California to Become First State to Mandate Adult Vaccines: Criminal Penalties for those Who Refuse

[HAPPY2BME]

Published: June 27, 2016

Source: Awareness Act

California recently became the first state in the U.S. where lawmakers removed religious exemptions to those opposing vaccines for their children. This bill mandates proof of vaccination for measles, pertussis and…..

Optional annual flu vaccine for daycare providers, early childhood teachers, head start teachers, parent co-ops where money is exchanged, YMCA early childhood and after school program caregivers, in-home daycare providers and parent volunteers who care for and supervise children.

    SB792 would eliminate an adult’s right to exempt themselves from one, some, or all vaccines, a risk-laden medical procedure. The bill would make California the first state to require mandated vaccinations.

http://www.blacklistednews.com/California_to_Become_First_State_to_Mandate_Adult_Vaccines%3A_Criminal_Penalties_for_those_Who_Refuse/52222/0/38/38/Y/M.html

[Chieftain]

Mixed feelings on this one.  Considering the influx of aliens crawling with every disease and parasite known to modern man, it is good policy to narrow the reasons people can avoid these vaccines, and especially those who could put others at risk from transmission. 

That said, unless you are in the military, nobody can order you to get a vaccine against your will, to a point.  If you refuse to get your kids vaccinated then the public schools can and should exclude your kids until they are.  I don't see any potential for criminal sanctions, and any imposed would surely be challenged in court.

 

[rodamala]

SCOTUS 5-3 decision pending... stating CA can not implement this law because it infringes on the constitutional rights of undocumented Mexicrats.

[GtHawk]

SCOTUS 5-3 decision pending... stating CA can not implement this law because it infringes on the constitutional rights of undocumented Mexicrats.

You are being totally unfair and biased in targeting undocumented Mexicrats, how dare you not give equal recognition to all of the  undocumented CentalAmericrats and the countless Arabicrats that are also invading our country.

[sinkspur]

If you work with other people in a position where exposing them to a disease would be a likelihood, I have no problem with a mandate for vaccinations.

You have no right to expose me or mine to a deadly disease.

[RoosGirl]

You have no right to expose me or mine to a deadly disease.

I understand your point of view on this and I don't disagree.  I also though look at it like this, you have no right to force me and mine to expose ourselves to the risk, however small, of adverse reaction to a vaccine that we don't want.  I have not been able to reconcile the two views, though I tend to lean toward the later.

[sinkspur]

I understand your point of view on this and I don't disagree.  I also though look at it like this, you have no right to force me and mine to expose ourselves to the risk, however small, of adverse reaction to a vaccine that we don't want.  I have not been able to reconcile the two views, though I tend to lean toward the later.

Then you won't be able to work in any of those helping professions that require these vaccines.  I have no problem with you saying no, but you don't get to work where I might be exposed to something.

And your kids don't get to go to school if they're not going to get vaccines like every other kid.  Home schooling is always a possibility.

[HonestJohn]

I understand your point of view on this and I don't disagree.  I also though look at it like this, you have no right to force me and mine to expose ourselves to the risk, however small, of adverse reaction to a vaccine that we don't want.  I have not been able to reconcile the two views, though I tend to lean toward the later.

I don't think a law should mandate vaccinations.  I think a law should mandate proof of immunity (or medical reason for none).

It would then be up to the person/parent how they wish to obtain that immunity.  Repeated exposure to each disease in an isolation ward would provide the same.

[raml]

My sisters as nurses always had to have up to date vaccines so I agree with some jobs requiring them but to force everyone no no no. I always have kept mine pretty well up to date because I don't want to get certain diseases they have vaccines for but not all of them just those I feel I would possibly be exposed to. It is my right and my choice this is not a dictatorship yet and hopefully Trump will keep us from becoming one. Hillary will be a disaster if she gets in and my grandkids will never have the nice life I had and I will blame certain members here for it since they want Hillary in. All I ever heard when Romney was running was you don't want Obama again do you and of course I voted for him now the same people are saying they won't vote for Trump and he is a decent candidate just not one of those Rino's I am sick of.

[RoosGirl]

Then you won't be able to work in any of those helping professions that require these vaccines.  I have no problem with you saying no, but you don't get to work where I might be exposed to something.

And your kids don't get to go to school if they're not going to get vaccines like every other kid.  Home schooling is always a possibility.

Completely agree with that.

[RoosGirl]

I don't think a law should mandate vaccinations.  I think a law should mandate proof of immunity (or medical reason for none).

It would then be up to the person/parent how they wish to obtain that immunity.  Repeated exposure to each disease in an isolation ward would provide the same.

Medical reason for none: possible adverse reaction.

This would be true for actual disease or vaccine induced immunity.

[geronl]

It should be possible for the other 49 states to kick California out of the union.

