Nature is wrong.
A species CAN regress.
Kinda odd to think technology, the thing meant to propel us further, has a lot of uses to hold some people (a lot) back
The idea that evolution is always progress is incorrect.
It's more like a random walk where adaptable changes are more likely to continue and maladaptive changes are more likely to die out.
But we live in a society where we artificially keep maladaptive humans alive to reproduce, and even tend to have them reproduce at a higher rate than the members of society that are most adaptable.
In theory this could be an issue if we were going to depend on adaptive changes to human biological and environmental developments for continued success.
In reality, it's not going to matter as within a generation we're going to have effectively infinitely scalable AI which is more adaptable than the average human and will offset the growth in maladaptive humans relative to adaptable.
Which will still not matter, as within a century the various debts we as a species are taking on will likely have inescapable consequences that doom us all, at best our cultural legacy living on with the continuation of AI that is adaptable to the environmental hellscape we leave behind.
They warned about these people back in the 1930s and we didn't listen.
Religious exemptions need to be banned outright throughout the United States.
Actively withholding your child from receiving vaccines should be grounds for losing custody.
Sadly, I would guess that a challenge against religious exemption would be decided against on first amendment grounds by SCOTUS.
Which is madness. If we're at the point where abortion can't be found in the federal Constitution, then vaccine opt outs shouldn't be derived from the first amendment.
The first amendment protects them here. However, it does not automatically grant them access to government services such as school and welfare. Our focus shouldn't be so narrow that we forget to protect the people who children are incapable of being vaccinated. So denying these people access to school or government facilities is always an option we should look into.
The first amendment protects them here.
That depends on the court, and on how broadly the relevant rule is written. It's a hell of a claim to say that my religion must exempt me from laws that apply to others, and that's exactly the sort of claim being advanced when we say that our religion requires us to not do [things that our religion says nothing about].
A relevant precedent, in Jacobson v. Massachusetts, reached in 1905 regarding the constitutionality of compulsory vaccination law, held that individual liberty is not absolute and that the public interest can justify narrowly subjecting it to the authority of the state. (note that this ruling was narrowly about public health authority and its enforceability, and the stakes of the dispute were that if Jacobson didn't want to be vaccinated, he would be made to pay a fine and nowhere was child custody ever questioned)
The Court held that "in every well ordered society charged with the duty of conserving the safety of its members the rights of the individual in respect of his liberty may at times, under the pressure of great dangers, be subjected to such restraint, to be enforced by reasonable regulations, as the safety of the general public may demand" and that "[r]eal liberty for all could not exist under the operation of a principle which recognizes the right of each individual person to use his own [liberty], whether in respect of his person or his property, regardless of the injury that may be done to others."
Personally I agree there shouldn't be religious exemptions on vaccines, that the only cases that justify non-vaccinated kids attending schools would be medical justifications, not religious ones. Allowing non-medical people to carve unscientific loopholes in best public health praxis because they feel like Jesus or Cthulu (neither of whom said to not get vaccines) wouldn't want that basically means, if you extend that reasoning to its logical end, that when I say I have a religion and I tell you it means that law cannot apply to me or else it violates 1A, that no law can be consistently made to apply to anyone. ...and when it can't be made to apply to everyone equally, expect it to be applied, forcefully, to people of the wrong faith, or of the wrong race, or of the wrong caste.
Vaccine exemptions should not exist at all unless a physician (MD or DO, not a naturopath or chiropractor) cites a reason why the vaccine should not be administered.
There are many unscrupulous MD/DOs that will happily compromise their morals for a quick buck. In my opinion they should lose their license, but it usually takes a while and they can do a lot of damage before then.
You can't keep the determined from self harm. All you can do is hope a few roadblocks will deter the half-hearted.
What are we to do when a parent brings in a paper covered with Bible verses?
The sad reality is you can get away with saying whatever stupid bullshit you want as long as you add “because God says so” at the end of the sentence. It’s the ultimate thought terminating cliche.
If someone commits a murder, "God told me to" is not a valid legal argument. They'll still be prosecuted. This should be the same. People can practice their religion however they want until it starts causing suffering to others.
Another pandemic, let's goooo!
nooooOOOOOO
It can't possibly have any relationship to morons like Florida's Surgeon General citing bogus claims and vaccine efficacy denialism could it?
Denying children healthcare should result in a loss of custody.
Charging for a child's health care should result in a prison sentence.
