Well, here's your handbasket.

[bladespark]

Maybe it's just something about being Texan, but the Governor of Texas is taking a page from Bush, looks like. And what makes it even more disturbing to me is that he's doing this for a fairly liberal cause. So it's not just more nutjob conservatives here.

Whatever you may think about cervical cancer, (and I personally can see the point of view of those who don't want mandatory innoculations, but I'm not sure I agree with it,) the founding principle of this country is in checks, balances, branches, voting, and other such things that come attached to a democracy. Getting elected to a position of power in this country is NOT SUPPOSED TO MAKE YOU A DICTATOR!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Quit it with the signing statments already! I had so little faith in politicians before this it was hard to measure, but some how this has managed to reduce it even more.

Even if cervical cancer vaccines really are a gift from the gods to save humanity, right now those who believe so can go and flipping get them, and can then go and start a bill to make them mandatory if they really think it's that important that every single human being get vaccinated. *growls* Bypassing the legislature is NOT what governors are supposed to do. And presidents aren't supposed to do it either.

Comments

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

actually, ill laugh if in a few years they find out that the drug causes brain tumors or miscarriages.

[sulcharae.livejournal.com]

What a horrible thing to laugh at, even in concept. :/

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

do you live in texas??

[sulcharae.livejournal.com]

used to.
i just dont know how funny the idea of people getting sick is. :/

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

the idea of people getting sick inst funny, but the idea of people not thinking things thru before forcing them on people is ironic. its not funny "haha". its funny "ironic".

[scribe-of-stars.livejournal.com]

Actually, until Alanis Morisette changed the definition, "irony" was a literary term that meant something quite different. I'd file this under "black humor," personally.

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

i wouldnt wish that on anyone. even my worst enemy.

[bladespark.livejournal.com]

What?

Ummm... let's see. Drug that vaccinates females against a VERY nasty STD. Objected to by ultra-conservatives, because they feel being vaccinated against an STD promotes promiscuity.

Why would you want that to cause miscarriages?

[harliquinnraver.livejournal.com]

i obviously wouldnt want it to.

but go figure, they make vaccines mandatory, and BOOM they find out it has horrible consequences. its a texas thing.

[2dlife.livejournal.com]

I'm torn, I sort of agree with the governer on this one. Most girls are infected with one HPV strain (there are at least four) after their first sexual intercourse, the virus is so prevalent. As for developing cervical cancer, almost none of the cases of infection are actually pathogenic and thus it seems like one of those disease that appears randomly. A vaccine that is even 50% effective is HUGE in breaking that chain and protecting even the 50% for whom it is ineffective.

The government mandates vaccines to offer this protection to the entire population. And in a very interesting legal twist, mandating vaccinations is MUCH better for the low-income group as this means the vaccine will be given for free in schools rather than being something you or your insurance company has to pay for.

The problem with going through legislature on this one is that the final compromise would almost certainly be that it is optional (the legislature would probably not want to spend the money and deal with the uproar.) and that outcome should not be acceptable.

[scribe-of-stars.livejournal.com]

However, choice represents one of the key facets of American society. Making the vaccine optional allows choice to do its work. Many parents would pose a question to themselves--"DO I WANT TUMORS IN MY CHILD'S NAUGHTY BITS Y/N"--and decide in favor of the vaccine, while others--like lin_chan--would refuse on the grounds that their child's moral code would see them through without the threat of cervical cancer becoming a problem. Everyone's as happy as possible (unless Harli's vision of Unforeseen Side Effects comes to pass, God forbid), and such is the beauty of choice.

[2dlife.livejournal.com]

We had this exact same discussion at work the other day. It seems that a potential problem with parents making this decision is that they would have to think through their 12-year-old as potentially having sex. Which is a tough thing to think about. Especially since parents usually think that they can protect their own children sufficiently without outside help.

Unless there's a moral code that forbade sex entirely, not just sex in minors, not just unprotected sex, then it won't do anything to protect the child from HPV.

[starkruzr.livejournal.com]

I agree with him too, but it's still an abuse of executive power.

Which is interesting, because I heard yesterday that the governor of Texas is actually one of the LEAST powerful state executives in the country because of the way their government is put together. So I'm not really sure how this happened in the first place.

[bladespark.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that's my problem. Mandatory vaccinations? Go for it, great! Signing statements to get around the legal process? No, bad, no cookie! After all, Bush and his crazies think that the end justifies the means for their illegal behavior. We're descending to their level if we applaud this action just because the end result is something we approve of.

[2dlife.livejournal.com]

I'm not thrilled by this either. However, like I pointed out above, the legal process could and probably would have led to an "optional vaccine" state, because legislature favors freedom of choice and budget savings over controversial decisions. And making the vaccine optional is a very poor outcome for both low-income families and for public health in general. So, I think this may have been the best way to get the desired outcome.

[bladespark.livejournal.com]

And therein is why I am very disturbed by this.

Illegal actions are okay if they accomplish something you believe is right, good and for the best?

[eisenhart.livejournal.com]

As a libertarian, I hate it when the government meddle with people's bodies. As a human being, I think this is great from both a humanitarian and scientific viewpoint, and I hope it will save many lives.

Also, I find it awesome beyond belief that a conservative politician is making a decision that he hope will benefit his constituents as opposed to one that would please the church.

[bladespark.livejournal.com]

Actually, it's a decision that may well be lining his pockets. So much for awesome.

[silveradept]

Hrm. On the one hand, we've seen what bypassing the legislature can do. On the other hand, we've seen what diddling around and waiting for a legislature can do. So it's really a judgment call, I guess, as to whether you support the executive exercising his power over how the agencies under his command are run to produce a law-like effect.