on advice of a trusted physician. How can you possibly say there is no issue here, as supporters of said legislation do not allow us the opportunity to say no. Would you provide an exemption to those who pass an IQ test ? Would a bachelors degree be sufficient ? How about an Associates ? How about you love and take care of your daughter as you see fit and allow the rest of us to do the same. Odds are we will agree on a majority of issues with regard to child rearing, but how about I won't cram my will down your throat and you agree to allow my throat to stay unobstructed as well.

Mikerotch, Advocate of Unimpeded Throat Passages

[float 'n stalk]

Advocate of Unimpeded Throat Passages

Can HPV be transmitted through..... you know....... oral??


:D

[Wayward Son]

yes it can.

Seeing as how my daughter just turned 18, whether to get this shot is now her decision. We've been discussing it.

[chuam]

Mike, in cases of vaccines I think the public benefit outweighs peoples choices. If you had the choice to not vaccinate your child but it puts my child at risk I have a problem with that. Everyone thinks this vaccination is all about women. It really isn't. There is no good test to know if men have HPV. Vaccinate against it now and you are saving both men and women from warts and possible cervical cancer. Sounds like a win, win.

In this case the benefits society outweigh the individuals right to choose.

If this were a vaccine against aids would you feel the same way?

[Wayward Son]

It's a little bit different than shots to prevent measles & such. Kids can't get this simply by being in the same classroom or hallway with each other.

It's also a new drug & it's going to take a long time before we find out if it's truly safe. The ones who get it now are the guinea pigs. It will be a long time down the road before we have enough data to know for sure. It may turn out that this shot will increase the incidence of some cancers or something.

Should the state have the right to use the force of law, nailing you down at the point of a gun, to take that risk, regardless of whether you want to or not?

IMO, no, it should not. Not in America any way. But people no longer care that much about being free & having control over their lives, it's so much easier to allow others make all the decisions for you. That way you don't have to be bothered with them. So we'll likely make it mandatory, bc there are simply too many people who see others as needing to be saved from themselves for one reason or another, as we once again throw away part of what was paid for in blood & lives.

[Bill McIntyre]

When I was a kid, polio was still a big problem, killing and crippling other kids. I recall not being allowed to go swimming in the municipal pool because they had no idea how it was transmitted.

Then they came up with a vaccine. I can't say for sure if it was mandatory, but it was widespread vaccination that wiped out the disease in most of the world. I think there may be a couple of pockets left in Africa.

Sometimes the public good really is more important that one individual's choice. I'm not certain that is the case with this HPV vaccine, but just trying to make a general point.

And in that vein, I'm still curious about your individual right to drive drunk.

[Mikerotch]

#1
Now I know some of you who can think and form sentences can make an educated decision on this and see the benefits of it or not.
#2
In this case the benefits society outweigh the individuals right to choose

Based on #2, it is obvious #1 was insincere. For the record, I have not made a decision as to whether or not I believe the shot to be worthwhile. At first glimpse, it appears to be a risk worth taking. However, there have been countless medical procedures, drugs etc., that appeared harmless when first introduced that later turned out to be quite harmful and in some cases, fatal.
Regardless of what myself, my wife, and my daughter decide with regard to her future and said vaccine, I will fight to the end to make sure that no government bureaucrat forces such a decision upon her.

Mikerotch, Longing For Freedom To Live As I Choose, Free Of Oppressive Government

[Bill McIntyre]

Mikerotch, Longing For Freedom To Live As I Choose, Free Of Oppressive Government

And what about drunk driving?