Charging for ~~a child's~~ health care should result in a prison sentence.
Not actually surprising given how many people distrust the health-care system in US. I wonder why that might be...
Vaccines are actually one of the parts of the US healthcare system which works well. There is no excuse for vaccine skepticism other than stupidity.
Vaccines work too well for their own good in some respects. They are so good that most people don't remember the bad old days when these diseases ran rampant. People think "measles" and say "so you get some sores for a few days and then fully recover, no biggie." They hear "whooping cough" and say "you just cough for a bit, so what?"
Too many people don't recall the horrors these diseases inflicted. I count myself among those who don't recall first hand, but I've read enough accounts to be thankful that I haven't had to experience this.
Also, the anti-vax movement started small. They stopped getting shots and the world didn't end. This was actually because everyone else was still supplying herd immunity, but they spun it as "see how you don't need vaccines?"
As more and more people joined, the herd immunity started to falter. Now, it's breaking down entirely and diseases once thought gone are making a comeback tour.
And all because these people would rather trust someone online with no medical experience, but who tells them what they want to hear rather than actual doctors.
For those wondering genuine reasons to support this statement, remember the horrific things the US government did to black people and native Americans.
The CIA and such were having a field day doing whatever unethical shit they wanted.
Tuskagee experiment? (Giving black people syphilis) https://www.history.com/news/the-infamous-40-year-tuskegee-study
MK Ultra? (Drugging black people with cocaine and mishrooms) https://chacruna.net/cia_research_exploited_black_americans_mkultra/
Mass sterilization of Native American women: https://time.com/5737080/native-american-sterilization-history/
It goes on and on. Yeah, we have good reason to distrust the US Government. Unfortunately, we also have lots of reasons to trust them as well. This isn't a post "gubbmint bad". This is just "we can understand why some people think the way they do because of the actions of others".
I think distrusting pharmaceutical companies and being skeptical of excessive tests is very different from distrusting medical science. I don't have to trust my health insurance company to know that vaccines are on solid evidence and safe to get.
If it's a new vaccine? I'll apply more skepticism, but that means looking into it. The explanation of the mRNA method for COVID was very transparent and supported by university academics. It was novel and quite impressive.
Plus, just in general, you need to be wary of side effects. I'm way more cautious about new medications after going through the gambit with psychological medications and their side effects. As I get older, more health procedures become elective vs necessary (e.g. hair regrowth products), and it's important to think critically about it.
There is a rising distrust in the health care system
I blame all the bullshit fees and tests that hospitals, pharmacy companies, and medical insurance companies have joined forces to do to milk more money out of ppl. Ever since the health care system started to chase profits instead of caring for people, this distrust was bound to happen.
People know that the health care system is trying to make money off of you, not take care of you. So they don't know which medical advice to trust and which medical advice was given in order to make money.
This.
It is easy, and justified to blame Trump for being anti-vax to have gotten as mainstream as it has…
… but that was only able to gain traction in the first place because people are being offered the choice between healing and going broke.
At some level, conscious or not, this is the masses rebelling against a system that has actively harmed them.
Unfortunately, the outlet for this rebellion actively harms them and is decidedly not in their best interests. It’s going to take at least a generation to rebuild that trust, and our medical system is going to fight tooth and nail to keep that trust ruined in the name of maximum profits,
I hate these articles that give no contextual numbers. What was the exemption rate before? The article doesn’t bother to tell us.
I remember how I felt about antivaxxers a decade ago. Drove me crazy, people making bad sweeping decisions based on gut feeling and fear instead of trying to understand the medicine and how it benefited them. I often tried pretty hard to convince the ones I knew personally to reconsider.
Nowadays I just try not to get yelled at for my opinions while I watch things fall apart.
I feel bad for the immunocompromised and the children who can’t make their own choices. I don’t feel bad for the nutbag parents who will see their children suffer with preventable diseases. I’ll even likely chuckle when I hear of a death.
Religious extremist (to the point of not accept vaccines at least) potentially extinguishing is so Darwinistic...
If only they didn't spread diseases to others, that would be true, but they are also going to kill a lot of innocent people this way.
To be fair my child's daycare asked for papers from the doctor every time they went, often enough it was forgotten, and you could just sign saying the child's exempt to not have to deal with the papers.
Thanks Joe rohan
Fucking morons are gonna get other vaccinated kids killed by mutant viruses.
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.