• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Vaccines: how do I talk to my anti-vac wife about it?

Lamuella, I'm working on the reply to Estellea and SkepticGinger which will address this. Unfortunately, my time to devote to this is limited but I'm hoping to complete this within the next 2 days. It doesn't help that while I'm reviewing my previous references, I keep bumping into supporting material that I hadn't seen before. Did I say reams?
Hmm, I would have expected someone with "reams" of evidence of vaccine-induced epidemics and studies that have been disparaged as untrustworthy could have produced a couple of examples by now.

Or not.

Este
 
Ah, so that would mean that the so-called "evidence" you want to believe gets disembowelled ergo pro-vaccine studies are propaganda. These mental gymnastics are almost an Olympic sport with anti-vaxxers. What studies that have been discredited do you have a problem with? Making such blanket statements without examples seems rather feckless.

Este, you'll answer this one for me in just a moment as you dismiss every reference that I put forward.

What is this "alternative view" you speak of?

Hmmm - what is an alternative to pro-vaxxer. Could it be anti-vaxxer?

How fascinating. What are these "reams" of evidence showing that vaccinations are a major cause of epidemics?

Please see the following quotes which are only a handful of what's available.

Vaccines are cheap compared to treating and curing diseases by the way. Why go through all that bother of creating a vaccine poison when we could just let entire populations get all of the VPDs that they had been getting?

For the moment, let's ignore the ASSumption that vaccines contribute in any way to the prevention of any disease whatsoever and just address why you'd bother vaccinating instead of just treating the disease.

The following excerpts are from Vaccines and Serum Evils by Herbert Shelton. (IMO scopie's law is trounced by the Shipman Law which states that medical doctors can kill patients intentionally or otherwise with impunity as long as they don't get stupidly greedy! You're of course entitled to your own opinion.)

Wm. A. Rohlf, M. D., President-elect of the Iowa State Medical Society, said in his official address at a recent meeting of that body:

"Allow me to quote from a letter received from Dr. Steel-smith: 'For the five year period preceding the State Department's Education toward diphtheria immunization, namely, the five years preceding 1923, there occurred in Iowa more than three thousand cases of diphtheria each year. Many of these cases were not seen by any medical practitioner, but the average revenue as computed by statisticians signifies that the, physicians of the state of Iowa received in cash approximately [$]20 per case for the treatment and cure of diphtheria for each of the five years preceding that state-wide anti-diphtheria program. This would result in physicians of the state receiving approximately $60,000 for such work each year incidental to diphtheria.

" 'Now in comparison to that, allow me to suggest that there are approximately 44,000 children born each year in Iowa. For the sake of figures, we will say that the average price for immunization would be $3 per child. If the physicians would interest themselves in preventative medicine and see to it that every child is treated before he is a year of age they would see dearly that from such practice the physicians of the state of Iowa would receive $132,000 a year, or twice as much as you and I received years ago for treatment of cases.'"

Apparently in 1923, they recognised the profit potential from vaccinating most of the population instead of just treating the few who fell ill with the disease.

The Journal of the American Medical Association, Nov. 4, 1922, prints an address by Dr. W. S. Rankin, Sec. of the North Carolina State Board of Health in which he says:

"Last year we inoculated 70,000 persons against typhoid fever and 1,000 children between six and twelve years of age against diphtheria. The county Commissioner paid the local practitioner 25 cents for each complete inoculation, and that was $20,000 which went to the profession last year which otherwise would not have been received. The work of the medical profession with the State Board of Health does not stop when the [$]20,000. is paid. It goes on. In the dispensaries which were conducted in Union County, North Carolina, with 35,000 people, the physicians vaccinated 10,000 people in a campaign of five weeks. That was $2,500 paid to twenty physicians--only $125 each, but think of the effect on the business of the profession in keeping up that work. It goes on."

There's a pattern developing...


Mather Pfeiffenberger, M. D., President of the Illinois State Medical Society, in a speech before the annual Conference Illinois Health Officers, Springfield, III., Dec. 3-4, 1926, said: "Prevention practiced to the uttermost will create more work for the physician and not diminish it, for the full time health officer will be educating his community constantly. There will be more vaccination, more immunizing, more consulting and use of the physician. His services will be increased many fold.