[Mikerotch]

And in that vein, I'm still curious about your individual right to drive drunk

Before I answer the question, let me first say I in no way advocate driving drunk. If in anyway you take what I am about to present as advocation of such, I must immediately cry foul. I observed many of you that lean to the left twist my advocation of private sector education as being "anti" education, which was categorically untrue, in a previous thread and it must be agreed in advance that what I will present will in no way be advocacy of drunk driving. What I advocate is a different approach to dealing with societal problems and I readily admit that at first glimpse it will appear radical, and in no way will it be traditional by today's standards. It was; however, traditional when we were a free country not under the thumb of "leviathan". Once again, I'll leave such a difficult issue to someone wiser and more articulate than myself, Lew Rockwell.

http://www.lewrockwell.com/rockwell/drunkdriving.html

Mikerotch, Asking For Deep Thinking On This One

[Wayward Son]

It's nice to set up straw men. No one here said they had a right to drive drunk but Bill wants you to defend the position.

Polio, again, is not an STD. You can catch it through casual exposure. Kids are not at risk of catching HPV simply by attending school, unless we're to assume that the curriculuum now includes having actual sex as part of their classes?

They can't get it by walking down the hall, sitting in the same room, breathing the same air, or even shanking hands. It takes somewhat more contact to be at risk for.

[Mikerotch]

No one here said they had a right to drive drunk but Bill wants you to defend the position.

True Wayward, but as you were writing this, I was taking the position that we should, in fact, have such a right. Once again the disclaimer : I do not advocate drunk driving. I must go home now, let the fun begin.

Mikerotch, Antidrunkdriver, Antirepressivegovernment

[Bill McIntyre]

It's a little bit different than shots to prevent measles & such. Kids can't get this simply by being in the same classroom or hallway with each other.


That is a reasonable argument. By my "set up a straw man" was in response to a much broader statement:

'm quite sure I need not say a word on this one. Glad to see many believe parents should have the ultimate say when it comes to their children. Welcome to one of the fundamental principles of Libertarian philosophy.

If he had said the same thing you did, then it would not have been fair or relevant to ask if there were limits. You were addressing this one vaccine alone.

But he likes to make broader statements that government has no right to interfere with his personal decisions, so I think its fair to respond by asking if any vaccines are OK, or if drunk driving is OK.

[chuam]

Yes it takes more contact. Unfortunately we are not educating our kids on how to deal with sex. Abstinence only programs that are being pushed by Bush do not work. 88% of the people that take abstinence pledges do not make it to marriage. Without giving them good sex education they are not ready to make safe decisions about sex. Did you know that people who take the abstinence pledge have a higher degree of STD's than those who don't? Kids are going to have sex and you may not know when your kid is engaging in sex. Why would you not want to vaccinate them before they start?

Please answer this question:

If there was a vaccine for AIDS would your outlook be different?

[jackpine savage]

I would hope that parents would be responsible enough to learn all they can about HPV and the vaccine and then make a rational decision with the best interest of the child in mind. Do I think all parents will do this, definitely not since some put a priority on other things than their childrens health. I am a little sceptical about the government mandating this vaccine although I do think it would be a good use of tax payers money to make the vaccine and any educational information about it free to the public.

[Wayward Son]

Yes it takes more contact. Unfortunately we are not educating our kids on how to deal with sex. Abstinence only programs that are being pushed by Bush do not work. 88% of the people that take abstinence pledges do not make it to marriage. Without giving them good sex education they are not ready to make safe decisions about sex. Did you know that people who take the abstinence pledge have a higher degree of STD's than those who don't? Kids are going to have sex and you may not know when your kid is engaging in sex. Why would you not want to vaccinate them before they start?

Please answer this question:

If there was a vaccine for AIDS would your outlook be different?

No.

[Mikerotch]

Just curious- are there any vaccinations at all that you would agree should be mandatory to permit your kid to go sit next to other kids in school?

No. Once again, think through the problem. If your kid has been vaccinated, then my unvaccinated kid is no threat. Not to change directions, but I also believe parents should have control over who their children are in school with and that can only occur in a competitive system where each family has choices, unlike the monopolistic public system most are in now. For what it's worth, all of my kids have been vaccinated.

Mikerotch, Father Of Three Vaccinated Kids

[Bill McIntyre]

Not to change directions, but I also believe parents should have control over who their children are in school with and that can only occur in a competitive system where each family has choices, unlike the monopolistic public system most are in now.