[Sighlass]

If there was a border that worked there would be no reason for this crap. Dang open border liberals. No illegals, no reason for this whatsoever.

[Smokin Joe]

Hillary will be a disaster if she gets in and my grandkids will never have the nice life I had and I will blame certain members here for it since they want Hillary in. All I ever heard when Romney was running was you don't want Obama again do you and of course I voted for him now the same people are saying they won't vote for Trump and he is a decent candidate just not one of those Rino's I am sick of.

Could it be that you simply don't understand that there are people here who don't want either one of them in, and aren't willing to cast our ballot for either?

Now, consider, if by not voting for Trump you consider that a vote for Hillary, then I get two votes, because I'm not voting for Hillary either, and that, by the previous logic would be a vote for Trump.

They cancel. It's a wash.

Have a nice day.

[Smokin Joe]

WHO OWNS YOU, BABY?

If the government can decide what you may or may not consume, that's bad enough. It should be your choice.

When the Government can force you to consume something, that takes it to the next level.

[Oceander]

Could it be that you simply don't understand that there are people here who don't want either one of them in, and aren't willing to cast our ballot for either?

Now, consider, if by not voting for Trump you consider that a vote for Hillary, then I get two votes, because I'm not voting for Hillary either, and that, by the previous logic would be a vote for Trump.

They cancel. It's a wash.

Have a nice day.

Exactly!!

[HonestJohn]

Medical reason for none: possible adverse reaction.

This would be true for actual disease or vaccine induced immunity.

Then you'd have to show the statistical likelihood of that chance and meet some sort of set bar for it.

[Henry Noel]

Mandating that a person inject a foreign substance into his body, on pain of legal sanction? No. That's not in accordance with my principles or my worldview. Even if the said substance were perfectly innocuous, that would be my opinion.

[RoosGirl]

Then you'd have to show the statistical likelihood of that chance and meet some sort of set bar for it.

Not sure how you would do that with an individual.

[RoosGirl]

Mandating that a person inject a foreign substance into his body, on pain of legal sanction? No. That's not in accordance with my principles or my worldview. Even if the said substance were perfectly innocuous, that would be my opinion.

Yes, I think this falls under the surrender of freedom for security thing that Franklin talked about.

[ABX]

One of the biggest things that always bugged me about the anti-Vaxxer movement, other than they are getting their 'facts' from kooks and celebrities, is many claim to be about stopping government oppression, yet they are making choices that open the door for the government to come in and do exactly what they fear.

It is like someone who claims to be pro 2nd Amendment going outside and shooting off his gun in the air, taking shots at his neighbor's house, and generally acting a fool- is just giving the government an excuse to crack down on everyone.

[Half Vast Conspiracy]

Mixed feelings on this one.  Considering the influx of aliens crawling with every disease and parasite known to modern man, it is good policy to narrow the reasons people can avoid these vaccines, and especially those who could put others at risk from transmission. 

Except that the state NEVER enforces on illegals.

[driftdiver]

If you work with other people in a position where exposing them to a disease would be a likelihood, I have no problem with a mandate for vaccinations.

You have no right to expose me or mine to a deadly disease.

@RoosGirl

Sure on the surface that seems reasonable until you throw in flu, pneumonia, HPV and who knows what else.  Where is the line on what the govt can force you to take?

You and your kids are exposed to a myriad of viruses and bacteria every time you have contact with another person.   If you want a sterile environment go live in a bubble.  Until then hand washing and good sanitary practices are the best defense.   Of course the pharmaceutical companies wouldn't make hundreds of millions if you werent forced to take all these vaccines now would they.

[Henry Noel]

One of the biggest things that always bugged me about the anti-Vaxxer movement, other than they are getting their 'facts' from kooks and celebrities ....

Some of them are. Consider, however, the veterinary profession, which has put the financial welfare of its practitioners at risk by severely undercutting its original vaccination protocols on the grounds that over-vaccination has been shown to cause autoimmune illness and certain cancers in dogs and cats.

Or consider the fact that a vaccination is a challenge to the immune system, and as such is liable to temporarily weaken that system while the challenge is being addressed. When you receive a vaccination you have no way of knowing what pathogens or conditions are working in your body that require all your immune system's resources. You could conceivably have a tumor in an early stage; something that your immune system might naturally deal with that it would have problems dealing with in a less-than-optimum state.

People can be naturally suspicious of vaccination without having to be labeled as kooks or cranks, and at all events, they have a right to make their own decisions based on what they perceive to be their interests.

[skeeter]

I suppose mandated vaccinations for citizens would naturally follow mandated acceptance of diseased illegal aliens.

Goes well with all the new ex post facto laws regarding gun ownership.

California is becoming quite the police state.

And there'll be no SCOTUS riding to the rescue.