If there’s one area where granola-crunching liberals like Jim Carrey and Robert Kennedy can join hands and sing Kum Ba Yah with libertarian, constitutionalist, and right-wing types in an unlikely alliance against the unholy axis of Big Pharma and Big Government, it’s the vaccine issue.
It brings us together, like farmers markets and Trader Joe’s.
On the surface, I can understand why so many otherwise freedom-loving folks tend to suddenly become totalitarian Statists when it comes to mandatory vaccinations. After all, fear is a powerful thing.
[sharequote align="center"]How can anyone who supposedly believes in freedom be for this kind of tyranny?[/sharequote]
Who hasn’t seen horrifying pictures of lame polio victims or heard stories of the millions who died during smallpox epidemics? You may be able to fight an Islamic State invader, but a microbe? Well, that’s an entirely different thing.
And so we run to the people in the white coats and power suits who say they’ll protect us and our children if only we’ll just roll up our sleeves and let them give us this teensy-tiny, easy, harmless shot.
If only it were that simple.
Which brings us to Ben Carson, whose strong debate performance has seen him rise from the “not a snowball’s chance” group to someone who could very well have a legitimate shot.
And why not? Besides his lack of political experience (which, let’s admit, could be a plus), what’s not to like about Ben Carson? He’s articulate, brilliant, likeable, self-deprecating, and passionately conservative in a genuine, refreshing way.
He’s also pro-freedom, except, apparently, when it comes to vaccines. In February, 2015, Carson made it abundantly clear that he wants to do away with all philosophical and even religious exemptions to vaccinations, essentially stating that the state, not parents, should decide what and when substances get intravenously injected into children.
Now maybe this wouldn’t be such a problem if vaccines were 100 percent safe and 100 percent effective, but even the most pro-vaccination among us know they are neither. The fact that a fund exists specifically for those injured by vaccines, one of the goals of which is to shield vaccine makers from lawsuits arising from defective products, suggests that the government is well aware of the risks and considers those harmed by vaccines little more than unfortunate collateral for the “greater good.”
Ben Carson seems to think government, not parents, should make the decision to vaccinate your child for things like chicken pox. Thus, in this scenario, Ben Carson (i.e. government), not you, has just put your child at risk for “shock, seizures, brain inflammation (encephalitis), thrombocytopenia (blood disorder), Guillian Barre syndrome, or death” in order to avoid a generally harmless and inconvenient childhood disease.
Ben Carson, Republican 2016 U.S. presidential candidate, speaks during The Family Leadership Summit in Ames, Iowa, U.S., on Saturday, July 18, 2015. The sponsor, The FAMiLY LEADER, is a 'pro-family, pro-marriage, pro-life organization which champions the principle that God is the ultimate leader of the family.' (Daniel Acker/Bloomberg via Getty Images)
As a parent, you have lost your right to forgo this particular vaccination and instead let your child endure a historically common and fairly mild childhood disease and obtain immunity for life instead of just a few years.
In this sort of tyranny, everyone is the same. There are no exceptions, no special considerations, no informed consent. This hammer, or mallet, or giant Paul Bunyan axe, falls on all, and if your child happens to have a life-changing adverse reaction… well, too bad.
For many parents, including me, that’s a bridge too far. I’m not against the concept of vaccination, but I am against a one-size-fits all, government and Big Pharma administered program that treats every child’s immune system the same. I’m against government thinking they know more than parents.
Want cleaner vaccinations (you know, maybe minus some of the formaldehyde, thimerosal, MSG, or tissues from aborted fetal cells)? Too bad. Want to spread them out so as to not risk overwhelming your child’s immune system? Nope. Want to skip a vaccine altogether, particularly when the vaccination risks outweigh the protection? Forget it. Want more studies? It’s “settled science,” and there can be no further discussion.
How can anyone who supposedly believes in freedom be for this kind of tyranny?
Here are a few questions Ben Carson won’t address in his political campaign, but which remain, like giant elephants in the room, valid for those of us who have taken the time to keep an open mind and study both sides of the issue.
University of Miami pediatrician, Judith L. Schaechter, M.D., gives an HPV vaccination to a 13-year-old girl in her office. (Photo: Joe Raedle/Getty Images)
Why did the Centers for Disease Control feel the need to cover up hard data about the measles, mumps, and rubella's adverse effect on African-American children? What else have they covered up and just haven’t been caught?
Why are vaccines given virtually all the credit for certain disease eradications when most of these diseases were already dramatically declining BEFORE vaccinations for them were developed?
Why are doctors and other medical professionals, including most chiropractors and homeopathic caregivers, who are just as educated if not more so than pro-vaccine physicians, maligned and sometimes even destroyed because of an unorthodox stand on vaccines?
Why are autism, ADHD, ADD, and other autoimmune disorders on the rise, often coinciding with vaccine administration? Why, as Donald Trump has asked, are there so many stories of kids being completely fine before a shot, then experiencing bowel disorders followed by the autoimmune disease almost immediately after the shot is given? Are these all coincidences?
Why do my daughters need a vaccine against a sexually transmitted disease when they are newborns?
Why are vaccine manufacturers immune to legal action if they make a defective product?
We know that it’s possible to make “cleaner” vaccines minus all or most of the adjuvants, cancerous cells, aborted fetal cells, and other potentially dangerous ingredients, so why don’t they? Lots of people would likely pay extra for this, and yet we aren’t given a choice. Why?
There are more, of course, many more. This really just scrapes the surface of the issue. When Big Government and Big Science collude, conservatives might do well to remember the global warming issue before passing judgment on those who hold unorthodox views on the vaccination issue. Often what is declared “established science” and what is not depends not so much on reality as it does on the political and economic motivations of those doing the declaring.
TheBlaze contributor channel supports an open discourse on a range of views. The opinions expressed in this channel are solely those of each individual author.