"I am informed that epidemic and endemic infections cause only 12 per cent of all deaths and that this percentage is declining very rapidly. Only 15 per cent of all children would ever get diphtheria, even under epidemic conditions, while 100 per cent are prospects for toxin-antitoxin. The percentage who would ever get smallpox, under present time conditions, is even less; but 100 per cent are prospects for vaccination. Scarlet fever will soon come in for its 100 per cent also, as it may for measles, judging from the reports on that disease. Typhoid fever is disappearing, due to sanitation, but vaccination should be used when the individual travels into unknown territory and countries,"

Thus another medical leader tells doctors how to increase their incomes by exploiting the children and non-sick adults.


From VACCINATION ABSURDITIES AND CONTRADICTIONS.
by W.R. Hadwen, M.D., J.P. 1902)

The Public Vaccinators of the Borough of Hackney have just claimed for VACCINATION FEES during the last twelve months no less than £4,839—(shame)—and the Public Vaccinator of Marylebone has sent in a bill for three months for £2,000. You cannot be surprised if they all believe in it. (Laughter). There was one medical gentleman down in the west country who was so delighted with the new rules issued by the Local Government Board that he called all his family around him ; he vaccinated his boy, and he vaccinated himself, and he vaccinated his wife, and he vacci*nated all his children ; and he sent in a bill to the Guardians at seven-and-six a head. (Laughter). He could have taken them into the surgery, where, according to the rules, the fee would have been two-and-six a head. But, oh, no ! it was all done in the drawing-room, " at the patients' residence," at seven-and-six each, and the Guardians had to pay it. (Laughter).

You cannot be surprised at the Medical Profession believing in vac*cination, because it has become lately A MAGNIFICENT ENDOWMENT, and if there is one thing in the world that wants disestablishing and disendowing, there is no doubt about it, it is this miserable practice.

The vaccination/immunization/inoculation scourge was identified as a scam at least by the 19th century and concerned individuals have documented it's many transformations over the centuries. Medical doctors who fought against it largely forfeited their careers so it's not surprising that those willing to speak out diminished over time as well.

Going back to the idea that vaccines in some way contribute to the prevention of disease, let's see what history teaches us.


From Swine Flu Expose by Eleanora I. McBean, Ph.D., N.D.

CHAPTER 2: THE SPANISH INFLUENZA EPIDEMIC OF 1918 WAS CAUSED BY VACCINATIONS...
...I heard that seven men dropped dead in a doctor’s office after being vaccinated. This was in an army camp, so I wrote to the Government for verification. They sent me the report of U.S. Secretary of War, Henry L. Stimson. The report not only verified the report of the seven who dropped dead from the vaccines, but it stated that there had been 63 deaths and 28,585 cases of hepatitis as a direct result of the yellow fever vaccine during only 6 months of the war. That was only one of the 14 to 25 shots given the soldiers. We can imagine the damage that all these shots did to the men.

CHAPTER 3: ANTI-TYPHOID VACCINE CAUSES A WORSE DISEASE WHICH THE DOCTORS NAME PARATYPHOID...
...It was during World War I (we entered it in 1917) when vaccination was enforced to the fullest extent, that the death rate from typhoid rose to the highest point in history— even higher than it had been during the pre-sanitation days of the Spanish American War. This 1917-1920 death rate could not be blamed on bad sanitation or spoiled food as was the case in the tropics. The deaths occured after the shots were given in sanitary American hospitals and well-supervised army camps in France, where sanitation had been practiced for years. There was no typhoid in the camps before vaccination, so it couldn’t be blamed on contagion. The only reason for this extremely high death toll was the blood-poisoning practice of vaccination.

The Wonderful Century by Alfred Russel Wallace
Again, Mr. William Tebb brought before the Com-
mission a paper by Dr. Maclean, in the Medical Observer
of 1810, giving 535 cases of small-pox after vaccination
of which 97 were fatal. He also gave 150 cases of
diseases from cow-pox, with the names of ten medical
men, including two Professors of Anatomy, who had
suffered in their own families from vaccination. The
following striking passage is quoted: "Doctrine.—Vac-
cination or Cow-pox inoculation is a perfect preventive
of small-pox during life. (Jenner, etc.) Refutation.—
535 cases of small-pox after cow-pox. Doctrine.—Cow-
pox renders small-pox milder. It is never fatal. Refu-
tation.—97 deaths from small-pox after cow-pox and
from cow-pox diseases."

