Now, here’s the latest from an immunization panel affiliated with the National Centers for Disease Control: force every single little girl, female teenager, and young woman in the country to be vaccinated against cervical cancer–actually against sexually transmitted disease that can cause cancer.
Here’s the New York Times report:
“The vote all but commits the federal government to spend as much as $2 billion alone on a program to buy the vaccine for the nation’s poorest girls from 11 to 18.
“The vaccine, Gardasil, protects against cancer and genital warts by preventing infection from four strains of the human papillomavirus, the most common sexually transmitted disease, according to federal health officials. The virus is also a cause of other cancers in women.”
If you think 11 sounds young for sex, how about age 9–the recommended age in some cases?
Charlotte, you dipshit, the idea is to give girls the vaccine BEFORE they become sexually active.
But the IWF doesn’t select its contributors based on their ability to argue rationally or pay attention to facts. Such as the fact that the panel’s recommendation did not make the vaccine mandatory, simply strongly recommended. Meaning that the government is NOT “forcing” all young girls and women to have this vaccine, but it is providing the push necessary to offer it to *poor* women through publicly-funded vaccination programs. Somehow, I doubt that Charlotte’s kids are in this pool (though God forbid any tax money go to prevent CANCER in poor women).
And they don’t screen for racists, either — check her preceding comments on universal preschool and HIV testing.
And now we come to the heart of the matter: Gardasil’s going to turn my little girls into sluts because I’ll have to tell them there’s one less consequence of fucking!
But there are a few hitches–such as parents who, uh, balk at the idea of telling prepubescent girls that it’s just fine for them to have all the sex they want, ’cuz now they’ll be vaccinated! And isn’t it against the law to have sex with children?
Let’s unpack all the freakish little goodies in that, shall we? First off, why in God’s name would you tell your kid — your 9-year-old kid — about the connection between this shot and sex? The kid asks why they have to get the shot, you tell them it’s so they don’t get sick. I know my parents didn’t explain in detail disease pathways every time I got a shot as a kid, just that it was going to keep me from getting sick. About the only thing I was ever given any detail on was the odd tetanus shot, and that’s because a) there’s a cause-effect relationship between getting cut and getting the shot; and b) my dad had had tetanus as a kid and it didn’t sound like a very pleasant experience.
Seriously, though, what is the religious-nut obsession with having discussions with your prepubescent children about sex? As if Purity Balls and virginity pledges and fathers being in charge of their daughters’ sexuality weren’t creeptastic enough, they have to turn a perfectly routine vaccination for a very young girl who probably isn’t even that curious about sex yet into some kind of opportunity to obsess about that girl’s genitalia?
And, yes, Charlotte, having sex with children is against the law. But children, you may have noticed, grow into adults, who will more than likely have sex. With other people. Who may very well have been exposed to HPV at some point, like the majority of the population. And this is where that herd immunity thing comes in.
And as for it being against the law, well, why don’t you ask an altar boy how much that does to stop adults who are determined to have sex with kids? Here’s what Amanda has to say about that:
Think about what she’s saying for a second—because there’s a law against raping children, said children should be unprotected from diseases they could get if they were in fact raped. Why? Does she think that a person wicked enough to rape a child would stop and think, “Oh I’d better not rip this little girl’s body up and traumatize her, possibly for life, because there’s a chance she might be unvaccinated and I could give her HPV.” What other medical care should we deprive child rape victims from in order to appeal to the better nature of child rapists, Charlotte? I myself wasn’t aware that child rapists had some better nature that could be appealed to.
Charlotte would probably blame the child for being too tempting.
Finally, Charlotte demonstrates that while she sure as hell doesn’t want the government “forcing” her daughter to be vaccinated, she’s not above advocating that the government refuse to fund vaccinations for poor girls in favor of moral hectoring (the portion in quotation marks is from the New York Times article she cites):
“Another challenge is Gardasil’s price. At $360 for the three-shot regimen, it is among the most expensive vaccines ever. Because cervical cancer is mostly a disease of poverty, those in most need of the vaccine will be the least able to afford it. State vaccination programs, already under financial strain, may refuse to provide it.”
I hope they do refuse. How about telling young teen-agers instead that sexual promiscuity is not only a bad idea but actually dangerous to their health?
What a disgusting person.
Similar Posts (automatically generated):
- Conservatives ask themselves, fight cancer or fight sex? by Jill October 17, 2012
- Making It Universal Would Cut Down on the Slut-Punishing by zuzu August 1, 2006
- Common Sense Prevails by zuzu June 29, 2006
- Countdown to June 8th by Jill May 19, 2006
- HPV Vaccine Approved! by zuzu June 8, 2006