Most people want private schools so they can control who there kid sits next to, but they won't admit it. At least you are up front about it.

[bug_power]

Hi I'm a teacher. I work with your kids everyday, and some times even spend more time with your kids then you do on a typical day. In 6-7-8th grade if you think kids are not reading about, discussing, and having sex you're sadly mistaken. Some of the letters I've taken up in class or conversations I've overheard would make most parents cry. How hard would it be for a parent to say, I love you very much, so I'm going to make sure that you will never have to suffer from a preventable disease.

[Wayward Son]

That's not the issue. The issue is, who decides what to put inside your kids bodies, you or the state?

Inform, educate, persuade. Not force & coercion.

[chuam]

That's not the issue. The issue is, who decides what to put inside your kids bodies, you or the state?

Inform, educate, persuade. Not force & coercion.

But we make it mandatory for certain vaccinations to be done before a kid can enter school.

The biggest problem is there are people too ignorant or blinded by faith to get the vaccination. Should the child be put at risk because of the shortcomings of their parents?

[chuam]

I look at it this way. If you are offered up the vaccine and do not take it I don't think your medical insurer should pay for your treatment as it was preventable. I also say this about smokers, alcoholics, etc.

Just the same as if you keep rebuilding in a flood plain and are constantly being flooded and losing everything you forfeit the right to get any help from the government after the first time.

[Wayward Son]

But this, as I have repeatedly pointed out, is not something someone can get just by being around other people.

You assume people are ignorant or blinded. Who are you to decide that? Some people may have far more information on the subject than you do, but you would still use the force of law to make them do your will.

What exactly are your credentials in this field to be qualified to make such a choice? Speaking of choice, where are all the pro-choice people on this issue? Is it only a legitimate issue of personal privacy when you choose to abort, or does that concept apply to other control over your body as well?

[bug_power]

wayward are you willing to bet your childrens life on the fact that they will never have sex, oral sex or even rubbing or heavy petting?

[jackpine savage]

I have to agree with Wayward on this, people should be free to choose, especially if it isn ot a contagious disease. When a disease can be spread through the air like measles then the state has the interests of all its citizens in mind when it requires school children to be vaccinated and the rights f the many supercede the individual, in that case. With HPV I believe the state should provide the vaccination free of charge to all who care to receive it. The state should also go out of its way to educate people on th risks of HPV and how it can affect them.

[Wayward Son]

wayward are you willing to bet your childrens life on the fact that they will never have sex, oral sex or even rubbing or heavy petting?

You're assuming that I would not get her the shot, an assumption you have no basis in fact for.

It may be the best thing since we discovered God, that's not the point. The point is who has control over you & your children?

Consider the fact -FACT, mind you, not speculation- that this is a brand new drug. I have also pointed this out, but no one seems to give a shit. However, it's new. You don't know what the long term risks are, nor do I, nor do the people who developed it. And most especially the elected legislators do not.

Now, it may prove to be utterly safe. Or it may prove to increase the incidence of cancer, or have some other side effect. What happens if, for example, we force all young girls to get this & then 20 years down the line we discover that for some reason by giving it to them before puberty, a fairly common side effect is that they grow up to be sterile? Can't have kids? Not only would you have ruined their lives by such damage, you would have cut off a chunk of the following generation.

That may not happen, but then again it may. Do you really think the govt is who should decide to take such a risk? How much do you guys trust the govt any way? Aren't a bunch of you people who have been on here for years bitching & moaning about how stupid Bush is, how wrong some of his decisions are, disagreeing with this law or that? Chuam in this thread has complained about teaching abstinence, something he views as wrong & ineffective, there's but one example of someone in govt making a decision about your kids that you disagree with & do not want to go along with, yet when it comes to a decision you like, then anyone else who doesn't agree with it is just a dumbass & needs to be trampled on for their own good?

