Bishops push for veto of Bill to vaccinate minors for STD's w/o parents consent

Bishops urge Catholics to push for veto of AB 499

California’s bishops are urging Catholics to contact Gov. Jerry Brown and ask him to veto a bill adopted by the state legislature that would allow minors to consent to vaccinations and other means to prevent them from being infected by sexually transmitted diseases without their parents’ knowledge or approval.

AB 499, also known as the “Gardasil Bill” after the name of a controversial vaccination some consider dangerous, won approval in the state Senate on Aug. 31 by a vote of 22-17. All 15 Republicans and two Democrats voted against the bill. One senator abstained. The state Assembly, where the bill originated, approved AB 499 on May 12.

The bill, sponsored by Assemblywoman Toni Atkins, D-San Diego, would permit children 12 years old and up to consent to Gardasil vaccinations and other methods to prevent sexually-transmitted diseases without telling their parents. California’s bishops opposed the bill from its inception, saying it “will greatly expand the ability of children to act without parental permission or the support and guidance of their families.”

The rest of the article:

To contact Gov. Brown:

By mail: State Capitol, Suite 1173, Sacramento, CA 95814
By phone: (916) 445-2841
By Fax: (916) 558-3160

The reason this was so easy to push thru in SF, and has almost got pushed thru in other places, is the explanation is completely misleading. This vaccine will not “protect you from STD’s”. It will protect you from SOME of the strains of HPV, the Human Papilloma Virus. Last I read, and this keeps changing with the manufacturer, but I believe the FDA approved version was 8 strains of HPV were not able to infect the person…but so what when there are over 30 strains of HPV?!? And the 8 are not even the most common.

The reason to avoid HPV is it can many years after the sexual contact, lead to cervical cancer, which is highly treatable, but no one wants cancer. So do you understand what I’ve tried to explain? If not, do we want 12-year olds making this decision? Gardisil does not prevent STD’s, that is the bottom line, it prevents a few of many, many strains, and may have dangerous side effects. As always, they are pushing kids to have sex instead of teaching the only Safe Sex is chastity.

Gardasil protects against four strains of HPV. Of those tour strains, two cause 75% of cervical cancer and the other two cause 90% of the cases of genital warts.

Cervical cancer has a high mortality rate. Even at Stage 0, when abnormal, but pre-cancerous, cells are found in the lining of the cervix, 7% of patients will die within five years. If cervical cancer becomes established, the survival rate plummets.

If I was still raising kids, I would move out of california. No matter about statistics for cancer prevention…we need to protect our children from outside influences that are pushing to sexualize kids. Dying from cancer is nothing compared to spending eternity in hell, cancer free.

I think it is absurd to think that the state of California is pushing/encouraging children to have sex with this bill. The point of the vaccine is to protect against types of HPV that are known to cause cervical cancer (among other cancers). How is this a bad thing? Why wouldn’t you want your child protected against this? The existence of this vaccine is no way a counter against abstinence and believe it or not, it is likely that your child WILL have sex sometime in their life. I think the bishop needs to calm down, take a step back and consider why the bill has come to exist.

I can see the furore caused as a consequence of taking the choice away from the parent and giving it to the child. But this in itself appears to be a reaction to ignorant parents refusing their children to be vaccinated in the first place - for reasons unfathomable to me.

I would like to hear somebody who has cervical cancer come on here and say: “Gee, I’m glad I never got vaccinated with Gardasil.”

So, your post seems to indicate that the government needs to step in between parent and child for the good of the child? HPV can only be transmitted thru sexual contact. The great government wants the dear kiddies to have sex and no bad old parent should interfere. The tired and silly argument that kids will eventually have sex in no way excuses the govermental interference in between parent and child. Your argument FOR govt inoculation and indoctrination of children is downright scary, IMO:eek:

Do you understand what a vaccine and its purpose is?

Can you please elaborate for me how this vaccine leads to an indoctrination process that will encourage a child to start having sex.

I usderstand perfectly what the vaccine is. I understand the part about the govt overstepping its bounds on this issue,too.
I am a parent of six children. God entrusted them to me in His wisdom. The government has no right to determine that my kids should be innoculated for sexual diseases, or for birth control of any kind. The goverment has no more right to enforce this innoculation against a sexually transmitted diesease than the Chines govt has a right to mandate killing of children in the womb. don’t you realize what is going on here? I pray you wake up to what the real issue is.

I understand what the real issue is darl, I just disagree with your opinion.

The issue of the bill appears to be giving a child of 12 years and up to make the decision on whether they are inoculated. The government is not forcing the vaccine upon the children of California. The argument is therefore about whether such a choice should be in the hands of the parent or the child, with the consideration that (1) the vaccine is only beneficial, (2) a lot of parents are misinformed and are making choices for their child based on ignorance.

I am left to wonder how it has got to this point? What idiot parent doesn’t want their child vaccinated against HPV.