COMPULSORY VACCINATION A MENACE TO PERSONAL LIBERTY
by J. M. Peebles, M.D. (1900)

It is admitted that prevention is preferable to cure. And
there is not an intelligent medical practitioner in the land who
will unqualifiedly risk his reputation upon the statement that
vaccination is a positive preventative of small-pox. Volumes
of statistics as well as the highest medical science of this coun-
try, Canada, England, and the Continent would be directly
against him. The most that any physician of good standing
now contends for is that vaccination modifies the disease. This
is stoutly denied. On the contrary it rather aggravates the dis-
ease as there are two poisons now in the system instead of one
for nature to contend against. It is sanitation, diet, pure air,
calmness of mind, confidence, and cleanliness that modify the
small-pox; all of which modifiers are infinitely cheaper, safer,
and in every way preferable to cow-pox poison, which, if it does
not kill, often marks, maims, and sows the seeds of future ec-
zema, tumors, ulcers, carbuncles, cancers, and leprosy.

When these facts shall be fully realized by a much crucified
and long suffering public, it will not take long to put a stop to
the compulsory feature of this infamous crime. We shall then
no longer submit the bodies of our defenceless children to the
assaults of salaried, place-hunting doctors, nor longer tolerate
the flagrant usurpations of parliaments and legislatures over our
personal liberties and the sacredness of the family circle.


"Bodily sovereignty"? WTH is that too? Do you think measles, hepatitis, Hib, pertussis or tetanus give a rat's bum about "bodily sovereignty"?

Este

(Apologies if the following quotes are offensive to you.)

According to Blackstone (the "Bible" of the lawyers): "No laws are binding upon the human subject which assault the body or violate the Conscience."

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that:

"No right is held more sacred or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others"

Judge Cooley stated: "The right of one’s person may be said to be a right of complete immunity; to be let alone."

PASTEUR ALSO A FAKER: ANTISEPSIS

Now the forcing of these inoculations upon individuals by law is one of the worst of tyrannies imaginable, and should be resisted, even to the death of the official who is enforcing it."

And I don't give a rat's bum about measles, hepatitis, Hib, pertussis or tetanus because while I live in accordance with the laws of nature, they cannot touch me.

For additional references, please feel free to deny the following sources:
http://www.whale.to/vaccines.html
http://web.mac.com/rblaylock/Russell_Blaylock_M.D./Swine_Flu_Data.html
Fear of the Invisible by Janine Roberts

I think that's enough from me for now. :)
 
The introduction of a meningitis vaccine is sub saharan Africa has been very successful. The numbers have gone from 5000 deaths last year to none this year.

I can't believe people want to undo all of this.
The reason is, the "people" in question don't live in sub-saharan Africa. They can afford the self indulgence because they are remote enough from people with real problems... :cool:.

Yuri
 
For the moment, let's ignore the ASSumption that vaccines contribute in any way to the prevention of any disease whatsoever

See many people under the age of 55 who are deformed by polio, or who have to stay hooked up to respirators because of polio?
 
Hmm ... not totally. The title leaves it open to ambiguity. It's why I thought the show was quite excellent in the "many angles" it portrays:

...

So the title "Selfish" was meant to be ambiguous. Was the anti-vac mother selfish ? Was the irresponsible, neglectful, murderous mother selfish ? Was the mayor and public outcry selfish ? I thought the episode did a great job of highlighting the fact that ... regardless of what is "right" or "wrong" or worthy of condemnation or not ... there are still consequences for your actions that go beyond just your own sphere of influence.

Thanks, Trent for the explanation. The mayor's and public's outcry is typical of superstitious beliefs that you'd expect from less educated peoples. The power of doctors is just as powerful in modern, civilized communities as it was when they were referred to as "witch doctors" or "medicine men." Only a very brave person would question or defy a witch doctor.
 
The power of doctors is just as powerful in modern, civilized communities as it was when they were referred to as "witch doctors" or "medicine men." Only a very brave person would question or defy a witch doctor.
...the same way only a very brave person would question or defy a despot before we got a democracy... are you trying to imply that asking questions throwing dangerous conspriacy theories left and right is as dangerous today as it was back then?
 
