Paul Waldman discusses yet another issue where the right wing’s irrational fear of the advancement of medical knowledge could lead to the deaths of people.
It’s time for the Democrats to stand up for progress against the flat earth society.
Breaking News
Oprah Quitting TV Show In 2011
Oops…did someone forget to provide this part of the article?
Why are they obsessed with women’s reproductive organs?
TomY…
Which White House appointees are you referring to?
How does this statement square with the article’s statement:
Oh, yeah…MSU.
Oh, you are so deliciously snarky, Scratch! But unfortunately, it’s a distinction without a difference: these people are White House appointees. So when your cousin or daughter (or mother) gets HPV because the Bush administration decided the vaccine didn’t meet their sharia requirements, be sure to to remind her sarcastically that this was carried out by the radical religious right-controlled White House, and not the conservative one.
Yes, I was just saying to some of my conservative friends the other day, “I’ve been thinking about cancer lately, and, you know what? I’m for it; how about you?
And they said, you know what? We are, too — in unison!
TomY,
Please provide one quote from anyone in the Bush administration who opposes the HPV vaccine.
If you can’t, then you’re MSU.
TomY…
you ve got Reginald Finger, who officially disavows the position, but for some peculiar reason feels the need to represent it to the media
Do you suppose it may be because he was being intervied for a story about that very issue? Do you think he may have been asked about it?
No doubt when he rules against the vaccine…
The issue is not “ruling against the vaccine,” the issue is whether the vaccine should be mandatory. Is it your position that the vaccine should be mandatory?
You ve also got Leon Kass…
What does he have to do with this case? And for that matter, what does making this vaccine mandatory have to do with bioethics?
Let’s see, you’ve got Reginald Finger, who officially disavows the position, but for some peculiar reason feels the need to represent it to the media, and who comes from Dobson’s group of “Christian” lunatics. Now he’s on the committee that will decide the issue at the CDC. No doubt when he rules against the vaccine, he’ll give a different reason, one where he uses the phrase “sound science.” You’ve also got Leon Kass on the President’s Council on Bioethics, who thinks that contraception is bad because it encourages sex, which is inherently dangerous, and should be made more dangerous so that people do less of it. Whee! You must be proud to have them advising your shitty embarassment of a president!
“Please provide one quote from anyone in the Bush administration who opposes the HPV vaccine. If you can’t, then you’re MSU.”
Bite me, troll. Nobody on a scientific advisory panel is going to make explicitly religious arguments their excuse for crippling this effort to protect our women from cancer. But they *will* strike it down, and the motivation will be religious reasons. You’re setting the bar ridiculously high — why? Because you are in denial about the cretins who control your party and your government.
“the issue is whether the vaccine should be mandatory”
That’s the fig leaf, you poor, willfully ignorant moron. Mandatory vaccinations are the tool for eradicating these diseases. How else do you expect a vaccine to work — will the free market take care of it? Isn’t there a libertaaaaarriian solution?
Oops…did I make someone mad by asking for evidence? I guess that makes me a troll.
So you are predicting that the HPV vaccine will not be allowed to go to market in the US?
So are you proposing that all vaccines become mandatory?
“did I make someone mad by asking for evidence?”
In fact, you asserted that unless a Bush administration official explicitly stated an opposition to the vaccine on religious grounds, then they could not oppose it on religious grounds. That’s not “asking for evidence.” That’s “setting the bar in order to cover for the religious conservatives that control your agenda.”
I think the advisory committee will stop the vaccine from being widely distributed, so that it will have a greatly reduced positive effect against cervical cancer. I think that this vaccine should become mandatory.
TomY…
In fact, you asserted that unless a Bush administration official explicitly stated an opposition to the vaccine on religious grounds…
And you asserted that even if a Bush administration official explicitely stated that he was undecided on the issue, that he in fact had already made up his mind and would recommend to oppose mandating vaccinations. So as near as I can tell your opinion is completely unfounded.
I think the advisory committee will stop the vaccine from being widely distributed, so that it will have a greatly reduced positive effect against cervical cancer.
Is that an unfortunate choice of words, or are you saying that the committe will not mandate the vaccine in order to reduce its positive effect against cervical cancer? In other words, you think their goal is to reduce the positive effects?