Really?

[MichaelBaranows]

most of yall probably don't know why people in Texas are pi$$ed about this. The Governor (which only got 30% of the vote in the last election) came in and said all girls will have to get the vac. like a dictator and the tax payers have to pay for it. This was w/o bring it before the Senate. And since many in Texas don't like to be told what to do it kind of left a bad taste in everyones mouth. I am sure that if there would have been a house commity about the issue and brought before the Senate things might have all been different.

[Mikerotch]

[QUOTE]I look at it this way. If you are offered up the vaccine and do not take it I don't think your medical insurer should pay for your treatment as it was preventable. I also say this about smokers, alcoholics, etc
"Just the same as if you keep rebuilding in a flood plain and are constantly being flooded and losing everything "

Now we are getting somewhere. In a free market, one free of government directives, everybody reaps the benefits/costs of their decisions. Insurance companies should certainly be free to write their contracts as they see fit. If they do a poor job, and incorrectly assess risks, the market will take care of them. If they do a good job, i.e., provide great service at what the customer base deems a "good price", they will likewise be rewarded by the market.
Meanwhile, those who advocate this shot should be aware that opposing said legislation is not necessarily opposition to the shot. Meanwhile, Bill, I'm curious as to your thoughts on the "drunk driving" piece. A new way of looking at the problem ? Oh, and by the way, should you disagree, consider me grateful that you didn't calll me a "drunk driver" advocate. I truly believe with your objectivity (rare for many liberals, and conservatives for that matter) it wouldn't take long for you to adopt a more substantial Libertarian platform.

Mikerotch, Drinking More Libertarian Koolaid Each Day, And Loving It

[jackpine savage]

We are talking about children who fall under their parents insurance. If the parents don't consent to the shot for their child then it is the child who suffers. Since they do not have a say in their health insurance coverage and they need their parents consent to have the shot I would say that the free-market really doesn't play a role in this. Funny how many people don't trust teh government to make decisions affecting their lives but have no problems allowing profit-driven entities to make the same decisions.

[Mikerotch]

And since many in Texas don't like to be told what to do

I think this applies to everyone who prefers freedom. I'm glad a substantial number in Texas still believe they can think for themselves. My 10 gallon hat is off to you.

Mikerotch, Looking For My 10 Gallon Hat

[Mikerotch]

We are talking about children who fall under their parents insurance. If the parents don't consent to the shot for their child then it is the child who suffers. Since they do not have a say in their health insurance coverage and they need their parents consent to have the shot I would say that the free-market really doesn't play a role in this. Funny how many people don't trust teh government to make decisions affecting their lives but have no problems allowing profit-driven entities to make the same decisions.

I'm not advocating either the insurance company or the government making the decision. I advocate parents making the decision. Although there are a lot of bad parents out there, I'd certainly believe that, statistically at least, parents care more for their kids than some legislator does. There is, contrary to many beliefs, no magical cloud that surrounds ordinary people once elected that makes them more likely to be smarter or make better decisions concerning our welfare than we can. Even if they were smarter, a people founded in liberty should still have the right to accept or reject their advice and council.

Mikerotch, Making My Own Decisions When "Allowed"

[jackpine savage]

Agreed, which is why I believe that this paticular vaccine should be available to all for free along with whatever educational material is necessary for people to make an informed decision.

[Marcus]

Educate the people and allow them to make the decision.

[Mikerotch]

Most people want private schools so they can control who there kid sits next to, but they won't admit it. At least you are up front about it.

Bill, for what it's worth, I also care about who they hang out with, who they date, who they swim with, who they play sports with, who they go to church with, etc. I'm quite sure you select certain parties to be around and at times, choose certain parties to avoid. If you are implying that I am descriminatory, that is correct. I descriminate against drug users, foul mouths, disrespectful kids, trouble makers, etc. I generally do not descriminate on the basis of money, race, etc. Meanwhile, you asked me three times about the drunk driving issue, so I'm curious, what'd you think ?

