Texas vaccine issue sparks national ‘Hands Off Our Kids’ coalition

by PegNews wire

National medical, civil liberties & other groups to send joint letter to Governor Perry.

DALLAS — The Association of American Physicians (AAPS) and the American College of Environmental Medicine will release a coalition letter to Gov. Perry in response to Executive Order RP 65 on the HPV vaccine.

An angry mob of concerned parents is headed towards Austin.

Prompted by Texas Governor Perry's executive order to mandate the HPV mandate, medical, civil liberties, parental rights and other groups have joined together to form a new national coalition.

Calling themselves the "Hands Off Our Kids Coalition," the more than 60 signatories to the statement include: PROVE, Texas Legal Foundation, Texas Eagle Forum, Patient Privacy Rights, Congressman Ron Paul, former Congressman Bob Barr, the National Vaccine Information Center, Citizens Against Government Waste, Frontiers of Freedom, the U.S. Bill of Rights Foundation, The Liberty Coalition, and numerous Texas physicians.

This follows a strong outcry from conservatives and parents' groups earlier this month.

Source: Association of American Physicians

Staff
Verified User
Anonymous

Pavel Lishin, says:

I support the children of idiots getting cervical cancer and losing reproductive ability; it's like a Darwin award that skips a generation.

I don't, however, support myself getting warts when I have sex with those children once they turn 17, or whatever the age of consent is in whatever state I kidnap them to.

It's a tricky subject, sure.

Verified

2 years, 10 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

thatzwhytheydie, says:

The bacteria or virus in question, is not the enemy...to those pushing vaccines, you are. Why would we subject healthy people to toxins and viruses, when not everyone has a weakened immune system?

The television seems to be educating people on matters of health apparently...judging from a previous comment. Intentionally injecting viruses into a human with a cocktail of deadly toxins...is a recipe for one thing, eugenics. They didn't get the recipe wrong either, they got it right! There are no human or animal bloodlines on the planet that would survive multiple generations of these vaccines. Aside from this, they won't even contain the strain of virus that they say they are preventing.

Immune/enzyme defficiency is corrected through fasting, nutrition therapy, and abstaining from these toxins that supposedly "cure" us. How about we just start adding radioactive fallout to vaccines, is that nutritious?

People will evolve and survive without vaccines, they will NOT survive after being given the toxins and bio-engineered viruses in these vaccines. The only way this has any benefits, is if you consider offing masses of people a benefit. Let me know if that's the case too, I'd like to know.

Anonymous

2 years, 9 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

jenn, says:

Wow - the looney store called...

I'd bet Channel 8 would love to get in touch with you, though!

Anonymous

2 years, 9 months ago
Link to this comment | Suggest removal

avoiddebt, says:

I believe the question under debate is whether the state has the right to decide and mandate you/your children's medical choices.
Maryland is mandating shots for chicken pox and the flu. It can be argued that the risks of those vaccines are greater than the risks of the disease (which you might not even get). If you choose the vaccine you definitely place yourself at risk because you are putting toxic chemicals in your body. If you don't vaccinate, you only come at risk if you also contract the associated illness. Interestingly, the persons who are at greater risk to serious, rare complications from those illnesses are the same group who would be medically advised against vaccination because of contraindications. As we suffer for the success or failure of our own medical treatment, shouldn't we have the complete authority over our choice of treatment? If the vaccines are so reliable, so effective, why is the cry of fear so great from the "protected" group if a few do not choose to take the same group of risks?