TomY
Why would they have their own guy promoting a prophylactic vaccine for the first time, something they re so clearly against? I think it s because they want to get quotes out there before he votes against the vaccine, so that later they can claim he s fair and balanced…
He’s not “their guy.”
You have a reasonable opinion…that the vaccine should be mandatory (I saw your answer after I re-posted the question.) I fail to see why you have to couch your position in unfounded statements about what you know people are going to do, who they are going to do it for, and (apparently) who is paying their salary. You have your opinions and they have theirs.
Would you make it a legal requirement that all students should wear condoms? Would you make it mandatory for all school girls to be on the pill? These two actions, strictly in scientific terms, would have many benefits. “Mandatory” is a big word, regardless of how sensible the underlying issue may be.
That’s Kass, not Zass.
Because the article said one thing:
while you use it to claim the opposite.
MSU.
I haven’t made up my mind over whether all vaccines should be mandatory. But like most people born after, say, 1900, I’ve got a very certain opinion about whether the decision should be be based on stealth medieval religious beliefs, something you and I apparently do not share.
And Scratch, make no mistake: you are a worse troll-prostitute hybrid than Shrek crossed with Michele Malkin.
But Frank D is still worse.
Here’s my exact quote:
TomY…MSU again.
Are you saying that abstinance does not prevent HPV?
What is you criterian for deciding when the government may intrude upon your health decisions?
Their goal is to curb the use of the vaccine as much as possible, so as to prevent incentivizing sex by making it safer. This will also reduce the cancer-preventing effects of the vaccine.
“So as near as I can tell your opinion is completely unfounded.”
It’s founded on the fact that he served on as a medical analyst for Dobson’s Focus on the Family. Neither Finger nor Zass are scientists, they are ideologues who work on behalf of medieval zealots.
Finger’s quoted in this article warning of the dangers of cervical cancer.
http://everythingchristian.org/news/psalms_n5.ihtml?nid=2652&catid=2
But is his quote used to marshall support for a vaccine to wipe out the disease? Of course not! It’s used to explain that the only safe sex is sex within marriage. This is why they oppose the vaccine: because they believe it will encourage sinful sexual behavior. Cancer deaths are something the licentious and wanton bring upon themselves. The godly need no vaccination.
TomY…
Their goal is to curb the use of the vaccine as much as possible, so as to prevent incentivizing sex by making it safer.
If I had to find common ground with you, which I usually try to do, I would say that the evidence suggests that Dr. Finger may wish to block attempts to make the vaccine madatory for students. The thing that you state as fact that he intends to do is more akin to taking condoms off the market, as opposed to just taking them out of the school clininc.
You lost me on the last point…did Dr. Finger help edit the article? Did he make that quote during this interview?
No, but you act like you are 12 years old. If you’re older than that, you should be embarrassed.
It’s a massive conspiracy.
Do you realize you sound exactly like the creationists who argue that the “real” agenda behind teaching evolution is to promote atheism? Even though biologists “claim” they are just searching for the truth, the creationists know the real agenda.
Even though conservative groups “claim” they “welcome the vaccine as an important public health tool,” TomY knows their real agenda (but can’t point out any actual…you know…evidence to support what he knows).
JWG pouted: “Conservative groups say they welcome the vaccine as an important public health tool but oppose making it mandatory.” The article says they like it so why can’t you libruls accept it, WAAAAH”
Why don’t the theocons come out and simply say they oppose a life saving vaccine? It’s because, as with the entire conservative agenda, they know it’d be wildy unpopular, so they dress it up in the language of progressive liberalism. It’s the same reason we get “healthy forest” and “clear skies” initiatives instead of the “Rape the earth to pay back campaign contributors initiative,” and the “Patriot Act” doesn’t get called the “Detain an American citizen without charges indefinitely Act.” Are you actually retarded, JWG?
I think Finger is one of these “reasonable” stealth conservatives, who holds nutty right wing ideas, but who finds less objectionable rationales for doing their despicable work. Much like Glenn Reynolds. Let’s see what his ultimate verdict is. Kass, on the other hand, is open about his neanderthal beliefs. But the real question is: why do you trolls so quickly run to prostitute yourself on behalf of these theocons?
Finger’s salary used to be paid for by Focus on the Family. Now, when they run articles about the HPV vaccine, they’re using the point/counterpoint model of “some say this vaccine could save lives, but others say it will encourage sex.” The interesting thing is that Finger, former Dobson employee, is mentioned as the guy *promoting* the vaccine, without ever mentioning his work for Focus on the Family.
http://www.family.org/cforum/fnif/news/a0038209.cfm
Of course, Focus on the Family is still against prophylactics of all kinds, and has many articles attacking the “safe sex myth.” Why would they have their own guy promoting a prophylactic vaccine for the first time, something they’re so clearly against? I think it’s because they want to get quotes out there before he votes against the vaccine, so that later they can claim he’s fair and balanced, and that his decision was based on “sound science” and not just because he’s an unreconstructed member of the Dobson cult. He’s sort of a Joe Lieberman/Judy Miller human trojan horse for these theocons.
But by all means, trolls, keep whoring for these psychos!
TomY…
But the real question is: why do you trolls so quickly run to prostitute yourself on behalf of these theocons?
You didn’t answer my question from before: do you support making this vaccine mandatory for students? That’s the issue. I haven’t seen anything to suggest that the panel will be — or indeed is even charged with — deciding who can take it voluntarily.
My sense is that few if any vaccines should be mandatory. I would bet that many, many people who have no particular allegience to whatever religious entities are involved feel the same way.
That’s my opinion in a nutshell. If you consider that trolling or prostitution then you don’t have a very open mind.
TomY…
And Scratch, make no mistake: you are a worse troll-prostitute…
Just for fun, can you please define that term before I put you on my ignore list (mostly reserved for people who deal in insults rather than issues)?
“You act like you are 12 years old.”
“You deal in insults rather than issues.”
Cry me a river, then build a bridge over that river and live under it. I’ll never understand the mindsets of conservatives who come to liberal websites under the belief that they will debunk liberalism through mockery and recitation of right wing talking points, and then cry for mommy when said liberals don’t knuckle under and praise you for how reasonable you cons are.
JWG, you, Scratch, Frank D, and so many others who troll on this site voluntarily carry water for theocrats and authoritarians (usually while calling yourselves libertarian, no less). You already made a joke of yourself. Liberals are just filling in the punch line on the pathetic mad-lib that you’ve made of your political philosophy.
You’d prefer a liberal echo chamber I suppose?
What? You demonstrably misstate my original question…then call me a “troll” and “retarded.” I responded that your behavior was immature, provided evidence of your errors, and you claim I’m mocking you. Riiiiight.
Now that you’ve unsuccessfully tried to change the topic, how about responding to my points?
Did someone mention my name?
Hehe!
Typical for TomY…distort, call some names, and leave instead of debating the issues.
I already did respond to your points, JWG: these guys have a stealth agenda b/c it’s an unpopular one. They get their guys in positions of influence. Their guys do what’s asked of them, and spin it in ways that make it seem motivated by legitimate reasons, but the effect is the same. Why would it surprise you — these guys are against condoms even being available; a vaccine making sex safer is no great leap beyond that. Here’s Dobson complaining about Bush appointing “safe sex liars” to the CDC. But after the election, Dobson got his man, didn’t he?
“This new appointment sends a disturbing message that the problems surrounding rampant sexual behavior can be solved with a false promise and a piece of latex. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is already the world’s largest promoter of homosexuality and ’safe-sex’ programs, and now the president has appointed someone whose positions indicate that the organization will continue dishing out more of the same.”
Whoops, no, Finger was appointed 2003, after this 2002 complaint.
Back to the point, please: Can you get this cancer without having intercourse?
If it is mandatory, will that mean absolutely no one is exempt?
Even Jehovah’s Witnesses and Christian Scientists?
Is it the only mandatory vaccine?
Aren’t the other vaccines mandatory because they are for contagious diseases?
So, is the theory behind this vaccine, the old tried – and – true “They’re gonna do it have sex), anyway!”?
So, isn’t it true that it is an incentive for teens to have sex?
Is it 100% effective?
Finally, how long has it been around? Is it going to turn out like Thalidomide or something?