Mikerotch, Descriminator And Proud Of It

[Swimsuit]

i haven't actually been following this thread, but i just skimmed it now. i saw that scubaru asked earlier if i would get the vaccine. YES. i will be getting it at my next dr appointment. no i haven't broken up with keez. yes the vaccine is only effective against some strains of HPV. it is effective against those strains that are shown to cause cervical cancer, high risk strains.

i have have human papilloma virus. i found out my senior year of college that my only other boyfriend ever gave me hpv. the vaccine has nothing to do with promiscuity. turns out that i have a low risk strain. however, they couldn't test for that when i was being treated for it. therefore, i had some rather invasive surgeries performed to remove the diseased cells. had the vaccine come out sooner or even the test to find out what strain of hpv i had, i wouldn't have gone through those surgeries & still be suffering from some effects of them. i just turned 24 & was 22 when i was diagnosed. i still do not know if this will interfere with my ability to have children. there's some good information on the cdc site for anyone interested.
http://www.cdc.gov/std/hpv/default.htm

i realize the question is whether the state should mandate it & it's not my state, nor do i have children, so i'm not passing judgement. my question is whether you fathers would like to prevent your daughters from going through what i had to, let alone prevent them from suffering from cervical cancer. it's not about your daughter being irresponsible with her choices as she matures. i got it from my first boyfriend, whom i dated for 3 years (keez is only #2 people & we're almost at 3 years) the only reason i see for not administering it is the possiblity of a rather rare adverse reaction to the vaccine.
this is not something i planned on sharing with spearboard, but i hope by doing so that i've opened some people's eyes about protecting themselves and those they care about.

[chuam]

Sorry for you having to go through the surgeries and catching. There was no way you could have known if your boyfriend at the time had it as there is no good test to test men for HPV. I know that most of the people arguing are not arguing against the vaccine but arguing against it being forced on people. Sometimes the good of society trumps the good of the individual. I think in the case of vaccines there is a good reason for it.

BTW, that took a lot of guts SW and I applaud you for it.

[Scubaru]

BTW, that took a lot of guts SW and I applaud you for it.


:stupid: Ditto, thanks for the input.

[Bill McIntyre]

Bill, for what it's worth, I also care about who they hang out with, who they date, who they swim with, who they play sports with, who they go to church with, etc. I'm quite sure you select certain parties to be around and at times, choose certain parties to avoid. If you are implying that I am descriminatory, that is correct. I descriminate against drug users, foul mouths, disrespectful kids, trouble makers, etc. I generally do not descriminate on the basis of money, race, etc.


Good luck in achieving your discrimination goals.

A local example- a new Catholic high school was built a few years ago out in the east, inland, part of this county right near a very wealthy gated community. A lot of the biggest donors of money were not even Catholic, so we cynics thought that their aim had less to do with religion than with creating a private school where their kids would not have to deal with the hoi polloi.

My wife has a horse at a stable where a lot of teenage girls ride, and they tell her that that school is the best place to score drugs. Another member of this board went there, and he told me in a PM that he never saw so many drugs even when he was in college. My wife knows some teachers there, and they confirm what the teenagers said. They add that a large proportion of the kids are spoiled rotten by their rich parents, feel entitled to their place in life, and are generally little shits.

But if you sent your kid there, he or she wouldn't have to sit near poor kids or Hispanics unless the Hispanics had a lot of money to pay the high tuition, and he or she would be spared dealing with real people like he or she would be dealing with in real life, even if all he or she had to do was boss them around.

I'd rather have my kid in public school.

Meanwhile, you asked me three times about the drunk driving issue, so I'm curious, what'd you think ?

I hate to admit it, but since you are such a puritan and not willing to admit to any limitation on your personal conduct for the good of society, I had burned out by then and didn't bother to read it. After all, I had asked three times before I got an answer, so I had lost interest. Its kind of like I feel about the 2d Amendment advocates who won't admit to a limitation on nukes or nerve gas. After a while, you realize you are dealing with a zealot and its not possible to really have a conversation because the person does not admit to shades of grey.

