SmokeAndMirrors
DP Veteran
- Joined
- May 20, 2011
- Messages
- 18,282
- Reaction score
- 16,154
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Other
According to the Massachusetts Legislature, children must be vaccinated against diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus, measles, and poliomyelitis before entering school unless there is some endangering reason to the child why they cannot have the vaccination. Many believe this should continue to stay a law, but in the past 20 years, this has been a question if this should stay a law as more and more parents are against vaccinating their children.
What are your thoughts?
Yes, absolutely.
The fact is, shoving 1,000 children into a small building is an enormous disease risk, and was a major reason why people often didn't survive childhood before vaccines.
I am aware anti-vaxxers are mad about it, but this is not a "freedom of choice" issue. It is not the anti-vaxxers who will die of measles from taking a gamble on not vaccinating their child. It is the non-consenting child. This is not an "it's not natural" issue. It's not natural to shove 1,000 children into a small building either, and it causes an unnatural level of risk.
People who are against vaccination are suffering under a delusion created by their lack of contact with either science, or these diseases, and their cushy, sheltered lives. As someone who is both scientifically literate, and whose grandmother suffered for the rest of her life due to the aftershocks of a disease we now vaccinate for, I am under no such delusions. Anti-science quackery should not mean that parents get to kill their children, or other people's children.
Be a quack all you like. But if you're going to do that, then you can keep your child at home and teach them there. You don't get to put other children at risk.
Last edited: