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

"The Republicans’ war on science and reason"

It tells me that you're totally cool with sticking to your religiously-derived objection to vaccines even if the cost is an epidemic that would kill one-third to one-half the population.

And ignore that many of those who survived, as with earlier plagues and indeed later outbreaks of plagues, were those who caught a milder strain, or were otherwise able to build up a natural immunity when their body adapted and learned to combat the infection.

So, guess what we call the artifical simulation of this process?
 
Whether immoral or amoral, people who do promiscuous sex get high rates of STDs.

How do you get a higher rate of STD? What is the average rate at which a person catches STDs?

Are you sure you don't mean that a higher rate of promiscuous people experience an STD? How do you think those figures might be effected by safe sexual practices? Or better sex education.

Take the simple fact that people like to do the dirty. Especially in certain age brackets. Tell them not to all you like, there will be a number who do. Telling them not to doesn't work.

Telling them how to make safe informed choices does. If you like it or not.
 

I smell confirmation bias.

I do know, from my travels, that there is good reason to teach the use of condoms. AIDS is not the only STD out there.

In Germany, all prostitutes demand that you wear a condom. They are far more lax about it in Korea.

I knew people in Korea who had gotten just about all of the common STDs, including chancroid. (Two of those were in my duty section.)

Maybe one or two guys a month got the drips in my battery in Germany.

If they reduce the rate of infection at all, it is stuipid not to inform teenagers that they exist. Kids are going to rebel, especially against an opinionated martinet of a father.
 
Lefty, Anything about contraception coming from a pro-life site is a lie. I haven't seen them tell the truth EVER.

If anything, it's a self-confirming prophecy. Condoms do have a significant failure rate. But the vast majority of that failure rate is due to people not using them correctly. And the practice of forbidding contraceptive education has in turn lead to more people using them incorrectly.
 
If anything, it's a self-confirming prophecy. Condoms do have a significant failure rate. But the vast majority of that failure rate is due to people not using them correctly. And the practice of forbidding contraceptive education has in turn lead to more people using them incorrectly.

You bet. Some people actually use vaseline as a lube with condoms!
 
No, the fact is that like any other disease the infection rate would rise and fall and different intervals. Lying vaccine murderers like to point to fractions of the infection chart and make it seem as if Polio was going away on its own. When the vaccine came into play Polio was in a decline -at that time. But diseases like polio don't decline to nothing on their own and thy come back quickly in new epidemics.

"Polio was going away on its own" is standard issue lie from the epidemic loving crowd. Its been debunked plenty of times.

All epidemics eventually fade away to virtually nothing, with or without vaccines.
 
I remember attending a lot of town hall meetings a few years back at which the republicons all had their panties in a twist that their little darlings had to put a condom on a cucumber in sex-ed classes.

Do these nitwits think that their larvae will keep it zipped up when they are not looking?

Republicons are an infectious hazard.

When it comes right down to it, wouldn't the idea that the male member is THAT freaking big might actually be a bit of a disincentive to that populaltion we most want to protect to ever engage in intercourse?
 
All epidemics eventually fade away to virtually nothing, with or without vaccines.
So do entire human populations who don't take measures. This is especially true in low-tech countries.

The only epidemic disease I can think of that is really self-extinguishing is ebola.
 
It tells me that you're totally cool with sticking to your religiously-derived objection to vaccines even if the cost is an epidemic that would kill one-third to one-half the population.

My objection is only to one-sided brainwash, and it's based not on religion, but on common sense and a well founded distrust of Authority.
 
My objection is only to one-sided brainwash, and it's based not on religion, but on common sense and a well founded distrust of Authority.
Cow cookies.

Ignorance-only sex ed has been a disaster from day one. You want to keep the children of rational people from ever learning anything contrary to your superstitions.

The authority I most fear is that of churches that have morphed into avatars of the Harlot of Reveleations.
 
All epidemics eventually fade away to virtually nothing, with or without vaccines.

Only after leaving a stack of bodies or thousands of crippled children.

They never go away to nothing. They come back.

The first known outbreak of Bubonic plague was the Plague of Justinian. It killed half of Constantinople and crippled the Byzantine Empire. It faded after killing so many victims. But did it fade into nothing? I'd say 14th century Europe would disagree with you, as would London and Vienna in the 17th century. London 'solved' its outbreak with a devastating fire, this is preferable to vaccines?

Seriously, you look at a huge pile of dead and say "that is how you solve a problem!"?
 
Only after leaving a stack of bodies or thousands of crippled children.

They never go away to nothing. They come back.

The first known outbreak of Bubonic plague was the Plague of Justinian. It killed half of Constantinople and crippled the Byzantine Empire. It faded after killing so many victims. But did it fade into nothing? I'd say 14th century Europe would disagree with you, as would London and Vienna in the 17th century. London 'solved' its outbreak with a devastating fire, this is preferable to vaccines?

Seriously, you look at a huge pile of dead and say "that is how you solve a problem!"?


Not at all. The fact that epidemics eventually fade with or without vaccines merely calls into question some of the extravagant claims made for vaccines.
 
The fact that epidemics eventually fade with or without vaccines merely calls into question some of the extravagant claims made for vaccines.

Only if you completely ignore the amount of time it takes for an epidemic to fade and how many people are killed, disabled, or disfigured. This is completely disingenuous.
 

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