Posted on 02/05/2007 7:13:36 AM PST by Froufrou
Bypassing the Legislature altogether, Republican Gov. Rick Perry issued an order Friday making Texas the first state to require that schoolgirls get vaccinated against the sexually transmitted virus that can cause cervical cancer.
By using an executive order, Perry sidestepped opposition in the Legislature from conservatives and parents-rights groups who fear such a requirement would seem to condone premarital sex and interfere with the way Texans raise their children.
Beginning in September 2008, girls entering the sixth grade -- meaning, generally, girls ages 11 and 12 -- will have to receive Gardasil, Merck & Co.'s new vaccine against strains of the human papillomavirus, or HPV.
Perry also directed state health authorities to make the vaccine available free to girls 9 to 18 who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover vaccines. In addition, he ordered that Medicaid offer Gardasil to women ages 19 to 21.
Perry, a conservative Christian who opposes abortion and stem-cell research using embryonic cells, counts on the religious right for his political base. But he has said the cervical cancer vaccine is no different from the one that protects children against polio.
"The HPV vaccine provides us with an incredible opportunity to effectively target and prevent cervical cancer," Perry said.
Merck is bankrolling efforts to pass state laws across the country mandating Gardasil for girls as young as 11 or 12. It doubled its lobbying budget in Texas and has funneled money through Women in Government, an advocacy group made up of female state legislators around the country.
Perry has ties to Merck and Women in Government. One of the drug company's three lobbyists in Texas is Mike Toomey, Perry's former chief of staff. His current chief of staff's mother-in-law, Texas Republican state Rep. Dianne White Delisi, is a state director for Women in Government.
The governor also received $6,000 from Merck's political action committee during his re-election campaign.
The order is effective until Perry or a successor changes it, and the Legislature has no authority to repeal it, said Perry spokeswoman Krista Moody. Moody said the Texas Constitution permits the governor to order other members of the executive branch to adopt rules like this one.
Texas allows parents to opt out of inoculations by filing affidavits objecting to vaccines on religious or philosophical reasons. Even with such provisions, however, conservative groups say such requirements interfere with parents' rights to make medical decisions for their children.
"That's a storybook, man!"
Probably, and EVILLL Halliburton, too.
Dick Cheney even lets me use the weather and earthquake and levy-destroying machine sometimes.
No kidding.
Hey Perry, you crook, that ain't happening here.
Look, there is going to be a certain percentage of folks who don't get the shot for their daughters because they see it as a symbol of "doubt" or betrayal of the values they hope to instill in their daughters and the kind of lives they want for them.
So, nothing you say is going to change their minds on this issue.
By the time a girl is 11, she's had most of her shots anyway.
"That's a storybook, man!"
I have an 11 year old daughter. She probably knows nothing about this vaccine. What reason do you give her if she asks why she needs this vaccine?
You tell her it will help keep her from getting sick, just as you would with any other type of vaccine. If you want to talk to her about cancer, tell her that it will help prevent a certain type of cancer.
Has she ever had a shot? If so, what did you tell her then?
We don't need another "here's a condom, don't use it type message" - they don't work.
I don't think the comparison works. Condoms have one purpose only - this vaccine isn't in any way the same thing.
I oppose the governor's actions because it trumps parental rights and responsibilities in the name of the State, but some of the objections to the vaccine itself baffle me.
You can spot them because they also go on-and-on about flouride in the water and someone taking their bodily fluids.
So you are prepared to assume that the boy your daughter marries never messed around in college pre-marriage?
A great assumption.
I agree with you.
I don't think they're crazy -- I just think they're afraid. It's tough to hold the line against what they see as the evils of society. There's very little they can control. This is something they can control. Unfortunately, a certain percentage (probably very small) will have killed their kids by the decision.
That means 50% don't. With discernment and good guidance, you can reduce those odds even further. You've surrendered to the cultural lie that all our children are destined to a life of rampant sexual promiscuity, and that there is nothing we as parents can do about it. Let's just give them condoms and vaccines and let them go.
The problem is that there are so many more STD'S, other devastations such as pregnancy and abortion, and serious emotional scars.
I refuse to surrender to these cultural lies. They will actually increase our children's risk of harm, not decrease it.
But it is about sex. Males and females carry the HPV on equal terms and should be immunized in the same fashion. Leaving the boys out implies there is some duality in the way the sexes are treated. Very not p.c.
Yes, having a husband is more risky than being a convent nun.
This vaccine will do nothing to change the fact that many women will go to an early grave because of their husband.
I sure hope the parents in TX stand up to their 'Republican' governor.
Be careful, you've fallen for the deception inherent in the marketing of this vaccine. This is not a cancer vaccine, it is a HPV vaccine, which can lead to cancer. the distinction is important.
The vaccine is designed to prevent a sexually transmitted disease contracted by promiscuous behavior.
My daughter is 11, not 2. She is not naive, nor would I lie to her
Not just any STD, but the one that causes cervical cancer. So, they're saying since boys have no cervix they don't need the immunization?! ~guffaw!~ It's the 'penile bombardment' that carries the virus to the cervix in the first place!
This is like saying, "girls cause cancer" when in fact it's the other way around.
That may be true for some who are opposing it. But I do not believe the government should be able to require a vaccine for any disease that one cannot get 'innocently' i.e. by breathing the same air as a carrier or touching a surface that a carrier has touched.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.