Texas Moves to Forcibly Inoculate Children

Should babies having babies be allowed to consent to vaccines without their parents knowledge?

The bill, S.B. 63 titled, “Relating to consent to the immunization of certain children,” would allow for consent to immunization by a child if the child is pregnant or is the custodial parent of a child. It also notes, “a health care provider or facility may rely on the written statement of the child containing the grounds on which the child has capacity to consent.”

California passed a similar bill in 2011, allowing for 12-year-olds to consent to vaccines like Merck’s Gardasil shot that is supposed to protect the child against sexually transmitted diseases, but has instead resulted in many dead teen girlsand thousands of adverse reactions.

Children do not have the capacity to consent. Claiming a child can consent to receiving these chemicals is the same as claiming a child can consent to having sex or doing drugs. In fact, Texas statute §22.011 states, “Sexual assault for anyone to intentionally or knowingly penetrate a person under age 17, other than his spouse” unless the person is within three years of age from a child of at least 14; anyone convicted stands to serve between two and 20 years in prison.

So how is it that a child who cannot consent in this instance is somehow suddenly capable of weighing all the risks of receiving inoculations which admittedly in their own product inserts can have numerous negative health effects and on record have caused autism and death?

The assertion that the act of getting pregnant somehow makes a child an adult is absurd; that a child would get pregnant actually shows the exact opposite about that kid’s ability to weigh long-term ramifications and make mature decisions.

finish reading here -- http://nworeport.wordpress.com/2013/02/28/breaking-texas-moves-to-forcibly-inoculate-children/