Reply With Quote
or "conserving" Texas' money
They're just pandering to their sexophobic base.
or "conserving" Texas' money
Of course the convervatives are against it. They see this as a vaccine that allows sex. I'm cracking up at you proping an Aggie Republican who is legislating morality. First Mookie pimps censorship now he's proping morality being legislated as opposed to Rick Perry making his most liberal move of all time.
Wow. You guys are becoming so knee jerk its disgusting. I get it though, it is more important that Merck not make any money than women have a lower chance at cancer.
MOOKIE DOESN'T CARE ABOUT WOMEN!
so then quit being so liberal you leftist piece of
im fine being called liberal if a neocon is saying it. Among my conservative values are- I am for a STRICT cons utional government with limited federal government, tight fiscal conservation, I am against gun control in all forms, I am against fariness doctorine and hate speech laws. I think the US needs to get out the UN, I am against the north american union. these things are traditionally conservative values, but NOWadays, theyre considered by liberal, funny huh
actually, they're traditionaly liberal, but ok.
I pray that all of those against this have a daughter at some point and she is sexually active at age 12............well, maybe not pray for it, but that would be some fun and ironic stuff.
Oh, and what the does the above quote from Mookie have to do with this thread?
Maybe you mean classically liberal.
Only the Christian Reconstructionists and the Marxists fall outside that umbrella, and they make what, 1% of the electorate combined?
BTW, this thread convinces me that the anthrax scare back in 2001 was a conspiracy by Bayer to sell more Cipro.
Actually, as a public health issue, males should get it too- to stop the spread of the virus.
I agree completely with that.
Big Pharma makes $Bs in profits by convincing you to consume their $ and keep on misbehaving so you need their $ forever. And they will scare the out of you until they get you diagnosed as needing their . There is an epidemic of diagnoses, not an epidemic of diseases.
http://www.cfpc.ca/cfp/2003/sep/vol4...critical-1.asp
cir cision seems to reduce HPV/cervial cancer in monogamous women who don't have history of promiscuity. 1000s of years before modern science, Jews used common sense to require cir cision for health reasons. Similarly, they proscribe pork for health reasons.
But the BEHAVIOR of using (much cheaper) condoms are the best protection if the girl insists on getting ed, not only against HPV but all other STD and pregnancy. But I guess the condom industry doesn't have as effective lobbyists as Big Pharma.
Sounds like a lot of dumbasses in this thread who have never heard of Thalidomide CORSO
www.nosideeffects.trusteveryvaccine.org
YOU are one of the dumbest pieces of on this board and I havent even read 10 posts of yours.
FIRST of all dont try to bring that weak ass childless men argument. As if not having children gives people a skewed view of reality?? PLEASE!! I mean it's funny that ANYONE would use that in any kind of argument to try and prove any point.
Secondly, there would be nothing ironic about your little scenario because not one person who is against this is arguing that the drug shouldnt be available or administered. you are so stupid it hurts me to respond to you
How are you going to enforce mandatory condom wearing?But the BEHAVIOR of using (much cheaper) condoms are the best protection if the girl insists on getting ed, not only against HPV but all other STD and pregnancy. But I guess the condom industry doesn't have as effective lobbyists as Big Pharma.
Isn't that exactly the point?
By attaching the word mandatory to this, this legislature is lumping HPV with rubella, mumps, whooping cough, etc.
There is no reason this needs to be a mandatory vaccine. None. Unless, of course, you own shares of Merck stock...
Simply, the ends do not justify the means.
how are they gonna enforce mandatory hpv vaccinations?
Probably very loosely. I doubt it will be very difficult to "opt" out, even retroactively.how are they gonna enforce mandatory hpv vaccinations?
but calling it mandatory is unnerving to some people. they hear that and they think they'll get in trouble if they dont get it done
WHY MAKE IT MANDATORY? this doesnt set of a red light for people?
Why would the school systems need this to be a mandatory vaccine when there is a 0% chance of this being caught from someone with HPV inside the classroom/school?
Are 6th grade kids ing inside the schools now? And unless this ing is mandatory, I still see no reason why this vaccine MUST be administered by the school systems.
Isn't this a doctor/parent issue?
Because many parents are too stupid (or, to a lesser degree, uninformed) to do it voluntarily - Which is why a lot of things having to do with the wellbeing of kids are mandatory... such as school attendance and minimal level of cleanliness.WHY MAKE IT MANDATORY?
It is ridiculous how many people think the vaccination being mandatory (in reality or in name) is no big deal. If it is mandatory in name, again, i'll repeat this question: why make it mandatory at all?
I will assume that no parent that posted in this thread truely wants their child to be sexually active at age 11, so why not lobby for better abstinence education, why do we have to be so god damn bullheaded on a tail injected into the human body?
This country has seen the effects of an injection that is not fully tested yet, but it still is tin foil material to talk about not swallowing this BS
So the cure for stupidity is mandatory injections?
Is this the best cure or the only cure? Have you never read Brave New World? You're seriously saying that because a large segment of the population is uneducated and misinformed that it is up to the government to require things to be injected into their bodies
REQUIRED IN NAME ONLY of course
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
