Religious conservatives oppose cervical cancer vaccine...say it might cause sex.

[hardheadjarhead]

This is just...insane.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2005/10/31/MNG2LFGJFT1.DTL&feed=rss.news

"Some people have raised the issue of whether this vaccine may be sending an overall message to teen-agers that, 'We expect you to be sexually active,' " said Reginald Finger, a doctor trained in public health who served as a medical analyst for Focus on the Family before being appointed to the ACIP in 2003.


It is a VIRUS. Your daughter could catch it from the man of her dreams on her wedding night, unbeknownst to anyone and after years of abstinence and virginity. She then could die of cervical cancer after having several children, leaving the motherless and the family saddled with medical bills. This is pro-family planning?

This vaccine could save thousands of lives...but people are worried that the shot might induce girls to go do the "evil nasty" with their boyfriends.

Remember when zippers were considered an invitation to immoral behavor by some in the late 19th century?

A little taste of what to expect when they come up with an AIDS vaccine, I suppose...or ANY vaccine for ANY sexually transmitted disease.


Regards,



Steve

 

[BrandiJo]

i say it woudl be great, id be first to sign my kids up for it when and if i have kids. But i know alot of more conservitive people who will be against it

 

[michaeledward]

Yes, it is insane.

 

[hardheadjarhead]

It amazes me how clueless people are when it comes to sexuality.

Look at sexual myths, past and present:

Condoms and vaccines and (I'm not making this up) dancing lead to sex. Pornography leads to rape. Masturbation causes insanity and blindness. Homosexuality=pedophilia and bestiality.

People ascribe to sex powers to which it doesn't have because they don't understand it. They're so fearful of it they likely never will understand it.


Regards,


Steve

 

[Navarre]

The entire idea is insipid, though not unexpected. This country is more repressed and concerned about sexuality than it is drugs or violence. It is attributable perhaps to our country's founding by Quakers..and the current administration.

Condoms and vaccines and (I'm not making this up) dancing lead to sex. Pornography leads to rape. Masturbation causes insanity and blindness. Homosexuality=pedophilia and bestiality.

I want to respond further but it's taking too long on my Braille keyboard.

 

[Ray]

Does the article really say that "religious" conservatives oppose the vaccine? Or does it say that "many" {and not necessarily "religious"} conservatives oppose making the vaccination manditory?

How many is "many" and how "religious" are they? How conservative are they; and are they fiscally or socially conservative? Was a scientific poll conducted with a plus/minus margin of error? How many of the general populace know about this vaccine?

 

[Loki]

I'd like to know how decisions are made about which vaccinations are mandatory and which are not. Anyone?

 

[shesulsa]

I'd like to know how decisions are made about which vaccinations are mandatory and which are not. Anyone?

This is usually accomplished by huge pharma lobbying the CDC and certain lawmakers with perks and lots o' cash. Some of us think it involves proof gained by studies that say it's beneficial with minimal side effects, but ... well, ever lie on a job application?

Steve, I'm dumbfounded. I've said before that with the dual standard of advertising vs. religious control that the message is that every consumer is supposed to like, want, fantasize about, worship sex, sex objects and people advertising deems as sexy, but we're just plain not supposed to have it. It could be enraging, eh?

 

[OnlyAnEgg]

In my experience with and observation on the procreative drive, most teen and post-teen activity leads directly to sex. It is basic instinct to preserve further the species. Anything we can do to keep people dying from it is acceptable and necessary.

 

[JPR]

[FONT=&quot]I think the issues here are a bit more detailed than simply opposing a vaccine. From http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038209.cfm ,
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]“Wallis says the vaccine does hold wonderful promise for those who need it.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]’I do think that we need to be selectively offering this to patients who are at high risk for HPV infections, but I'm not sure that we are at a point where we can justify universal applications.’”
[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
It seems to be the mandatory vaccination that has people worried. If I were the king of the world (a little Three Dog Night for those of you old enough to remember) I would make the vaccination available to school age children and allow the parents to opt in or out according to their beliefs / values / hang-ups / what ever. [/FONT]
[FONT=&quot]
After all, parents should be responsible for their children. [/FONT]

 

[arnisador]

I'd like to say I find this unbelievable...sadly, I no longer do.

 

[RandomPhantom700]

Wow, you know, according to their logic, the conservatives who are opposing these vaccinations should just be favoring the virus itself as a fear factor about sex. Obviously according to them, anything that prevents teens from having sex is a good thing, even if it's a cancerous virus that kills people.

