Would you lie and take a religious exemption to having your kids vaccinated if it was not your religion?

Question

I mean if you were philosophically or scientifically against vaccines but a philosophical exemption was not available would you take the religious exemption and lie to protect your children from your perceived dangers of the vaccine?

Answer 1

I'm sure some folks will say yes, and I can understand why you might be tempted.  But aside from all that, lying is still wrong, regardless.  If you have children, you also have to be very conscious of the example you lead by.  In lying, you show your children quite emphatically that there are situations where you will be untruthful.  Not only that, but you will be untruthful to the authorities.  Keep in mind, to your child, you are an authority.  So you establish the precedent that it is acceptable to lie, if you have a reason you think is acceptable.  While your children will probably never put it that eloquently, and the subject will likely never come up in conversation, that is still the example you will give.  A child gets their moral compass from their parents actions- not their parents lectures.  Worse yet, a child who knows their parents will lie also knows they can not trust the parents' will be truthful for other things either.  I speak this from experience.  My mother had a habit of lying, or at least, rearranging the truth to suit her.  I learned quite early that I did not want to depend on her as a sole source of truth.  She has no real idea why I wouldn't accept her word as a teenager- but that is the true reason.  She lied, and I knew she would.  So I didn't tend to rely on her word alone.  As far as vaccination objections, that's a call you have to make for yourself.  I personally see no reason to object.  They do have risks, but all decisions in life do.  I would have a lot more respect for a truthful objection than I would a dishonest one.  If you are going to object, do so honestly.  Those who honestly do object based on religious belief are at least standing behind what they believe.  They aren't claiming it's scientific.  So you shouldn't claim religion if it's not the true reason.

Answer 2

religion are made for man not man for religion. What religon it is that don't allows you to live disease free? I say not only take vaccine but give up taht religion that serves to kill you.

Answer 3

Yes without question; would I lie if a n**i put a gun to my head and asked if I was a Jew (or a Chinese Soldier asking me if I was a Tibetan Buddhist, that's the modern parallel)?

However, in all fairness this question was framed around an incorrect premise.  Citizens are legally mandated to have the right to refuse vaccinations purely by choice; it's just that most of the methods besides religious exemptions aren't publicized.

Most vaccinations are completely pointless, often quite harmful (especially mercury causing autism), and just a lucrative market for pharmaceutical companies.  The two biggest things which have eliminated the threat of infectious disease were the CDC and public sanitation.  At this point in time, the only actual threatening source of infectious disease would be immigrants from 3rd world countries (ie. in san francisco they've begun spreading drug resistant TB), but no one really wants to touch that issue since it's politically charged.

That said, I noticed some arguments were given here which I greatly disagreed with.

I'll try to go through them quickly:

Lainey: If everyone but your child was vaccinated against a virus, and your child somehow got it, no one besides your child would get sick and the plague could not be blamed on him.  There are certain infectious diseases which are very dangerous and merit complete vaccination or quarantine to destroy their human resevoir, but NONE of the vaccines children currently receive fit into that category, infact none of the prevented conditions are even fatal.

(the mom is last)

Kirsten D: Assuming you disregard all the additional problems in vaccines (ie. mercury), children actually get more damage from the vaccinations than the condition it is expected to prevent.  This is essentially for 4 reasons.  First, most of the vaccinated conditions are very very rare.  Second, when children receive vaccinations, their immune system still  has not developed so the viruses cause much greater damage to the body (especially in the brain which has a different immune system which kills the original neurons in the process).  Third, most of the agents put into the vaccines (weakend form of the viruses) are far from harmless, some have the potential to make people sick on their own.  Fourth, all the other toxic factors in the vaccine overwhelm the immune system and make the problem dramatically worse.  Fifth, many of the vaccines made are ineffective against the current strain (ie. the Flu shot is almost always completely pointless since they make the wrong variety), and serve to only weaken the body so you will be more vulnerable when exposed to the threatening agent).

If you want to be technical, the FDA recommended that they stop using mercury in vaccines, they did not ban it.  Given that most corporations don't actually care about people's health, this essentially means nothing for preventing it being in vaccines (other than appeasing those such as yourself into thinking it's stopped).  In actually later on a bill (Department of Health and Human Services Appropriations Act of 2008) was passed to ban it, but Bush vetoed it so as a result we still have it in vaccines! :D

The mom: I essentially think you're using cop out logic as an alternative to saying "I don't want to challenge the society even if what they are doing is wrong."  A lot of people who know my parents consider them to be some of the most morally straight/compassionate/perfect people they have met in the world, and I'm considered to be an unusual person since I'm generally nice, go out of my way to help others and never s***w people over.  Despite that, I wasn't raised in a picture perfect childhood or brought up around people who tried to act perfectly, and I know from my childhood at times you have to lie.  If you raise someone in such a way that they never do anything besides what's socially desired, it's much easier on the parent since they never have to venture into unfamiliar territory, but it leaves the kids fairly naive and unable to do independent thinking or actions, which amongst other things mark someone capable of doing good in the world.  I'm not advocating teaching your kids to murder and lie, but avoiding unpleasant concepts simply leaves them fairly unable to function properly in the real world.

Put differently, if you were to lie about the your religion on a form, the kids would only know if you told them.  I guess in your value system if you think you need to tell a child about every single thing that happened around them, it would be impossible to keep them from finding out you did that, but to the best of my knowledge all good parents make hard decisions to help their children without telling them.

Answer 4

Honestly no. Because of the whole collective/communal immunity, I wouldn't want my child to be the on blamed for an outbreak. If a patch of people aren't vaccinated, when an outbreak occurs, everyone blames them for having refused. I'd be too worried that it would become another situation where my child couldn't go to school because of it, or be ostracized.

The reason smallpox was eradicated was through a violation of human rights (forcing vaccines on people), but it worked because everyone was vaccinated. I'd just worry far too much about future consequences.

Answer 5

while i can understand the draw of lying in order to get what you want, i have to say i wouldn't do it.  lying is still lying and it sets a really bad example for your child.  

just for the record, the mercury that is supposedly linked (never been proven) to autism has been removed from vaccines.  also, it makes your child prone to diseases he or she wouldn't encounter if they were vaccinated - non-vaccinated children can catch a varied strand of smallpox from playing with healthy children who have been vaccinated.  this infection is often much worse!

Answer 6

I think the dangers of not getting your kids vaccinated far outweigh the risks.  Kids can actually die from diseases and complications from diseases like the chicken pox.  What are these perceived dangers of vaccines you are talking about?

Answer 7

I'd just get the vaccine.

Answer 8

Just do it, stop putting your kids in danger. The risks they face by getting the disease (most of them) is worse than the vaccine.

Answer 9

yea, if your against it then dont do it. though i personaly dont agree, if thats how you feel go for it why not

Answer 10

If you would not lie to prevent what you believe could hurt your child, you are a sheep.

Alex F said it better than I ever could.

Did anyone see the news report about the US solders with kidney failure from the anthrax vaccine? Even a 1% insidence of serious adverse reactions is a big deal when you give it to millions of peaple.

Even the FDA admits there is a link between autism and childhood vaccines.