Hellobee Boards

I think this is great! I hope more countries do this.

I think it's great. I also think they should remove the exemption for religious reasons. I mean, what's to prevent a conscientious objector from simply changing things up and saying they're not vaccinating for religious reasons....it's not exactly something you can prove or disprove. I think it's a step in the right direction, though.

I hope this catches on and more countries start to do this. I don't necessarily agree with government controlling every aspect of citizens' lives, but when you don't vaccinate, you put others at risk.

ETA: I like that they are asking religious organizations to make a formal statement to the government that they don't vaccinate for religious reasons. But how would/could they prove that someone who claims a religious exemption actually belongs to said religion? And there begins a slippery slope for me...

@Truth Bombs: Yeah, I saw that the article said "no mainstream religious organizations have made any formal objection to immunizations," so I wonder if under the new rules anyone will even be allowed to claim the religious exemption?

Love this. Totally on board!

Personally, I would be very upset if the US cut the child care tax credit if we didn't vaccinate. I just don't like the idea of government tying funding to health care decisions.

Im not familiar with this type of funding, but if I chose to have a nanny and not vaccinate I should be eligible for the similar benefits. But I don't think it should give the right to put other kids at risk.

Love it and think more countries should follow suit.

@littlebug: I am not sure specifically if this would work in the US (it opens up a whole other can of worms), but when I lived in Switzerland, I had to declare my religion. I had the option to choose nothing, but if I selected something, I was then paying taxes to support the organization, it came right out of my paycheck.

I think it's more the fringe religions that are difficult to track, someone correct me if I am wrong, but you are supposed to to register with a parish (at least when you're Catholic) in the US, if you want to partake in the sacraments.

@Truth Bombs: thanks for posting this, I might not have heard of it otherwise!

I think it's great and would support this in the US as well.

Don't support it. I don't think we need to have our rights taken away.

hm, not sure about this. i'm pro-vaccine, but not sure i like tying welfare benefits to forcing medical decisions on families. if this were specific to child care benefits, i could see a stronger argument because there is a more tailored need to have the vaccinations in child care settings, but the article just says "welfare".

I'm for it.

I'm all for this.

@Truth Bombs: that's great. But it sounds like I would still have to pay taxes that would go towards this....

@Truth Bombs: i'm not from australia, so i can't comment on what's a privilege or what's given to all parents regardless of circumstance, but i wonder what the outrage would be if they started taking away government privileges based on other decisions parents made.

for me as a californian, there are less than 3% of school-aged kids that have a vaccine exemption. for the new bill that's even just one of the mandated vaccines that you cannot skip in order to enroll your child in child care or public school. i do not believe that the state government should be able to deny my child the schooling she has been guaranteed and promised. "The right to a public education in California is a fundamental right fully guaranteed and protected by the California Constitution." "For example, public school teachers are prohibited from giving instruction, and school districts are prohibited from sponsoring any activity which adversely reflects upon persons because of their race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin, or ancestry. (97) Instructional material used in public schools must not include matter which is discriminatory on the basis of race, sex, color, creed, handicap, national origin or ancestry. (98) Scholarships, loans and grants must be awarded in a nondiscriminatory manner. (99) Discrimination based upon sex is also prohibited in athletic programs provided by public schools or supported by public funds. (100) Also, the general prohibition against discrimination by any program receiving state funds applies to public schools."

@T.H.O.U.: Nannies are not covered by this benefit in general so that wouldn't be an option.

@edelweiss: These aren't welfare benefits as you know them in the US. In Australia, all families, as long as you earn under the cap, receive some money from the government just for having children. They also subsidise childcare rates (so the government pays half of my daughters day at day care). These are the benefits they are talking about.

While I agree with the policy I am not sure what effect it will have, as it is proven in Australia, it is not the lower income that do not vaccinate and the higher income don't receive these payments as they earn too much.

Whoah. Not a fan.

@anonysquire: I'm have no idea how the welfare/tax system works in the US, but I think @Ree723: is pretty much on the ball. How does one pay taxes to the government in order to cut benefits to other people? Our income is taxed, some of that goes into Medicare, it pays for millions of children to be vaccinated if their parents chose to. @Truth Bombs: thumbs up to that.

also a quick link to an article - http://babyology.com.au/miscellaneous/no-jab-no-pay-no-play-tough-new-vaccination-rules-mean.html?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=referral&utm_campaign=SNAP