And this really has nothing to do with parental autonomy...they're not opposing mandatory vaccinations in general (all of which woul seemingly oppose parental autonomy), but only those that threaten their precious no-sex-before-marriage ********. That's the only cause for their concern, if you can call it that.

I'm disgusted by this behavior, though like so many others, not surprised. I hope these Focus on the Family lobbyists get infected by this virus themselves, see how much they wish the vaccine was available then. Oh but wait, they're not teen girls, their lives are apparently valuable. Pricks.

:ticked: :soapbox: :flammad:

 

[heretic888]

Just a little side note here...

This country is more repressed and concerned about sexuality than it is drugs or violence. It is attributable perhaps to our country's founding by Quakers [...]

Our country was not founded by the Religious Society of Friends (popularly referred to by others as 'Quakers' and who refer to themselves as 'Friends'). However, the colony of Pennsylvania was via William Penn. For more information on the Friends, please see Wikipedia's article on them.

I think you may be thinking of the Puritans here, but even they were geographically restricted to certain colonies.

Laterz.

 

[heretic888]

This is just...insane.

Undoubtedly.

This sort of stuff reminds me of the health class I had during my freshman year of high school in central Florida. One day, we were watching some video on sex education and a discussion was brought up concerning the use of condoms (of all things!). The teacher promptly stopped the video and informed the class that since the government's official policy was that of abstinence, we couldn't discuss such subject matter (i.e., using condoms for safe sex) in class.

Its always nice to see education take a backseat to political ideology.

Laterz.

 

[Flying Crane]

The thing is, with a vaccine, it is preventative. It has to be administered BEFORE infection, otherwise it is too late. So how do these clowns decide who is at greater risk and therefor needs the vaccine, and who is not? If it doesn't have significant side-effects, i think people should have it, plain and simple.

 

[Navarre]

Our country was not founded by the Religious Society of Friends...

You may be correct. Admittedly, I am not much of an expert on history. Still, wasn't the US founded primarily by those who had left England due to radically different, and very conservative, religious views?

Next thing you'll tell me the Quaker's didn't make all that tasty oatmeal.

 

[heretic888]

You may be correct. Admittedly, I am not much of an expert on history. Still, wasn't the US founded primarily by those who had left England due to radically different, and very conservative, religious views?

Again, I believe you are referring to the Puritans here. They were about as 'conservative' as it comes in terms of theology and moral philosophy.

The Friends have very 'liberal' approaches to both theology and morality by most Christian standards. From their very beginning in this country, they radically opposed slavery and war of any kind and fought for women's rights. They also take a more 'mystical' approach to revering God (as opposed to exoteric worship and ritual).

Laterz.

 

[Navarre]

I'm sure you're right, heretic. Thanks for the info.

Sorry to digress from the thread topic.

 

[heretic888]

I'm sure you're right, heretic. Thanks for the info.

Sorry to digress from the thread topic.

:asian:

 

[JPR]

Wow, you know, according to their logic, the conservatives who are opposing these vaccinations should just be favoring the virus itself as a fear factor about sex. Obviously according to them, anything that prevents teens from having sex is a good thing, even if it's a cancerous virus that kills people.

That really isn't the logic. The concern is that as action is separated from consequence the action becomes all the more prevalent. There is a moral concern that children are becoming too sexual inundated by society and sexually active too soon. This increased sexuality is believed to be to the child, the family, and society’s long-term detriment (and yes I understand that this is an debatable belief). Therefore, something like this pops up and the clamor begins.

What is troubling to me is why there cannot be a discussion. If someone raises the specter that any action (condoms, sex ed, morning after pills, etc.) might have the consequence of influencing more teens to become sexually active, then they are labeled as a clown, despot, Neanderthal, bigot, etc. On the other hand, if someone advocates the opposite position they are usually labeled immoral, heathen, danger to the family, sex – drugs – and rock and roll hold over. Neither set of labels is true or helpful in solving the problems that confront us. More energy is spent in vilifying the “enemy” than in addressing the problems.

Again, in this instance the solution seems so simple to me. Make it available to everyone and let them choose. In the case of minors, allow the parents to choose for them, it is what parents are supposed to do. That way the conservative clowns don’t repress anyone, nor plan the demise of teen girls and the liberal clowns don’t erode the moral fiber of the universe nor destroy the “traditional” family.

Send in the clowns, don’t bother they’re here.