What makes you think an illness was vaccine related when other causes of the baby's death were clearly implicated just because the court settlement was agreed to? Sometimes the cost of litigation is more than the settlement and people decide to settle even if they could win the case. The parents also claimed they were not given the VIS (vaccine information statement). On that basis alone a court can find in favor of a defendant.

The key lesson in the parents story was the refusal by any of the physicians or staff to believe that the vaccination could have been the cause of the child's rash and subsequent deterioration. They positively insisted that the vaccine could not have caused the severe allergic reaction and therefore dismissed it.

How is it you arbitrarily choose the hep B vaccine as the cause of this baby's illness? It's ignorant, but all too common for people to latch on to some thing they decide must be the cause, ignoring the fact there are many things that could have caused this from a viral infection to some other toxic exposure in utero in particular the preeclampsia causes some of the same symptoms the baby in this case suffered. (emphasis mine)

What was ignorant was the hospital staffs' refusal to consider the vaccination as the cause. The subsequent discovery by the parents that the "severe allergic reaction" was listed as a possibility on the information sheet as well as the CDC's admission of

“several” (which means hundreds) reported cases exactly like Ian’s; cases in which infants became ill within 24 hours of receiving the hepatitis B shot and then passed away

My point otherwise was that even after the fact, there was still no acceptance by the authorities that the vaccine could have been a factor hence the vaccine remains innocent until proven guilty.

People who don't understand research or who believe there is some big conspiracy to hide research results or who believe the vaccine manufacturers control information (that's the stupidest belief) or that every medical provider and researcher is either duped or in on the conspiracy come to these ignorance based conclusions that vaccines cause things they don't cause and 'natural' diseases are harmless.

I don't know how one addresses the ignorance, but that is the problem, not the vacines.

People who believe that the vaccine industry is beyond reproach are ignorant of its long history. There is always a possibility that your faith is justified but my judgement is that you are doubly duped by the industries claims to efficacy and safety. By "industry" I mean the medical profession, the manufacturers and the government agencies that work hand in hand with the other 2 to hype up vaccination emergencies, push people into the hands of the vaccinators and spend billions in public funds in the process.
 
See many people under the age of 55 who are deformed by polio, or who have to stay hooked up to respirators because of polio?

dave, it would appear that you are kneeling at the temple of the vaccination god(s.) Perhaps you've not had the benefit of the several references that show polio's close relation to harvest seasons and the use of pesticides. Certainly not a closed-case but to anyone but the faithful, a case that deserves deeper consideration.

There's plenty of reading available at good ol' whale.to

"In 1983, via new legislation, DDT was allowed back into the U.S. marketplace, but only in pesticide blends. Within only a few months of this re-entry, a new kind of polio epidemic suddenly occurred. It was labelled "post-polio", the re-emergence of polio symptoms in former victims. This has involved approximately 600,000 victims."--Jim West http://www.geocities.com/harpub/pol_all.htm
 
For those that didn't click the link to rational wiki ...

Whale.to is a website run by Herefordshire pig farmer John Scudamore. It is a notorious dumping ground for all things pseudoscientific... as well as a few other things. Like the complete text of the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, documentations of Illuminati mind control plots, and articles about the Catholic world conspiracy.[2] It contains every (and we do mean every) half-baked pseudoscientific theory ever concocted.
Shockingly, it was used as a source by the plaintiffs in the Autism omnibus trial, and it has seen increasing use as a "source" by anti-vaccinationists and propagators of the vaccine-autism connection. ...

... Whale.to Warning: Storehouse of extreme pseudoscientific and conspiracy-mongering crap. Enter at your own risk. But good for a laugh, if you have that sense of humour.
 
The key lesson in the parents story was the refusal by any of the physicians or staff to believe that the vaccination could have been the cause of the child's rash and subsequent deterioration. They positively insisted that the vaccine could not have caused the severe allergic reaction and therefore dismissed it.



What was ignorant was the hospital staffs' refusal to consider the vaccination as the cause. The subsequent discovery by the parents that the "severe allergic reaction" was listed as a possibility on the information sheet as well as the CDC's admission of



My point otherwise was that even after the fact, there was still no acceptance by the authorities that the vaccine could have been a factor hence the vaccine remains innocent until proven guilty.