I will try to read it tomorrow.

[Mikerotch]

I'd rather have my kid in public school.

In other words, you have preferences, and you believe that environment is in your child's best interests. Fine, I believe you should choose the environment in which your child is educated. Once again, you desire to choose your child's educational environment, but believe that allowing other parents that choice is undesirable, unless that choice lines up with yours. The red herring you threw out regarding the local private school has nothing to do with a parent's right to determine their children's education and the environment they choose. My children are exposed to some of the same crap, but in my estimation it is still the best option available in our area. The "Puritan Zealot" description is a new twist, congratulations. By the way, it took this "Puritan Zealot" a grand total of 2 hrs and 22 minutes to respond to your question. Sorry for the delay, but I was probably writing checks to some government entity to help fulfill your dreams of a socialist utopia. That's what those of us who are productive members of society are compelled to do for a little over 50% of our work day, financially speaking , that is.

Mikerotch, Tired Of Financing Other's Ideas

[Marcus]

Puritan Zealot?

Socialist Utopia??

Damn, this is getting good...better send my woman to the store for another 6 pack. :D

[Bill McIntyre]

I suppose "Puritan" was not the best choice of words. What I was trying to say was that he was such a pure libertarian, a true believer.

[Mikerotch]

But if you sent your kid there, he or she wouldn't have to sit near poor kids or Hispanics unless the Hispanics had a lot of money to pay the high tuition, and he or she would be spared dealing with real people like he or she would be dealing with in real life, even if all he or she had to do was boss them around.

You kill me with your generalities and the presupposition that kids who attend private schools are all the same. If I were to imply that all public school kids were dope smoking gang members, you would have a stroke, and rightfully so. As an example of what my oldest did to occupy 2 of his last 3 summers, one was spent in Russia working with orphans and last summer he went to Botswana, Africa. It was a great place, filled with rich little snobby white kids like himself. Perhaps next summer he can spend his time detailing to all of them the virtues of a command economy and hold up as examples the Soviets, Cuba, Eastern Europe, North Korea, Vietnam, China and all the other wonderful examples that socialism has left in its wake. Yes, I am a "purist" when it comes to freedom, liberty, and free markets. Any objective view of the evidence and the track record demands it.

Mikerotch, Libertarian Puritanical Zealot

[Mikerotch]

I suppose "Puritan" was not the best choice of words. What I was trying to say was that he was such a pure libertarian, a true believer

If so, I shall take that as a compliment. Thank you.

Mikerotch, Proud Libertarian Puritan

[Mikerotch]

better send my woman to the store for another 6 pack.

That statement shall not go over big with the leftcoasters, of course, down here we would put it something like "better send my bitch to the store for another 6 pack." ( Sarcasm intended, no need for a tongue lashing )

Mikerotch, Sarcastic Libertarian Puritannical Zealot

[Bill McIntyre]

You kill me with your generalities - - - - - -Perhaps next summer he can spend his time detailing to all of them the virtues of a command economy and hold up as examples the Soviets, Cuba, Eastern Europe, North Korea, Vietnam, China and all the other wonderful examples that socialism has left in its wake. Yes, I am a "purist" when it comes to freedom, liberty, and free markets. Any objective view of the evidence and the track record demands it.


And you kill me with your generalities and the implication that I advocate command economies and admire the record of Soviets, Cuba, Eastern Europe, North Korea, Vietnam, and China.

Unlike advocates of nukes for everyone and personal freedom uninhibited by any government limitations, I can see shades of grey. You may think that the fact that you have to pay income taxes makes this a command economy, but there are not many economists who would agree with you.

We have really gotten pretty far afield from requiring a vaccination for school girls in Texas. Maybe you should start another thread with a title like "Government is always oppressive and should be abolished."

