I’ve been putting this off for a long time, because it just wasn’t coming together the way that I wanted. I wanted it to be a step by step logical walkthrough with examples, of how pro-vaccination was a belief system, not a scientific position, blah, blah, best for public health, blah, blah. That it was an ideology, for all practical purposes, a religion. Faith is in a vial of fluid with a name attached to it – “vaccine”. It really doesn’t matter what is in the vial, as long as the label “vaccine” is applied to it, then it is going to save the people. All else is ignored. “Can we?” is more important than “should we?”. Pharmaceutical companies race to come out with new vaccines because if they can, it will be rubber stamped by the “regulatory” and immediately be incorporated into the vaccination schedule or perhaps even legislatively mandated as with HPV, resulting in instant return on investment and many years of future profits. Reported adverse reactions are classified as coincidental, or unrelated. All data that vaccines might be harmful is ignored, fingers are in ears, and believers shout as loud as they can that “VACCINES SAVE LIVES!!”
This started out as the second part of a response to an article that appeared in Pediatrics magazine encouraging pediatricians and government to scare people into vaccinating. But I was not able to finish it in that format. It got way too wordy and dry, and the more I wrote the more upset I got. :) Not a good frame of mind. But I promised to get this done, I know some were waiting and have probably given up hope that they’d ever see this part 2. And I have a lot of other things that I want to write, so I just want to try to get to my point as quickly as possible. It will be more editorial than a logical argument, and that will have to do.
I pointed out in part 1 that the author was espousing an ideology, not actual science. The belief is that vaccines are safe, effective, and necessary. And you know, I don’t really care what they believe or what they do for their kids. The problem is, they care what I believe, and more importantly, they want me to vaccinate my kids, whether I want to or not. And one might think this was a noble sentiment, that they are trying to protect my kids. But it isn’t. They really don’t care about my kids. They care about their kids or “the greater good” or “public health” or “the good of the many”. You’ll hear these phrases thrown around. And it is evil. Maybe I’ll elaborate on that later.
I got a chance recently to experience some of this. We rarely visit doctors, but we decided to go in for a well-visit for our kids. Typically when we go to a doctor, we spend a couple of hours waiting around, filling out paperwork, and getting poked, prodded and squeezed by the staff. And waiting. Typically we see a doctor for about 5-15 minutes. On this occasion were “honored” by the presence of the doctor for well over an hour, as he attacked us for our non-vaccination for our children position. He asked questions about our religion, our education, and other stuff unrelated to the task at hand to try to find an angle he could use to convert us. He accused us of being proud, he got huffy, he made dire prognostications for our kids. It was unsettling. He said that the pretty much the entire purpose of “wellness” visit checkups, was to vaccinate, and if we weren’t going to let him vaccinate then he didn’t see the point. He said if we wanted him to be the kids’ doctor, then we would have to work with him, let him do his thing, i.e. do whatever he recommended, e.g. we would need to vaccinate. He ignored every fact that we presented that he didn’t know how to handle, and continued straight ahead in his assault on our unbelief.
He said something at one point that if there was an adverse reaction like a seizure, we could reevaluate, and perhaps space out the vaccinations more or cease giving them altogether. I responded that at that point, it would be too late, that we couldn’t do anything about it. He replied that sure he could. He could shove a tube down my baby’s throat and breath for him until he started breathing again. We were shocked that he would be so cavalier and, um, unpolished in his presentation? And it really didn’t address the point. If my baby had a seizure, it is because something was wrong in the brain. Yeah, you might be able to keep my baby alive, but what about the brain damage? How are you gonna fix that?
It was a disturbing time. It really unsettled us for days. Not because anything that he said was new information or undermined or invalidated all of the study that we have done on this. No, he said the same old things. But his presentation was so forceful. He really was attacking us. He was the type of person that I could see calling child protective services to come take our kids away because we were abusing them by not vaccinating. And because he purported to be a medical professional standing on science, but at one point, totally dismissed the PhDs, that work for the CDC, the scientists that are supposed to study all of these vaccines and who work up the schedule of vaccinations, as being “not medical doctors”. Um, yeah. I don’t think he realized what he was doing when he said that. He was invalidating his whole position. He vaccinates according to American Academy of Pediatrics schedule. That schedule comes from these guys at the CDC. So if they don’t know what they are talking about as he indicated, then the schedule they make is hooey, and they schedule that he is following more faithfully than most people worship their deity, is hooey as well. So while I’m not going to go into a logical argument of why it is the same as a religion, at least as far as it matters for the rest of what I am going to say, just trust me, it’s a religion.
So, anyway, Steph and I wrestled for a while with this mandatory vaccination thing. It’s not quite a law, not yet. But for all practical purposes, it is, at least for everybody that wants their kids to participate in public school (or a few other things). It is not a law, but it is a policy. And to hear the school people talk about it, there are no exceptions. However, in most states there is a religious exemption. And here is where we had the crisis of conscience. We don’t have a religious objection per se, to vaccination. The Bible says nothing about vaccination. We are not part of a church whose charter prohibits such things. How could we, in good conscience, claim a religious exemption?
Well we are through wrestling with that particular issue. My decisions for what to do for my family’s health, stem in part from my religion, my belief system, my faith in God and my understanding of things in that context. It provides the foundation. Upon that rests knowledge, and reason. Small changes in the foundation can have significant effects on the superstructure. So in part, every decision that I make is religious in nature, having that foundation. On the other hand, the same is true on the other side of the equation. And so I find that I do have a true religious objection to a law or policy that requires me to do something that I strongly feel is wrong for my family. And so if it is ever needed, we will fill out and turn in our religious exemption paperwork with a clear conscience. And that was the point I was trying to get to.
I just want to mention one other thing about this “for the good of the many” thing. I think it is evil, because, the end result of that is, we kill a few, for the good of the many. Right now it might be, yeah, a few kids are damaged by vaccines that otherwise wouldn’t be, but it is for the good of the many. Later on it might be, harvesting the organs from a healthy, but brain damaged child to save the lives of many other “normal” people. Or, failing to extend life support to save all of those resources. Or the sacrifice of handicapped, or terminally ill, or morbidly obese, or those with low IQ, or just the very old. It could be sterilization, population control. It could be stripping the rich, or even those who just planned ahead, of their assets to distribute them. The sacrifice of the few, for the good of the many. For the public good. I know that these things may seem farfetched or unrealistic, but that is because of the moral compass you have. Not everybody has that same moral compass. So while you might apply that ideology within the confines of your morality, and it be reasonably innocuous, the same concept enacted by another, who do not hold your high moral code, could be devastating. The truth is that most of these things thave been recorded in the history of many and many of them in the not too distant past. “Sacrifice of a few, for the good of the many.” “For the public good.” Pure evil. And one more for good measure, “In the interests of National Security.” All of these are justification for stripping away the rights of the individual.