Defending the Judeo-Christian Ethic, Limited Government, & the American Constitution
Thursday July 31st 2014

Self-Educated Man

lincoln family bible study


Read along with us; share your insights, ask questions, post a link that adds to the discussion


Federalist 58 by James Madison. 1. Under the proposed Constitution whose interests were represented by the U.S. Senate? Is it so today? If not, how might it be remedied & by what means? 2. How did the Constitution provide for updating representation in Congress? 3. Madison credits the U.S Constitution with assigning the greatest power, that of the “purse strings” to the U.S. House. In your opinion, how might the House assert that power to reduce the size & cost of government today? 4. Explain in your own words Madison’s warning against too many men serving in the House. How might his warning be applied today as calls abound for a more direct democracy & for scrapping the electoral college system? 5. Is democracy the form of government our Founders gave us or was it a republican form? Explain the difference.


TML is syndicated by:

Google News (Internet)

Newstex - No. 1 Rated Authoritative Content

California Vaccine Bill Threatens Parents’ Rights

Child receives polio vaccine - (Photo credit: US Federal Govt)

EDUCATION REPORTER, EAGLE FORUM

It may soon become more difficult for some California parents to enroll their children in public schools. California bill AB 2109 would require parents who wish to decline one or more vaccines to obtain a doctor’s signature before enrolling their child in school. While the measure may initially sound like a common-sense idea, it takes decision-making powers away from parents and puts those powers in the hands of doctors who often benefit financially from high vaccination rates.

Current California law requires parents to simply sign a “personal belief exemption” at their child’s school if they wish to enroll without vaccinating. The new law, authored by State Assemblyman and former pediatrician Dr. Richard Pan, would require “a written statement signed by a health care practitioner that indicates that the practitioner provided the parent with information regarding the benefits and risks of the immunization and the health risks of specified communicable diseases.”

Though it can certainly be a good idea to discuss vaccine choices with a qualified doctor, the bill is an important threat to parents’ rights. As Dr. Bob Sears pointed out recently in The Huffington Post, many doctors will refuse to sign the form, either because they are themselves advocates for universal vaccination, or because insurance companies have offered them incentives for high vaccination rates:

I know how doctors think. Many doctors strongly believe that vaccines should be mandatory, and that parents should not have the right to decline vaccines. Some doctors are willing to provide care to unvaccinated kids, despite this difference in philosophy. But now the power over this decision will be put directly into doctors’ hands. He or she can simply refuse to sign the form. Doctors who oppose vaccine freedom of choice have been frustrated for years over this issue. Finally, they will have the power to impose their beliefs on their patients. Patients will be forced to find another doctor to sign the form, submit to vaccines, or get kicked out of public school. . . . Many doctors will be unwilling to sign an exemption form for a new patient or a patient who is only there for one visit (just to get the form signed). Some doctors get financial incentives from insurance companies for having high vaccination rates in their practices; seeing patients to get their form signed will put such bonuses at risk. . . . At a time when we are trying to decrease health care spending, this bill will add millions of dollars of extra health care visits for families every year. If this unfortunate bill passes in California, the rest of the country will soon follow.


Used with the permission of Eagle Forum.