Health Doctors demand the removal of anti-vaccine ad from Times Square.

[FireCat]

the article also indicated that no further abortions would be necessary to continue the production of the vaccines. if i find the article ill post it as soon as i can.

They can always say that, but would they?

O and vaccines gives you a little bit of evil ingredients into your body
to build up your natural immunity. Isn't it Just kinda nuts? lol

 

[perkeyone]

dan
lol i guess i didnt really think of it until slapshot mentioned alcohol.
everyone ive argued with has made some strong thought provoking points which prompted me to do research (albeit not very thorough or scholarly research, just google-ing, youtube-ing and wiki-ing) on the subject i hope that i have not misinterpreted anything, as i am not an expert on this subject.


slapshot
after rereading your post and mine i realize i made a mistake in my wording.
somewhere along my train of though i misconstrued your post.
it would be more appropriate if instead of saying

so in order for your analogy to work, someone would have to make an ad which encouraged people to research the benefits of alcohol.

i had more simply said

what if someone, perhaps a brewery, payed for an ad which encouraged people to research the benefits of alcohol.

i apologize for misrepresenting you and i hope that i have not diminished my intended message
i have edited my original message to reflect this and to remove the word "they" which i typed twice accidentally lol.



on the tangent topic of alcohol advertisements,
alcohol ads have a considerable amount of government regulation imposed on them.
part of the motivation for these regulations is preventing the company from targeting youth, who are often perceived as being more impressionable.
perhaps some form of regulation would apply in this case for similar reasons.

 

[Slapshot136]

what regulations are you suggesting? and I don't think that youth would be too interested in this particular ad (as opposed to an alcohol ad)

correct me if im wrong, but basically your stance is just that it advertises something bad (yet legal), therefore it shouldn't be show -
but tons of things fall in that category - granted this is a twist in that it portrays something in a bad light as opposed to promoting something else,
but the general message is the same, so who would you suggest be the decider between what is "good" and "bad", if both are legal? if the ad was
directly promoting alternative health products, would your response be any different? what about a McDonald's ad which is promoting an unhealthy
burger - that ad would also be "bad" for the general health, so how would you distinguish between the two?

or what about an ad paid for by a public transit system saying beware the dangers of driving?