Tag Archives: society

Vaccinate Against Stupidity

I don’t feel that there is any reason to debate an Anti-Vaxxer when it comes to the Science of vaccines. At this point, if someone still believes that vaccines cause autism, no study, no research, no rationality will ever cause them to bend. But, let’s be honest here, vaccines do not cause autism. At all.

No, the point I wish to debate is a new crop of folks that seem to think that vaccination falls under a rights issue; that parents should have the RIGHT to determine if they should vaccinate their children or not. Because this is the new argument I see cropping up online. I see people arguing that, individuals should be allowed the choice of whether to vaccinate their children or not, that no-one has the right to tell them to vaccinate little Billy or little Susan from the measles or the mumps.

Now, I am all for people being free from government intervention in their day-to-day lives. I believe that the State has no place in determining what is marriage. I believe that the State has no place in determining what God we choose to worship (or not worship). I believe that the State has no place in our day to day interactions with each other, so long as those interactions do not harm one another.

The point of a society, on a very basic level, is to ensure a basic level of security and happiness for the individual. Otherwise, we’d be living in the wilderness, huntin’ deer and choppin’ wood and growin’ crops and surviving as individuals alone and free. Society protects us, helps us, keeps us safe on a fundamental level. It provides infrastructure. It provides security. It provides a basic level of support.

We have a lot of laws that protect us from individuals that act in ways that harm the majority. You cannot rob banks. You cannot steal. You cannot blow up buildings. You cannot act in a way that hurts other people. That is the strength of a society. It protects us from the selfish, single-minded, obtuse, moronic and absolutely stupid individuals who believe that they, for some reason, know better than scientists and professionals who make their bread and butter from studying human illness.

So when an anti-vaxxer says that they have the RIGHT to not vaccinate their children, I get a little angry. If you do not have the RIGHT to rob a bank when you need money, if you do not have the RIGHT to speed down the highway when you’re late for work, if you do not have the RIGHT to endanger CHILDREN and PEOPLE in every other instance, what the fuck makes you think you have the right to risk epidemic death and disease just because you are stupid enough to believe fraudulent studies that were disproved years ago?

We have reached the point where we are so afraid of confrontation, of debate, that we are allowing people who have no position, who are arguing a point with no scientific evidence, who believe something with no basis in reality; to determine how the rest of have to live our lives. We are now living in fear of diseases that were wiped out generations ago, because our society has grown so afraid of causing offense, so afraid of dismissing stupidity out of hand, that we have become ineffective.

There is no debate here. There is no argument. There is no discussion. Anti-vaxxers are hurting us, hurting ALL of us, by refusing to vaccinate their children. And every moment that we refuse to shut these people down, every moment that we  allow them a podium where they spew their idiotic and mindless rhetoric, we are allowing them to continue hurting us all.

Society only works when we work together to protect the weakest among us. When we allow morons with loud voices and baseless opinions to hurt our children, which is what happens when an un-vaccinated child spreads disease in a public place, then maybe it is time to re-evaluate the society that allowed this to happen.

-D-

1 Comment

Filed under Thinking and Pondering: Science, History, Analysis and Over-Think

The American Hero

If you want to learn about a society, you look at the people they revere as heroes; the men and women that they hold up on a pedestal.

For example, if you look at the old Greek myths, their heroes were bloody warriors with long lineages that stretched back and far. They were men of honor who bore their burdens with savage ferocity.

With Americans, you have to look to our comic books.

As silly as this might seem to someone who hasn’t been paying attention to the major box office draws of the last decade, comic books reflect who we, as a culture and a people, worship as heroes.

First, there is The Individual. It is always someone who has, by Fate or by choice, who has gone alone. They have shunned (Bruce Wayne) society or been shunned (Peter Parker). They must define themselves by themselves. They cannot allow society to dictate who they are. Even when it’s a team of heroes working together, they’re on the fringes of society (see: X-Men).

Second, The Vigilante; we like the hero who is apart from the Law. This builds off the earlier point: we like someone who doesn’t allow legal red tape to stand in their way. We want someone to stand up and strike a blow against what’s wrong in the world without having to wait for cops and judges and juries. We want speedy justice.

Almost never do we see the legal ramifications of a hero’s actions.

Thirdly, he cannot kill. At least, not willfully. There must be compassion. There must be mercy. The hero must be better than the rest of us. He will not let bloodlust or rage govern his actions. The hero stands apart from us in every, emotional, way. They must make the decisions we would not be capable of making, which is why we trust them in the role of the Vigilante.

