Wow. Check out House Bill 1097 that was just filed, as primed by Representative Tom Pischke and also sponsored by Representative Phil Jensen which provides for additional exemptions for statutorily required childhood vaccinations:
The measure changes the existing law from providing an exemption for “a religious doctrine whose teachings are opposed” to a far, far more permissive “because of a sincerely held religious or philosophical belief.”
Philosophical beliefs?
Well, yes. That could include a long-held religious doctrinal belief. Unfortunately, that could also include a philosophical belief as in ‘I read it on Facebook.’
It’s a bit shocking that during a time where the legislature is in the middle of cleaning up a society-wide mess that a pair of anti-vaxxer legislators would want to allow people to bring back more pandemics because of nutty facebook drivel. (And yes, before you ask, Pischke and Jensen were sponsors of last year’s anti-vaxxer measure HB 1035 which cost 5 people legislative seats.)
Another measure that will likely – and should – go down like rubella when faced with a properly vaccinated child.
Rep . Jenson was is and still is an embaresment to our entire state.
Another bad bill brought by two of the most self-serving, do-nothing legislators in Pierre. What a waste of two seats in the House. Yet, their voters elected them so….You can say that for at least one other District – 30 and JFM too. Bottom line, it shows you how much being an incumbent really helps when its time for reelection, even when you’re a very poor legislator.
Also Mike, no worries on the spelling – we figured out what you meant!
Ok I know I left out an r & s m
Bad day forget the m
A good bill. This is what Christian Liberty looks like in practice (this general direction, anyway).
For what it’s worth, I’m good with informed consent:
https://plainstribune.com/podcast/?service=podcast.PodCastDetail&streamId=b5333153c63e6dd40becfc70c5d96b99
I am willing to accommodate sincerely held religious beliefs for the aforementioned contagious diseases as best we can so long as the rest of us sufficiently cooperate via vaccinations. South Dakota has a truancy law requiring school attendence adn it is reasonable for parents then expect their child will be reasonably safe from these life threatening or lifelong debilitating diseases and the science says the only reasonable protection is herd immunity via vaccine.
I am however wholly unwilling to accommodate a “philosophical” belief where the child is allowed to come to school. Those families and students who hold a sincere religious belief regarding vaccinations still desire their children to be protected from these diseases and such protection comes from the rest of us willing to get the population to herd immunity. Opening up the exempted population to “philosophical” belief is likely to prevent herd immunity and put these children at risk.
For this reason, own your philosophies. If you believe it, stay home and educate your child via home schooling. If you don’t want to home school and your child becomes truant, go to jail.
I’m pretty libertarian regarding these matters for adults as they can take actions to protect themselves where they deem they are unsafe. We reguire students to come to school and we have an obligation to take reasonable actions backed by science.
Just to be clear in case people think I’m a nut on government control, I do not believe most of the Covid mitigation strategies were sufficiently backed by science or fully considered unintended consequences to justify their mandatory (or use of shame) compulsory implementation whereas the rubella vaccination risks and benefits are sufficiently closed loop where the net benefits to both individuals and the public at large more than justify the vaccine.