The second argument that you are trying to make is that this vaccine encourages sex before marriage, and considering that you failed to answer it the first time, I shall ask again:

Can you please elaborate for me how this vaccine leads to an indoctrination process that will encourage a child to start having sex?

I will continue to clarify if you still don’t get it: I teach my own children, I take care of their health and welfare. I am the one to decide for them until they reach aduthood. The govt does not decide nor can they usurp my parental authority or give a “right to decide” life issues to my 12 year old child. Get it now?

Finally! We’ve separated two separate arguments and reached your point. If you go back and look at your previous posts, you were giving me the impression that you believe the vaccine encourages pre-marital sex.

So you have no problem with a child of 12 years+ receiving such a vaccine with parental consent? Furthermore, (may I ask) would you have had your children given such a vaccine at the same age?

Certainly not! I teach my children to have respect for their own bodies and to obey God’s commandments. I teach my children chastity. I teach my children that sex outside of marriage is wrong. I am completely clear on the issue at hand. The law is unconstitutional and must be repealed. The government is overstepping its bounds. If a person, including a child, does not engage in promiscuous sexual activity there is no need for this drug to be injected. And, let me add another point: you are assuming there are no awful side effects to this drug. That will be told in time. My child should not be exposed to ANY drugs at the hands of the government without my express permission. In the case of this particular drug, my answer will always be “Absolutely NO”.

Okay…so your back to this silly thought that Gardasil = pre-marital sex + abuse of one’s body. There are no adverse side-effects that I consider dire or life-threatening. Nothing that compares to having HPV or cancer.

You do understand that a parent can pass on HPV to their child? Furthermore, that said child can then go through a fairly ‘Christian’ upbringing, wait until he/she is married before having sex, then pass HPV onto their spouse?

So a 12 year old child is better able to make a medical decision than their parents? The parents less informed than a 12 year old?

No adverse side effects that you consider dire or life-threatening? Really? What about 49 deaths as of January 31, 2010? [see Toyota 52 Deaths, Gardasil 49. Toyota Recalled. ⋆ ]

Some certainly are. You only have to scroll through some of this forum to realise that.

And can you tell me how many people die from cervical cancer each year? Plus, a website called ‘VacTruth’ is not a credible source. If you want to reference adverse effects of a vaccine, please provide an article from a peer-reviewed medical journal.

The article you cite is based on the logical fallacy of Post hoc, ergo propter hoc. It assumes that just because an adverse effect happened after an event, that the event caused the adverse effect.

Because it can not be assumed that Gardasil caused an a adverse effect simply because it came after the use of Gardasil, the US Centers for Disease Control has looked at the specific reports regarding serious adverse effects and the use of Gardasil.

VAERS data cannot be used to prove a causal association between the vaccine and the adverse event. The only association between the adverse event and vaccination is temporal, meaning that the adverse event occurred sometime after vaccination. Therefore, the adverse event may be coincidental or it may have been caused by vaccination, however we cannot make any conclusions that the events reported to VAERS were caused by the vaccine.

As of June 22, 2011 there have been a total 68 VAERS reports of death among those who have received Gardasil® . There were 54 reports among females, 3 were among males, and 11 were reports of unknown gender. Thirty two of the total death reports have been confirmed and 36 remain unconfirmed due to no identifiable patient information in the report such as a name and contact information to confirm the report. A death report is confirmed (verified) after a medical doctor reviews the report and any associated records. In the 32 reports confirmed, there was no unusual pattern or clustering to the deaths that would suggest that they were caused by the vaccine and some reports indicated a cause of death unrelated to vaccination.

I would not currently allow a child of mine (and I may soon be the parent of an 11 year old boy, MAYBE if it’s God’s will and social services cooperates :heart:) to receive the Gardisil vaccine. In my opinion, it’s not tested enough and has not been on the market long enough to warrant the risk of side effects.

However, once it’s been out a few more years, I would have no problem with it. Because, as you said, there are more reasons than premarital sex - what about cases of rape or abuse?

Has anyone ever read this?
It was news to me.
“A researcher with Merck Pharmaceutical who helped develop the human papilloma virus (HPV) vaccines, Gardasil and Cervarix, has revealed that the controversial drugs will do little to reduce cervical cancer rates and may cause more illness than the disease they are intended to prevent.”

This article aside, I think it’s shameful to pass a bill that allows teens access to anything medical without parental knowledge. Makes me furious. :mad:

Prayer Shark, sign me up as your first idiot parent.

California can be an interesting place to live; far left wingers constantly trying to push their political philosophies on a mostly conservative population. I almost it the roof when I read one paragraph from our oldest child’s School Parent Student Handbook. The second sentence put me more at ease. I don’t have it in front of me but what it said was something like:

California Education Code Section blah blah blah states schools MAY (my emphasis) take your child out of class to seek medical advice without parental permission. This school district will NEVER (my emphasis) take your child out of class to seek medical advice without your permission.