[Mikerotch]

You may think that the fact that you have to pay income taxes makes this a command economy

I never said we ARE a command economy, but we are certainly becoming more and more of one each day and I will continue to fight it as hard as I can. Given that "Tax Freedom Day" is sometime in late July now, it is unobjective to say anything else. Meanwhile, I am truly curious as to your thoughts on the drunk driving piece. If you have time to read it, I am curious as to what parts you may agree or disagree with.

Unlike advocates of nukes for everyone

Another wonderful herring, red of course, especially considering the fact that most Libertarians are in the anti-war camp.

Mikerotch, Opposed To Command Economies

[Freedro]

Interesting read!

So, the so-called "liberals" want the government to decide what is best for us and inject us like cattle with whatever they deem is best for society while the so-called "conservatives" want the freedom to choose for themselves what is best for themselves and as a result what is best for society.

Hey, I've got a great idea. How about if we have the government decide who we can marry and/or breed with? That way, we could genetically influence the future and have a REAL and LASTING impact on society. Would that be OK?

Just a little FYI. We cannot protect all of the children of the world from poverty, disease, oppression, stupidity, etc.. It's a nice little fantasy, but it is far from reality. People who know better make bad choices ever day regardless of the legality or morality of those decisions or the education level of the participants. The world is nature and chaos, and as such is by definition a painful place. It is a real challenge to go through life and make the right decisions. That is why not every single person on the face of the earth is happy, healthy, beautiful, wealthy, etc.. If you really feel strongly about wanting to make the world a better place, then start in your own home. Look after your own family, and make the best decisions you can. Once you've got everything in your own family under control, then do something on a personal level to make the world a better place, like adopting an orphan or spending your own time and money to travel abroad to treat the sick. Join a community service organization or do whatever it takes for you to personally feel like you have made a difference. Just don't forcefully take part of MY family's income or property to fulfill YOUR idea of utopia.

[Mikerotch]

Just don't forcefully take part of MY family's income or property to fulfill YOUR idea of utopia.

Amen.

Mikerotch, Nominating Freedro For Quote Of The Day

[Bill McIntyre]

Just don't forcefully take part of MY family's income or property to fulfill YOUR idea of utopia.

So you don't think you should have to pay any taxes?

[Freedro]

So you don't think you should have to pay any taxes?
I've said my peace. I think my statement was clear enough for those who don't wish to convolute its meaning.

[JLittle44]

How about if we have the government decide who we can marry and/or breed with?
:thumps: If I could get a congressional candidate to promise me a nymphomaniac brazillian swimsuit model, I'd vote for him/her. :D

I was in Austin last weekend for a meeting regarding unrelated legislative issues. Perry's got some big problems and this is just one of them. He wanted to get the kids vacinated, and this is one of the proposals that put his nuts in the sling. The Lieutenant Govenor has also political aspirations, but he won't disclose what those are yet. There is a lot of chaos in the house, and the senate isn't doing much better.

The title of this thread does offend me. You all know that next to nothing is legislated without an underlying political power struggle. Maybe it could be better argued that the Texas Legislature doesn't truly care about young women.

It is my personal opinion that if the goverment really wanted to help, they'd make the vaccine free and voluntary, and disseminate loads of educational materials. Lining them up for a gestapo style mandate is just not cool.

With all the other issues stealing the headlines this session, I'm never going to get sales price disclosure and mortgage companies are goign to be suing my industry left and right to recoup the losses that they instigated. :mad:

[Mikerotch]

Bill,
For the love of God, could you please put the grandbaby back up and get rid of that disgusting picture of you. It's bad enough we have to read all your ill-guided political philosophies. ( Although your assessment of G.W.'s war in Iraq on another thread was dead-on.)

Mikerotch, Advocate Of Bill Mc.'s Granddaughter Over Bill Mc.

[mnguy]

Mikerotch, Advocate Of Bill Mc.'s Granddaughter

Whatta pedo :rolleyes: ;)