If this were a vaccine for any other disease, I bet 90% of you wouldn't care. This is silly prudery masquerading as genuine concern.
I'm certainly not a prude, my contention is that the government is forcing a vaccine on everyone because many women do not go to a doctor every year. My sister and two friends had this and it was caught by a routine pap smear. But now the government is mandating this on all because of a few. There approx 150,000,000 women in this country and 4,000 deaths a year. This vaccination mandate is government overkill, again.
No, it's called caution. Caution against having out children injected solely because the government said "It's okay", when all the evidence has yet to even be gathered.
Risk your children if you wish, be don't lecture other people about their personal motivations. How "it's all about sex" or how CAUTION somehow makes them a prude, an idiot, or "pro-cancer".
The ridiculous rationalizations you people will go through in order to belittle other people over a decision that is THEIR right to make is absolutely disgusting.
Then again, some people must belittle others in order to compensate for their own feelings of inadequacy.
Don't you think the individual should be able to decide how to remain healthy, rather than have the government mandate a certain course of action?
Living a lifestyle that would have been considered perfectly normal fifty years ago, in which one limits one's sexual partners to a reletive few, or even one, is an effective strategy for preventing infection with this disease. Shouldn't an individual have the right to choose that approach for themselves, rather than having the latest technological marvel miracle cure thrust upon them by the government?
And you're still wrong. This has never been tested on the targeted age group. I have the links to the studies if you want them. Oh heck, just go here.
I continue to be amazed at the fact that so many people like youself that come to a conservative site like Free Republic don't have a clue about the issue here.
Besides the theft of the rights and freedoms of the parents amd the children involved Perry has way overstepped his place. The executive in Texas is very weak, if you look at Perry's past so-called executive orders they are mostly piggybacking off of legislation passed by the legislature or they are puffy things recognizing people or whatnot. In fact, Perry has made executive orders in the past regarding vaccinations but they have been after the legislture passed specific laws and they refer to those laws.
When the legislature passes laws there is a process that must be followed then once the law is passed by the Texs legislature then the Governor signs it. In the case of this vaccination Perry has passed a law without using that process. His executive order is questionable but what is not in question is that he has no right to mandate that taxpayer money be spent for the order. In fact, he's required to account for any money he spends.
Rick Perry is not a prince or king. He may think he can do whatever he wants when it comes to the rights of Texan parents and Texas children but he is in for a rude awakening.
Wrong. Other vaccines are for diseases that are far, far more easily spread than HPV. Measles, TB, even Hepatitis can be spread in more than one way. HPV is sexually transmitted. Period. I don't see how my decision on how to raise my kids to see how much safer (emotionally and physically) abstinence is can be considered prudish. There is more to sex than just the physical aspects of it. I know better than anyone else in government what my daughters should be taught in regards to sex. I don't give a crap what anyone else says.
If it were just the Christian aspect of things, then maybe, yes, I could understand how it may seem prudish. But I taught my teen daughter abstinence for many, many other reasons than that. I know what her background is, I know what her situation is, and it is, frankly, up to me to decide how to raise her. If it were TB or Measles, or even Chicken Pox, (which I wasn't thrilled about either), then I could understand. You can't make a choice to avoid those diseases, they are easily spread through the air. This particular disease (HPV) can be avoided in other ways than just a vaccine.
Not really.
I'm a young woman who is choosing not to get this vaccine. There are so many unknowns. I've already had one seizure that's affected my life. This has given girls and at least one boy seizures, and possibly two cases of Guillain-Barre Syndrome. If someone said I had to take this, with no opt-out, when I was in high school? I would have dropped out, gotten a job, and paid to finish my education privately. I don't want the government making me put things into my body that aren't safe.
If they're going to force a vaccine on kids, why not the flu vaccine? The flu kills about 36,000 Americans each year and hospitalizes about 200,000, yet we're supposed to force kids to take a vaccine that's been untested on their age group, untested long term on ANY age group (so there's no telling how long the vaccine lasts, how it will affect people 10 years later, etc.), to something that MIGHT prevent something that's only diagnosed in about 12,800 women each year, and can be prevented with routine pap smears? I'm worried for the girls just a little younger than I am that are going to be lab rats for this company that will make BILLIONS of dollars off of this. I have younger cousins in danger. My flowergirl is going to be old enough soon.
I'm getting married in June to a man who used to be sexually active. I know most girls my age have had sex and yes, a lot of them probably have HPV. I'm concerned about cervical cancer. But I'm even more concerned about this vaccine. It hasn't been deemed safe. It's criminal to make girls take a shot without knowing what it will do to them without it being a matter of public safety. If this was truly about public safety, they'd make boys take it too, since they spread it, and they can be hurt from this. It's not though.
We know Perry got 6k from Merck. I wonder if they're bribing other politicians with campaign contributions? I can't think of any other reason to push this one, unless the liberals have started praising Perry and urging their own politicians.
Not true at all. There's lots about this issue to care about. I care about payoffs to politicians by companies to have them force me to buy the company's product.
I care about any vaccine that isn't necessary and has been tested so little.
I care about being the guinea pig for any vaccine that so little known about and knowledge of the long term consequences is simply nonexistent.
If politicians are truly so worried about cervical cancer, the most effective way to combat it would be by making Pap Smears mandatory for all women. That way they'd catch cervical cancer no matter what its cause.
My children are not going to be any body's guinea pigs or cash cows.
You should go on some of the threads about vaccines and autism.
Or how about freepers that think too many kids are on ritalin.
Many freepers are concerned about the safety of drugs and vaccines on our children, and it has nothing to do with sex.
Every vaccine is a BIG concern. Remember that.
For me, that statement is BS. I didn't get my kids the chickenpox and Hep B vaccines for all the same reasons that I don't want my daughter to get this one right now.
My mom was sterilized by the Dalkon Shield. My friend flipped out on Prozac and dumped her kids at a homeless shelter one morning.
"They" say a lot of things are safe. Then the product hits the masses and side effects that weren't apparent in the controlled trials float to the surface.
My daughter already has arthritis from Valley Fever and Lyme Disease. There's no way I'm exposing her anything that might make her condition worse. If, in ten years or so, she chooses to get the vaccine, I'll support her. Heck, my kids are in the process of getting the Hep B right now. Enough time has passed without a disaster that I'm comfortable with it.
I don't put my kids on the front lines. I'm a mom. It's my job to be cautious and skeptical.