"I believe it's the parents' decision whether to immunize or not. And so I'm looking at [my] wife -- most of our children, we didn't immunize. They're healthy. Of course, home schooling, we didn't have to get the mandatory immunization."
Today, the Republican congressman decided to follow up with a statement
intended to clarify his beliefs.
"My family's choices surrounding healthcare have been misinterpreted as a statement against immunization. I believe it is a parent's right and responsibility to make all healthcare choices affecting their family. The advancements of healthcare science throughout our history have saved countless lives around the world, and as a member of Congress, I fully support our scientific community."
The fact that Loudermilk followed up with a general endorsement of science is a good thing, I suppose, but the clarification doesn't entirely help.
Loudermilk doesn't want to come across as an opponent of vaccinations, but the fact remains that he didn't immunize "most" of his children -- and he apparently considers that the right move because "they're healthy."
If there's a compelling defense for this position, I can't think of it.
But it's the larger context that really rankles. The congressman made these comments publicly, which may have an influence on families in his community. Just as important, House Republicans not only put him on the House Science Committee, he's even the chairman
of the Science Committee's oversight panel.
The strained relationship between Republicans and science has become increasingly difficult
lately. Loudermilk isn't helping.