On the face of it the new real ID is not much worse than what we have now.

1.) the incredible inconvenience of NOT having an SSN. If you think about it, the SSN is more or
less the real ID w/o sensible security measures. As such, my typical thinking has been that since we have SSN's already we might as well do it right and root out some of the widespread corruption in government aid. Also local cops etc... would be able to tell if a person is actually a citizen or not.

2.) the IRS and it's insistence of knowing the mundane details of my financial dealings. This is MUCH more offensive than a real ID. I would argue it is a strong point in favor of the FAIR tax or more generally the removal of income tax.

3.) vaccinations. This is the MOST offensive intrusion into our daily lives in my opinion. We are supposed to take these and yet have little legal recourse if they destroy our health. What is the harm in not taking them if I do so choose? Will I hurt other people? NO. The fact that these are required to go to government schools is absurd. We are not a government resource. If I die because I happen not to have X-vaccine then so be it. It is none of the government's business. I don't understand why anybody puts up with required vaccines for government jobs etc... if you are going to get upset about something choose this first. Real id is small potatoes compared to the current health regulations, not hypothetical either, I mean now.

1/12/2008 7:44:53 PM

i agree with 1 and 2.

if you do not see the rational for 3 then u are just a retard and can take your TB ridden body to Africa

1/12/2008 7:52:08 PM

what's your problem? if you have the vaccine then it's my body my choice.

1/12/2008 7:53:03 PM

^^^ Oh no... its one of those "vaccines-are-an-evil-ploy" people. What if you lived in a country where vaccines aren't required... because they aren't even available. Then, when you come down with some mundane sickness thats been eradicated in developed countries for over 100 years you'll think twice about required vaccinations. You can look on the internet and find that everything from vaccines to Splenda to antibacterial hand soap carry these excessively overboard claims of their potent dangers. You have to weigh the risks with the benefits-- and I don't see how you might justify forgoing immunizations for some minuscule risk of complication. Polio, Hepatitis B, Small Pox, Measles, Tetanus, Diphtheria, etc... do these things sound risk-worthy to you?

[Edited on January 12, 2008 at 8:53 PM. Reason : spelling]

1/12/2008 8:53:10 PM

^ So no one has addressed my main point. Vaccines should be more of a personal health choice.

I am not saying everyone should give them up, I am not saying they are inherently evil. Why can you people not understand that there is a middle ground between requiring vaccines and having vaccines as available but optional.

Current vaccine policy is driven by government interference which is likely spurred on by the aggressive drug-company lobby. For example, many parents are now pressured to vaccinate new-born babies within a day. As I understand the reason is that the government gives the hospital a particular type of funding if some percentage of the newborns is vaccinated. This is stupid. Birth is traumatic and you could not pick a worse time to tax the immune system. A more logical course of action is to wait a few weeks until the baby has established a healthy pattern of eat and sleep before doing anything invasive. And make no mistake, vaccines mess with little babies. At least it did mine. In fact, as a child I almost died from a vaccine. It runs in my family.

All I'm saying is it not something that should be automatic. People should make an informed choice before injecting themselves with a vaccine. And whatever people choose it should be none of the governments business when it comes to enrolling in schools and such.

As a rule the newer the vaccine the more dangerous. Just like drugs.

I have no idea what you are babbling on about splenda and hand soap... gee just because I don't want to be part of a big drug company experiment I must ignore all modern conveniences. Super logic there champ.

1/12/2008 9:18:22 PM

^ What I meant was that you can search the internet for literally *anything* (yes even antibacterial soap) and find people promoting all these health risk claims.

1/12/2008 9:31:41 PM

we should just go ahead and repeal the Constitution. No one follows it anyway

1/12/2008 9:40:46 PM

Quote :

"So no one has addressed my main point. Vaccines should be more of a personal health choice. I am not saying everyone should give them up, I am not saying they are inherently evil. Why can you people not understand that there is a middle ground between requiring vaccines and having vaccines as available but optional. Current vaccine policy is driven by government interference which is likely spurred on by the aggressive drug-company lobby. For example, many parents are now pressured to vaccinate new-born babies within a day. As I understand the reason is that the government gives the hospital a particular type of funding if some percentage of the newborns is vaccinated. This is stupid. Birth is traumatic and you could not pick a worse time to tax the immune system. A more logical course of action is to wait a few weeks until the baby has established a healthy pattern of eat and sleep before doing anything invasive. And make no mistake, vaccines mess with little babies. At least it did mine. In fact, as a child I almost died from a vaccine. It runs in my family. All I'm saying is it not something that should be automatic. People should make an informed choice before injecting themselves with a vaccine. And whatever people choose it should be none of the governments business when it comes to enrolling in schools and such. As a rule the newer the vaccine the more dangerous. Just like drugs. I have no idea what you are babbling on about splenda and hand soap... gee just because I don't want to be part of a big drug company experiment I must ignore all modern conveniences. Super logic there champ."

lets break it down:

Quote :

"All I'm saying is it not something that should be automatic. People should make an informed choice before injecting themselves with a vaccine. And whatever people choose it should be none of the governments business when it comes to enrolling in schools and such."

you are a god damn idiot

the reason that vaccines are required is to prevent these diseases that will fuck you up from spreading and taking out others

go live it up in africa and let me know how good it is over there where they dont have anything

Quote :

"I have no idea what you are babbling on about splenda and hand soap... gee just because I don't want to be part of a big drug company experiment I must ignore all modern conveniences. Super logic there champ."

triclosan with water in sunlight forms formaldehyde...i would agree that some products are overused, there is no reason to have antibacterial everything because then your basic antibiotics are rendered ineffective

Quote :

"Current vaccine policy is driven by government interference which is likely spurred on by the aggressive drug-company lobby. For example, many parents are now pressured to vaccinate new-born babies within a day. As I understand the reason is that the government gives the hospital a particular type of funding if some percentage of the newborns is vaccinated. This is stupid. Birth is traumatic and you could not pick a worse time to tax the immune system. A more logical course of action is to wait a few weeks until the baby has established a healthy pattern of eat and sleep before doing anything invasive. And make no mistake, vaccines mess with little babies. At least it did mine. In fact, as a child I almost died from a vaccine. It runs in my family."

this is just asinine...they arent even recommended to start until the child is at least 2 months

im not trying to minimize your problems but the benefits here outweigh the risks, just like every other rational decision that you make for the rest of your life

[Edited on January 12, 2008 at 11:59 PM. Reason : 

1/12/2008 11:32:19 PM

Quote :

"you are a god damned idiot"

1/12/2008 11:53:47 PM

^^^^ ok. But, for me and my family it is not a hypothetical internet risk.

Quote :

"Aficionado you are a god damn idiot the reason that vaccines are required is to prevent these diseases that will fuck you up from spreading and taking out others go live it up in africa and let me know how good it is over there where they dont have anything"

So let me get this straight, diseases will spread to the people with vaccines if I opt out?

What is your point?

I'm the idiot?

Quote :

"Aficionado this is just asinine...they arent even recommended to start until the child is at least 2 months im not trying to minimize your problems but the benefits here outweigh the risks, just like every other rational decision that you make for the rest of your life "

So my wife is a liar. She and my mother did not have a nurse come and argue with them to let my child have a vaccine shot the night she was born. Because it happened. And more than that, my mother warned me it would happen and came to the hospital to help my wife on this very confrontation. If my mother knew this would happen it suggests to me that there is a pattern of such acts so forgive me if I doubt your baseless claim to the contrary.

Clearly the benefits do not outweigh the risks. Immunity from a disease which is virtually absent from society verses the adverse reactions which have been observed more than once in my family is a no-brainer.

I am still waiting for you guys to explain how I can hurt other people through my choice to avoid vaccines.

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 3:57 AM. Reason : .]

1/13/2008 3:56:40 AM

if 10% of the population felt like you then a variety of diseases that would otherwise be extinct would make a come back. dont be an idiot

1/13/2008 11:32:24 AM

am I the only sane person here? None of you libertarians gonna back me on this?

^The 10% choose to take that risk. The other 90% would be just as safe as they are at the moment.

Why is this so hard to understand?

1/13/2008 12:24:28 PM

Quote :

"I am not saying everyone should give them up, I am not saying they are inherently evil. Why can you people not understand that there is a middle ground between requiring vaccines and having vaccines as available but optional. Current vaccine policy is driven by government interference which is likely spurred on by the aggressive drug-company lobby. For example, many parents are now pressured to vaccinate new-born babies within a day. As I understand the reason is that the government gives the hospital a particular type of funding if some percentage of the newborns is vaccinated. This is stupid. Birth is traumatic and you could not pick a worse time to tax the immune system. A more logical course of action is to wait a few weeks until the baby has established a healthy pattern of eat and sleep before doing anything invasive. And make no mistake, vaccines mess with little babies. At least it did mine. In fact, as a child I almost died from a vaccine. It runs in my family."

vaccines are a serious debate, and people who pass them off as a hippie rebellion topic just haven't heard it yet.

There are maybe one or two vaccines that we get that stand the chance to cause outbreaks of nearly-extinct diseases. Also, there are things that we eradicated and we're NOT vaccinating for that make people worried. There's no clear line and many of the things we pump our kids with have very poor potential to prevent anything compared to a large risk to the child from administering it.

This is also a bit of the tragedy of the commons. One person can forgo almost all vaccines and have no detrimental effect as long as some percentage of the population is getting them. So who has the right to do so, and who has the right to force people to do it?

Both sides are taken people in the medical field and it is not a trivial debate. If you think it is, then you're the idiot.

1/13/2008 12:27:42 PM

Quote :

"am I the only sane person here? None of you libertarians gonna back me on this? ^The 10% choose to take that risk. The other 90% would be just as safe as they are at the moment. Why is this so hard to understand?"

this the part about libertarianism that i hate

its that you cant see the forest because of the trees

however, you are right, if you want to refuse you should...no one is making your child get vaccinated. you need to quit bitching about the government school system refusing to admit your child because as a libertarian, you should be against that dept of education. and dont bitch when private schools refuse to take your child because they arent vaccinated. just educate them at home ok

1/13/2008 12:36:19 PM

well actually I plan to, I just think poor folks without my resources and ambition should also be free to pursue other options for their children. Especially if they have family histories like myself or other similar logical concerns. I'm not really a libertarian, I just don't consider myself a ward of the state. You can be government property, but I'd rather decide my own fate thank you.

1/13/2008 12:40:58 PM

Quote :

"^The 10% choose to take that risk. The other 90% would be just as safe as they are at the moment. Why is this so hard to understand?"

Ummm no.

Diseases spread, because they are contagious. Vaccines prevent diseases from spreading. Vaccinations keep the conditions for these diseases spreading to be a rarity.

So you can't say that your choice to not get a vaccine doesn't affect the other people, because if something that we would ordinarily vaccinate against breaks out, the rest of people would suffer in terms of quarantines, medical bail outs by the gov., and risk of sickness or weak or "expired" vaccinations.

It's kind of like the whole security measures at the airport. It's extremely unlikely that they'll actually catch a terrorist, but they have to keep the environment of vigilance to at least deter or increase the possibility of catching a terrorist. Vaccinations are the same thing. It sucks, but for the safety of society, there are certain ones that should be mandatory.

I also find it extremely difficult to believe that if you have medical issues with a vaccination a doctor would be concerned with that. That doesn't seem to be a policy issue, like you are complaining about, but more a doctor issue.

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 1:07 PM. Reason : ]

1/13/2008 1:06:31 PM

These are not all necessary, and many of them have potentially serious health affects. I think I'll keep listening to people who know what they're talking about on the subject instead of you guys.

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 2:30 PM. Reason : img]

1/13/2008 2:30:04 PM

Quote :

"am I the only sane person here? None of you libertarians gonna back me on this?"

well its also my personal choice to drive drunk. If I do not hit anyone or cause and damage w/ an accident who is the gov't to tell me that I have to go to court for a DUI....

1/13/2008 2:36:37 PM

if you own the road you're driving on, then yes, it should be your right to drive drunk.

1/13/2008 2:46:23 PM

exactly.

If you do not want to give your kids the mandatory immunizations then don't bitch when they can not attend public schools.

btw..

Quote :

"Incomplete vaccine coverage increases the risk of disease for the entire population, including those who have been vaccinated. One study found that doubling the number of unvaccinated individuals would increase the risk of measles in vaccinated children anywhere from 5–30%.[10] A second study provided evidence that the risk of measles and pertussis increased in vaccinated children proportionally to the number of unvaccinated individuals among them, again highlighting the evident efficacy of widespread vaccine coverage for public health"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vaccine_controversy

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 5:58 PM. Reason : j]

1/13/2008 5:52:08 PM

I'm gonna gtfo of this cunt-ry.

1/13/2008 6:07:37 PM

that still doesn't change the fact that vaccines are over prescribed like the rest of drugs in this country. Only they don't let you opt out.

1/13/2008 6:37:53 PM

don't get you vaccines; but don't bitch about not getting to attend NCSU or any other institution where you will be around many people.

I am sure the FBI will not hunt you down if you live in a log cabin vaccine free if you so choose.

1/13/2008 9:17:00 PM

I'd be fine if my kids couldn't attend public school: if they weren't forced to attend school in the first place.

But remember: telling a woman she can't have an abortion is an invasion of her privacy; telling me I have to have my kids vaccinated is NOT an invasion of my family's privacy.

[Edited on January 13, 2008 at 9:21 PM. Reason : ]

1/13/2008 9:20:20 PM

^^^^^ well if people can get the disease for which they are vaccinated then apparently they are not really vaccinated are they? I think what the esteemed Wikipedia has really referenced is that the "proper" vaccination schedules fail. This suggests that doctors should reevaluate the timetable for vaccines. So why should I have to take drugs just because your doctor failed at his job?

^ well I'm glad we cleared that up.

Quote :

" Hepatitis B is a rare, mainly blood-transmitted disease. In 1996, only 54 cases of the disease were reported to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the 0 to 1 age group. There were 3.9 million births that year, so the observed incidence of hepatitis B in the 0 to 1 age group was just 0.001 percent. In the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS) there were 1,080 total reports of adverse reactions from hepatitis B vaccine in 1996 in the 0 to 1 age group, with 47 deaths reported. "

Given that there is about 90% of the population that got the Hep B vaccine this is pretty damning since of those 54 reported cases it is doubtful more than a couple would die. Extrapolating naively, we might expect 540 or reported cases of Hep B if no kids got the vaccine, compare that to the 1080 adverse reactions. At best we are breaking even here, and that is ignoring the possible long-term health damages the vaccine may be incurring as well as the not so adverse reactions that people didn't think to report.

I'm no expert, but I think there are other countries which have banned Hep B vaccine for infants.

1/14/2008 6:22:58 PM

OMFG ITS THE LIBERAL CONSPIRACY TO VACCINATE EVERYONE TO MAKE THE BIG DRUG COMPANIES RICH AND TO SECRETLY IMPLANT TRACKING DEVICES INTO THE BLOODSTREAM OF EVERYONE IN AMERICA!!!!!

1/14/2008 10:52:55 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2008/TECH/02/04/fbi.biometrics/index.html

yay for more deification on the US constitution. As long as we get dem turrrists and evil drug dealers then its ok!

Quote :

"The FBI is gearing up to create a massive computer database of people's physical characteristics, all part of an effort the bureau says to better identify criminals and terrorists. art.iris.cnn.jpg The FBI wants to use eye scans, combined with other data, to help identify suspects. But it's an issue that raises major privacy concerns -- what one civil liberties expert says should concern all Americans. The bureau is expected to announce in coming days the awarding of a $1 billion, 10-year contract to help create the database that will compile an array of biometric information -- from palm prints to eye scans."

2/4/2008 1:07:27 PM