People who believe that the vaccine industry is beyond reproach are ignorant of its long history. There is always a possibility that your faith is justified but my judgement is that you are doubly duped by the industries claims to efficacy and safety. By "industry" I mean the medical profession, the manufacturers and the government agencies that work hand in hand with the other 2 to hype up vaccination emergencies, push people into the hands of the vaccinators and spend billions in public funds in the process.
There are ways to tell when a side effect or illness is vaccine related or not vacine related. It has nothing to do with willingness to believe, it has to do with understanding evidence.

The infant was sick before he was given the vaccine.
The infant spent a week in the NICU after birth before the vaccine was given.
The mother was seriously ill prior to an emergency labor induction.

There are no other children who received the vaccine that had the symptoms the child had.

In medicine we have a saying about not looking for zebras when you hear hoof beats.

Regardless of your false beliefs about health care providers defending vaccines, I would imagine the physicians and other health care providers who no doubt worked tirelessly with that infant trying to save its life could care less about protecting the reputation of vaccines if they thought for one minute the vaccine had anything to do with the baby's symptoms. I've worked in ICU, pediatrics and bone marrow transplant units. The care givers can't help but get emotionally involved with an infant one spends a month trying to save.

As a health care provider, you don't take a parent's desire to find something to target or someone to blame and use that as evidence in making a diagnosis. Grieving parents often channel their grief into a cause, and sometimes that cause is misguided.

If the vaccination appeared to be the cause of this infant's death, the vast majority of physicians and other health care providers would want the facts to be out there. There was little chance of any lawsuit given the vaccine injury fund so certainly saving their financial bacon was not something that would make the physicians lie about the cause of the infant's death. No one is getting rich off of vaccinating newborns compared to all the other sources of income generated in a hospital's OB unit.

Your conclusions rely on the false premise that vaccine manufacturers have a monopoly on research findings, the false premise that doctors are duped or in on the conspiracy, the false premise that our years in college and years of experience leave us ignorant and the false premise that uneducated people reading the Internet are more knowledgeable than we are.

If you think you are seriously ill are you going to go to a doctor or consult a quack on the Net? Your life may one day depend on that decision.
 
dave, it would appear that you are kneeling at the temple of the vaccination god(s.) Perhaps you've not had the benefit of the several references that show polio's close relation to harvest seasons and the use of pesticides.

I wouldn't call it a benefit, but yes, I'm familiar with those assertions and the complete lack of evidence to support them.
 
Last edited:
trusetheeker said:
Ah, so that would mean that the so-called "evidence" you want to believe gets disembowelled ergo pro-vaccine studies are propaganda. These mental gymnastics are almost an Olympic sport with anti-vaxxers. What studies that have been discredited do you have a problem with? Making such blanket statements without examples seems rather feckless.

Este, you'll answer this one for me in just a moment as you dismiss every reference that I put forward.
Why shouldn't I dismiss every reference? You pulled them off of whale.to and vaclib. Use primary sources that are peer reviewed and don't contain the phrase, "I heard..." and you won't get laughed out of the room.

What is this "alternative view" you speak of?

Hmmm - what is an alternative to pro-vaxxer. Could it be anti-vaxxer?
Fine, but should still be qualified with evidence since you claim that there is acceptable evidence:
Vaccination is a religion and serious intellectual discussion is thwarted by the emotional attachment to entrenched beliefs as you have seen over the course of this discussion. There's no chance that any of the pro-vacciners will give any thought that the alternative view might be correct nor will they realise the ridiculousness of their vicious attacks against anyone who questions their beliefs.
There is no "alternative view"; you either have scientific validation or merely your dogma. It's laughable that you would accuse pro-science advocates of "emotional attachment" when you can't even produce a single citation from a reputable source. That's why I asked what this "alternative view" was and compared it to homeopathy arguments.
How fascinating. What are these "reams" of evidence showing that vaccinations are a major cause of epidemics?

Please see the following quotes which are only a handful of what's available.

Vaccines are cheap compared to treating and curing diseases by the way. Why go through all that bother of creating a vaccine poison when we could just let entire populations get all of the VPDs that they had been getting?

For the moment, let's ignore the ASSumption that vaccines contribute in any way to the prevention of any disease whatsoever and just address why you'd bother vaccinating instead of just treating the disease.
And references to whale.to and vaclib. I'm shocked I tell you. Conspiracy theories promulgated by a pig farmer and parroted by you are not a basis for arguing with people who actually study scientific disciplines and utilise real scientific publications. Even though you disdain science (or don't understand relevant scholarship), your arguments are no less vacuous.

The following excerpts are from Vaccines and Serum Evils by Herbert Shelton. (IMO scopie's law is trounced by the Shipman Law which states that medical doctors can kill patients intentionally or otherwise with impunity as long as they don't get stupidly greedy! You're of course entitled to your own opinion.)
I don't utilise opinion when discussing matters of science; that's probably where you have gone dreadfully wrong. The rest of your entries, which I mercifully deleted are antiquated, based upon faulty and incomplete information and selectively quoted. Nothing more recent and from a legitimate source I take it? You know there are excellent disease anthropology texts available. Why wouldn't you use those and instead rely upon one of the most profane and ridiculous websites known for your information?

"Bodily sovereignty"? WTH is that too? Do you think measles, hepatitis, Hib, pertussis or tetanus give a rat's bum about "bodily sovereignty"?

Este

(Apologies if the following quotes are offensive to you.)

According to Blackstone (the "Bible" of the lawyers): "No laws are binding upon the human subject which assault the body or violate the Conscience."

The U.S. Supreme Court ruled that:

"No right is held more sacred or is more carefully guarded by the common law, than the right of every individual to the possession and control of his own person, free from all restraint or interference of others"

Judge Cooley stated: "The right of one’s person may be said to be a right of complete immunity; to be let alone."

PASTEUR ALSO A FAKER: ANTISEPSIS

Now the forcing of these inoculations upon individuals by law is one of the worst of tyrannies imaginable, and should be resisted, even to the death of the official who is enforcing it."

And I don't give a rat's bum about measles, hepatitis, Hib, pertussis or tetanus because while I live in accordance with the laws of nature, they cannot touch me.
Your quotes are completely irrelevant. Offensive? No. Inane? Absolutely. I see that you think that you live some kind of charmed life that you aren't susceptible to any disease. Let me guess? You don't accept germ theory; you think that your diet is superlative and only the "weak" succumb to disease, of which you are not. :rolleyes:

For additional references, please feel free to deny the following sources:
http://www.whale.to/vaccines.html
http://web.mac.com/rblaylock/Russell_Blaylock_M.D./Swine_Flu_Data.html
Fear of the Invisible by Janine Roberts

I think that's enough from me for now. :)
If you know that your sources are rubbish and will be discarded as such, why do you continue to use them? I also have to question the integrity of someone who would blithely use the site of someone so egregious (Scudamore's anti-Semitism alone is vomit-worthy) that an internet meme has been invented about it.

Este
 
So from an assumption that an adult infected the child with measles, you can charge that adult with being selfish? What actual proof is there that the adult was guilty?
Yes, along with the parents of the (intentionally unvaccinated) child who infected several others, including one who recently died of SSPE and another who is dying of SSPE. There is this thing called epidemiology that has made some rather substantial strides in methods that allows us to be able to identify all sorts of nifty things regarding disease transmission. Given your fondness for conspiracy theories and archaic ramblings, I thought I'd let you in on that.

Este
 
...the same way only a very brave person would question or defy a despot before we got a democracy... are you trying to imply that asking questions throwing dangerous conspriacy theories left and right is as dangerous today as it was back then?

I would agree that engaging in an argument with narrow-minded people who are in the grip of a fear-based mythology has potential to be dangerous and that's probably just as true today as it ever was.

Your lot have a long history of fining and imprisoning 1000s of people for refusing to be endangered by vaccination. On several occasions, countries have made it illegal to administer vaccinations after countless deaths and severe illness followed the forced immunization attacks; that was the only way to stop the doctors from continuing to pedal their deadly products.

Compare that to the danger you might face from the anti-vaxxers. At worst, you might get a bloody nose from trying to forcibly vaccinate me! You couldn't possibly get measles from me because you're so well protected by your vaccine! :p

(For references please see my previous post)
 

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom