Thursday, March 15, 2007

It's a shame he already lost any chance of my support...

I've made my support of John Edwards at this point pretty openly, yet I was still following with interest the campaign of Bill Richardson. However, my moment of deciding he was not someone I could support came when I discovered he supported mandatory vaccinations for young girls with the HPV vaccine. Individual rights and parental rights are important to me, especially when dealing with too many unknowns about this particular vaccine.

So, I got this email from his campaign, and it's a shame he has decided to demonstrate that he doesn't believe in choice...
With a global warming crisis looming, we need a new "man-on-the-moon" effort to protect our environment. We had such an effort when I served as Secretary of the Interior under both President Kennedy and President Johnson -- working toward such ground-breaking legislation as the Clean Air Act, the Endangered Species Act, and the Land and Water Conservation Act. We can do it again under a President Richardson.

Bill Richardson will be an outstanding president and the leader we need on global warming and other vital environmental and energy issues. He stands head and shoulders above the other candidates. It will take unprecedented global cooperation between the largest nations to deal with the complexities of global warming. Bill Richardson's experience at the United Nations gives him unique qualifications to lead this crusade.

Voters and would-be supporters can only learn that Bill Richardson is the environmental candidate, with a proven record of success, if we tell them. We can't count on the media to share this information -- but I know we can count on you.

Unfortunately Stewart Udall, you can't count on me, because I can't count on Bill Richardson to demonstrate he really believes in choice, and I hope that John Edwards doesn't follow that path in stating he supports mandatory vaccines for HPV, not at this juncture. I try not to be a one issue voter but to me, demonstrating that a presidential candidate does not care about choice, tells me he is not going to support other choices....

5 comments:

Not Your Mama said...

It's about funding. I have mixed feelings about this vaccine myself but I had to side with favoring mandatory because without that poor women would not have any "choice", they would be forced out.

There is an opt out so "mandatory" is not really mandatory...unfortunately this is the only way to insure state funding for those who want it but cannot afford it.

News Grinder said...

I'm envisioning a whole generation of young girls being used as lab rats.

Anonymous said...

Lisa,
Can't help but think you're being a little strident on this.

There's always an opt-out for parents who don't want their child innoculated.

But, we're talking abut a vaccine for CANCER, for heaven's sake ! It's been shown to be very effective at PREVENTING CANCER !

My son's an M.D., and he thinks it should be mandatory for all boys, too, as they are carriers.

jimwest

Lisa Renee said...

Jim, my MD is not recommending it at this time, he's concerned about the side effects and the fact that there is no evidence as to how long the vaccine works and no booster.

I'm not sure what position your son is taking but, I feel making it voluntary gives parents the choice to decide with consultation of their own Doctors...

Hooda Thunkit said...

news grinder,

"I'm envisioning a whole generation of young girls being used as lab rats."

Amen! That's exactly what's happening too and way too often, IMO.

Despite the popular belief, the government doesn't always know/do what is right.

Remember, in the grand scheme of things, it's really all about the money. . .