Our heroes, the ones we revere in culture on television and movies and pulp fiction, are men and women emotionally unavailable, socially on the edge and disregard the law as beneath them.

In short, Americans revere sociopaths in flashy garb and gaudy dress.

-D-

4 Comments

Filed under Pop Culturing: Movies, Books, Comic Books and Other Arts

Tell Me Why, Amendment One

I normally don’t talk about politics. I think it ends up being a preaching to the choir situation, where your enjoyment of the entry comes from whether or not you agree with me already. I don’t think I’m going to change any minds and I think, at best, I can just get people to understand where my views are coming from. Which is fine. I think the country would be in a better position right now if people spent less time trying to force everyone to agree than if they just tried to spend five minutes trying to understand where someone is coming from.

So that’s what I’m going to try and do right now. I want to understand. I want you, the reader, if you disagree with me, to tell me where you’re coming from. I’m doing this, because I really do not understand. I am lost. I am incapable of empathizing.

Here’s the issue: In my old state (North Carolina), they’re going to vote on Amendment 1. It defines marriage as being between a man and a woman and they’re voting on this tomorrow.

And I want to know why, because this kind of thing makes me angry. In point of fact, I’m pretty fucking pissed off right now. I do not, cannot, comprehend the sheer amount of cussedness it takes for one human being to try and restrict another human being’s happiness when no-one is being hurt. These are consenting adults. These are individuals who have made a decision to legally bind themselves to one another. And you are saying no.

Why are you saying no?

That’s all I want to hear from you. I don’t want to change your mind. I don’t want to enter in a discussion with you. I have no ambitions or designs upon your opinions, even if those opinions are about to strip rights from your fellow citizens.

Is it for religious reasons? Have you read your Bible and you’ve read that bit about how God doesn’t want men to lay with men as they lay with a woman (Lev. 18:22)? If you’re religious, I can see how that might be a reason. These are the holy words of God. You don’t want to disobey them. That’s a sin. You’ll go straight to hell for ignoring His words.

Do you also make sure to keep your woman outside of the house during her menses? She’s unclean, you know. Needs to be purified. That’s Leviticus 12. Whole chapter on how filthy women are when they’re menstruating. I’m guessing there aren’t a lot of good, Christian women who obey any of those laws, even if they are the holy word of God.  Not a lot of Christians nowadays who pay attention to any of the old laws though. They ignore the dietary laws. They ignore the laws about the Sabbath. They ignore any laws about sacrifices or stoning. Not a lot of adulterers being stoned nowadays.

So why not ignore the whole bit about men laying with other men? You find it so easy to ignore everything that’s inconvenient for you or your family. You pick the one thing that’s so easy to do. All you have to do is hate someone that’s different. You ignore Jesus when he says “Sell all that you own and give the money to the poor, and you will have treasure in Heaven.” (Mark 10:3). You ignore when Jesus says that the second most important thing (after loving God) is to love your neighbor (Matthew 22 36:40).

Do not hide behind your holy book when you deny your fellow man. Do not cower behind religion when you hate someone who is different from you. Have the decency and the backbone to acknowledge the fact that your hate, your contempt, your bigotry comes not from holy words or from saints or angels, but from yourself.

Are you trying to protect the sanctity of marriage? Do you think, for some reason, that marriage can be ruined by two people with the same genitals getting hitched? I think marriage can be ruined by spousal abuse and domesticate violence. I think a marriage can be ruined by alcoholism or drug addiction. I think a marriage can be ruined by two people who no longer love each other. I think a marriage can be ruined by infidelity or boredom or illness or bottled emotions or money problems.

But I don’t see YOUR marriage being ruined by Adam and Steve getting hitched, just like I don’t see your marriage getting ruined by Stephanie and Adam…ina. Marriage is not an institution, a grand old building that can be ruined by one thing. Marriage is a legal contract between two people. So explain to me how the sanctity of your marriage is being ruined by two dudes. Please. I want to know. Explain to me in excruciating detail why this is the case.

Because I…do…not…understand. And I’m furious. And I’m not a gay man trying to get married. So I can’t even imagine how anyone in that position must feel. Even if they don’t want to get married, I imagine they’re pretty pissed that someone is telling them that they can’t just for pure pissedness.

So tell me, in the comments below, why? That’s all I want. Tell me why you don’t think same-sex couples should enjoy the same legal benefits as different-sex couples.

I’m done yelling. I’m ready to listen.

Please

Why?

-D-

4 Comments

Filed under Thinking and Pondering: Science, History, Analysis and Over-Think