More on the HPV Vaccine: because it upholds the culture of life

By -
I see on one of the recent posts where I'm grumbling about the nanny state that I'm taking a zing for my position on the HPV vaccination program. I also note that fellow conservative blogger Bob Ellis had a column in the Rapid City journal today noting that he thought it was a bad thing:
Or does it have something to do with the overall trend of late in our civilization to insulate ourselves from any consequence of sexual license? We push condoms despite their high failure rate. We laud homosexuality despite its many health risks. We fight to preserve the right to kill our unborn children — the natural result of human sexuality —- at all costs.

Given these priorities, it only makes sense that we’d push a vaccine on our children to supposedly protect them from something they could avoid anyway just by exercising restraint.

Is someone who immunizes his or her child against HPV a bad person? I don’t think so. But I do wonder what it says about us when we vaccinate against something that can be prevented by responsible behavior.
Why do I think that view is possibly incorrect and that we should encourage girls to get the vaccine? It's simple.

We oppose abortion on demand because we believe it is not fair for the life of the unborn child to be sacrificed for a momentary lapse in judgment by that unborn child's mother and father. If we're going to prohibit abortion on demand on that basis, why would we allow a similar fate for a young woman who had the same momentary lapse in judgment - except instead of her getting pregnant, she was exposed to HPV and is now at risk for a terribly tragic death from cancer.

Yes, we don't want to encourage sex before marriage. We don't encourage unintended pregnancy, either. But how can we fight to protect the unintended results of one and not the unintended results of the other?

If we oppose abortion because an unborn child should not be made to suffer a penalty for the parent's error, why shouldn't we try to protect someone from differing consequences of the same act?

Not so easy to dismiss now, is it?

Comments

Bob Ellis said…
The key and critical difference in your scenario is that the person who risked HPV by having sex outside of marriage made their own choice to take the risk.

When you kill the unborn child, they had no choice of whether to live or die. They've done nothing wrong and they're at the complete mercy of someone who wants to kill them.
6:40 AM
PP said…
But don't we also talk about healing and forgiveness for the mother?

Cancer is a pretty harsh punishment for a mistake.
6:46 AM
Anonymous said…
Even more compelling, PP, is the situation where the man or woman chooses to be responsible and not engage in premarital sex, then gets married to someone who did, was infected, and then infects the truly innocent spouse. In that situation, responsible living will not save the innocent spouse. The vaccine may.

I couldn't agree more with you on this issue, PP. Keep up the good fight!
9:03 AM
Anonymous said…
Lex is right. Is it really the responsibility of taxpayers at large to foot the bill on a vaccine for a behaviorally transmitted disease? How is that consistent with the conservative philosophies of limited government or personal responsibility? By all means the vaccine should be commercially available, just not publicly subsidized.
1:17 PM
Anonymous said…
When the problems with the vaccine--which is untested in large populations--begin to hit our court system. It shouldn't be our tax dollars paying big awards --but it WILL be if it is government mandated and gov. subsidized.

Let the private market and manufactures take the hits.

Any vaccine that is the ONLY one on the market should be suspect for at least 7-10 years until there is a large group of voluntary user who sort out the side effects and problems with the vaccine.
3:32 PM
Anonymous said…
Reiger and Ellis would rather see a woman die a painful and cruel death from cancer than give them the opportunity to be vacinated. Ya, these guys are true Christians alright. What is with these wackos?
4:12 PM
Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A note from Benedict Ar... Sorry. A note from Stan Adelstein why he thinks you should vote Democrat this year.

By -
Image
(Click on letter to enlarge) And while it may not be printed at taxpayer expense, I don't see a disclaimer, either. When they hold the special session (supposedly at the end of November) , since he's left them already, I think his colleagues should expel him from the caucus. Sure. At that point it's only going to be symbolic. But since he's already said he's running again in the near future, sometimes symbolism is enough.
Read more

Corson County information on Klaudt Rape Charges

By -
Here's some of the information on the Corson County Charges: COUNT I That on or about December of 2005, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT II That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration with his foster daughter, A.M., through the use of force or coercion; and as to COUNT III That on or about July or August of 2006, in the County of Corson, State of South Dakota, Ted Alvin Klaudt did commit the public offense of SECOND DEGREE RAPE (SDCL 22-22-1(2)) in that he did accomplish an act of sexual penetration, separate and distinct from the act alleged in Count II, with...
Read more

It's about health, not potential promiscuity.

By -
As the only South Dakota blogger out with 5 daughters, I feel I need to weigh in on the whole discussion that's occurring with regards to the HPV vaccine, and Governor Rounds' proposal to make it available. My family (including my three oldest girls) watched my mom, their grandmother, succumb slowly and painfully to cancer which spread throughout her body. If a similar fate from a different type of cancer was preventable through a simple shot, why wouldn't anyone advocate for it? At the age most of my kids are going to be getting it, they're still playing with barbies, and negative influences such as most of the programming on MTV, and other assorted trashy television is verboten in my house. All they're going to know about this vaccination is that it's a shot, just like for teatnus or measles. They'll go "Ow, I don't want a shot," and that will be it. Just another mark on their vaccination record. One check box for DPT, one for HPV, and so on...
Read more