Official Discord for 1stAmender - Click to Join Us!

The Reasonable Argument to Vaccinations - Should Government Force It?

Changing the way people think about news.


Tags: vaccinations  

Changing the way people think about news.

The Reasonable Argument to Vaccinations - Should Government Force It? published by The 1st Amender
Writer Rating: 2.6552
Posted on 2019-05-20
Writer Description: Changing the way people think about news.
This writer has written 193 articles.


"You MUST vaccinate your children!" said the concerned public.

"I believe that my child will suffer negatively if they take these vaccines!" said the concerned parent.

Interestingly, this brought on the basic debate I feel has been spoken of for a long time now: "Should the government force vaccinations?"

Before I answer this question, I want to make it clear: Vaccinations are proven to have a much higher benefit and very much outweigh the documented consequence of "not" taking the vaccine. If you don't believe me, I recommend to watch this video before reading this article further.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zBkVCpbNnkU (Video included in video section of this article as well)

So after understanding that vaccines are an overall positive to the human race, why shouldn't the government force vaccines? The benefit of course is that we can eradicate epidemics that have come around again due to the anti-vaccine craze. A noble cause. Yet with all noble causes, bad things happen even with the best of intentions. It is under my belief that while I would suggest someone to give their child vaccines. It would be in the child's best interest to do so.  But that is one thing. Making the government perform it is another.

Because I have a genuine belief in the inalienable right of the "self" this would mean that the person has a right to harm "themselves" or initiate risk in their life. Imagine for a moment a politician standing at your car door in the morning.

"Sir/Mam I cannot let you into your car. The United States government has decided that the amount of people dying from car accidents is too high. We also believe that it is bad for the environment. So we will no longer be allowing you to step in your car for your safety."

Of course, this is insane. Everyone looks at the suggestion and it is insane. From a fundamental standpoint, it is insane because it assumes that the adult does not have the right to assume risk in their life. So why is it that we have people that want to force others to give vaccines? Now for the real debate. Children. Because children cannot assume rightful ownership of their body and consent (being that a child does not possess the cognitive capability to assess risk. It is required that a child cannot consent because of the lack of understanding consequence) this would mean the guardian of the child must make the decision.

But what of the child's well-being if the parent makes a "wrong" decision for their child? Well, in my "black-and-white" world, it is up to the parent to make that decision. Not the arbitrary whim of the government to make that decision for them. Though, this does not stop any school, public or private, to demand that their students receive their immunization papers. This gives the parent with their "bad decision" to not have any of their inalienable rights revoked, and at the same time, minimize risk.

This, the current situation, is the best possible situation we can have. We do not revoke the inalienable rights of the parent, while at the same time minimizing risk. Therefore, any instance of enforcing a doctrine that assumes risk for adults is abhorrent and should not be allowed. Let me know what you think on this site.

Do you believe that parents should be forced? If you do, I would love to hear what you have to say in the comments or in your own article. Try registering on this site and let me know what you think. https://1stAmender.com/register.php.

 

   

Sources:
self-written

Article Rating: 0.0000



You have the right to stay anonymous in your comments, share at your own discretion.

Anonymous: 2019-05-20 05:24:53 ID:3185

Science proves that un-vaccinated children are a risk to everyone. We've seen in the news that AntiVax parents today don't comprehend or understand how science fundamentally works, thereby directly causing death and disability to children.

What does greater good for more people? The right of an anti-vax parent to CHOOSE or passively allow infection of their own and other children with deadly and debilitating diseases that have historically killed millions? Or just require that all children are vaccinated and remove the disease from existence?

I know what side I'm on

The 1st Amender: 2019-05-20 05:29:17 ID:3186

I don't disagree with you. My question is not whether or not it is "good" or "bad" for the collective, but whether or not the government should require the use of vaccines. Currently our laws give people the inalienable right to illicit risk within their life, and therefore the child. At the same time, should the child be an imminent danger to their surroundings, often for private institutions (or even public where there is a collection of people) require vaccinations to attend. This is a completely different aspect and therefore moral. I would say it is immoral to not allow parents to assess risk within their children within reason.

DoingYourMom: 2019-06-06 10:55:12 ID:3227

Yeah Vaccines are being pushed by the jews that want to make us retarded so we buy into their games!

The 1st Amender: 2019-06-07 03:25:42 ID:3235

lol what in the ever loving hell are you talking about? Get out of /pol/ and read a damn book for once.