• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Should children be required to vaccinate in order to attend School?

Should children be required to vaccinate in order to attend School?


  • Total voters
    60

Captain Adverse

Classical Liberal Sage
DP Veteran
Joined
Jun 22, 2013
Messages
20,230
Reaction score
28,000
Location
Mid-West USA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Other
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.
 
I had my shots when I was growing up. So did my daughter. No of us had any ill effects.

That said, if a parent does not and the child comes down with (small pox). should another person be able to sue if they become infected?

I think its a good idea to keep certain diseases at bay.
 
I said yes. It's inexpensive, prevents serious communicable diseases, it is needed to protect the health of all others, and it is safe. Do it.
 
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.

Absolutely.

The continued efficacy of vaccines depends on herd immunity; the vast majority of the populace being vaccinated.

When the unvaccinated population gets too high, the virus finds hosts in which it can mutate, leading to possible infection even of previously vaccinated people. We have already started to see this happen.

It should not be permissible for uneducated parents to kill other people's children. Vaccination must be compulsory to attend school in order to protect their lives and health (because even if you survive it, many of these disease have extreme and permanent side effects), save for verifiable medical contradictions.

We can debate all day long about whether parents should be able to put their own kids at that risk. I still find it neglectful, but I can entertain the other side.

But when it comes to a building packed full of other people's children, absolutely not.
 
Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not.

Yes.

Please explain your reasoning.

Because we're not uncivilized, third world cave dwelling savages.
 
Yes, public health overrides your philosophical or religious beliefs.
 
I do not think we have much choice here, the answer has to be yes.

We are sending our kids to school and they will be exposed to whatever the others there have, and this all becomes a matter of public safety for these kids. There are too many communicable diseases have been largely eradicated or at least put under control by immunization. I understand those with a medical condition of some sort may not be able to participate in immunization and an opt out is reasonable for those cases, but that should not be extended to those of philosophical or "religious" beliefs wanting to opt out for whatever reason. It goes against my Libertarianism, but our schools are nothing more than a Petri Dish pooling of whatever they all have and then bring to school to share. There is not enough legitimate reasoning to place kids in danger because a handful of parents want to opt out of Hepatitis B, or Influenza, or other immunizations for their kids.
 
The only possible reason not to is legitimate medical complications. Weird beliefs or delusional fear are not legitimate.
 
Personally I think yes although it looks like the CA law will be challenged by the ACLU. When we give exemption for religious reasons to get out of healthcare (Amish, Mennonite etc) it opens the door for religious exemption from vaccinations as well. What happens when these non vaccinated become adults and get in the workforce? Its a much bigger issue to be an adult and contract measles or chicken pox. It would be easy to spread it to elderly and so forth as well.
 
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.

My answer does not fit. I see no reason not to leave it up to the schools. State or local level for public schools, private schools up to the schools themselves. On a federal level I see no reason to regulate that.

Now, if it was proposed where I live, I am really wishy washy. I do not like the idea of punishing kids because their parents are dumbasses, and the risk to other kids actually is really small. However, it is a risk. As I do not have kids myself, I would probably leave it up to those who do.
 
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.

I voted "no", but would qualify it. Personally, I find it silly not to have vaccinations. And there are situations in which I would go much further than requiring immunization. But most of the shots are not that important objectively speaking. But if we force immunization on people, then they should be indemnified, should they come to harm.

This is for public schools and excluding religious objectors.
 
Another thing, I would prefer tiers of vaccinations. For example, tier 1 would be mandatory and include, polio, MMR, chicken pox etc and then tier 2 wouldn't be mandatory but would include the flu, Gardasil etc. That way it would prevent pharma companies from using us as guinea pigs or politicians filling their pockets with profits from vaccinations. Remember Rick Perry and Gardasil?

Rick Perry's HPV mandate returns to haunt him - Alexander Burns - POLITICO.com
 
This won't be a popular response, but in the US if a woman can't be compelled to carry a "parasite" within her body because she has a constitutionally protected right to privacy, why should a child be compelled to be injected with a vaccine which is not 100% without side effects or worse in order to exercise their government mandated responsibility to attend school?

In addition, why should the interests of others override a first amendment right to freedom to exercise religion as the individual sees fit?

And let's be clear here - a child that is vaccinated is not susceptible to any affected disease from a child who isn't vaccinated. The only ones in danger are those who, like the unvaccinated child, chose not to vaccinate, or those children who are medically unable to vaccinate. We're talking about minute numbers in the big scheme of things.

For me personally, it's a no brainer - I'd vaccinate my children. But in a free society where the majority doesn't run roughshod over the rights of minorities, I'm perfectly happy not to force my views on others.
 
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.
I posted this in another thread earlier this year. It still applies, IMO, and this is why I fully understand the reasoning behind making it mandatory, but still cannot bring myself to endorse it...

"...we have done very well with vaccines thus far. No complaints from me. I am a pro-vaxxer, not an anti-vaxxer. But... what if some vaccine in the future IS dangerous? Is the entire population screwed because the mandatory vaccine made things even worse? We've had good results so far, but will we always have good results? We're human, we simply don't do everything right.

The government does have a healthy history of lying to us. 1950s atomic testing being just one prime example. I said it once and I'll say it again, we have had good results thus far, but if something did go wrong, would they be honest with us?"
 
I posted this in another thread earlier this year. It still applies, IMO, and this is why I fully understand the reasoning behind making it mandatory, but still cannot bring myself to endorse it...

"...we have done very well with vaccines thus far. No complaints from me. I am a pro-vaxxer, not an anti-vaxxer. But... what if some vaccine in the future IS dangerous? Is the entire population screwed because the mandatory vaccine made things even worse? We've had good results so far, but will we always have good results? We're human, we simply don't do everything right.

The government does have a healthy history of lying to us. 1950s atomic testing being just one prime example. I said it once and I'll say it again, we have had good results thus far, but if something did go wrong, would they be honest with us?"

Agree, plus it wouldn't be past some of the big pharma companies to use us as experiments. After learning about the abuses in mental hospitals and prisons right up until the 80s, it make for concern. Put full faith in pharmaceutical companies?
 
This won't be a popular response, but in the US if a woman can't be compelled to carry a "parasite" within her body because she has a constitutionally protected right to privacy, why should a child be compelled to be injected with a vaccine which is not 100% without side effects or worse in order to exercise their government mandated responsibility to attend school?

In addition, why should the interests of others override a first amendment right to freedom to exercise religion as the individual sees fit?

And let's be clear here - a child that is vaccinated is not susceptible to any affected disease from a child who isn't vaccinated. The only ones in danger are those who, like the unvaccinated child, chose not to vaccinate, or those children who are medically unable to vaccinate. We're talking about minute numbers in the big scheme of things.

For me personally, it's a no brainer - I'd vaccinate my children. But in a free society where the majority doesn't run roughshod over the rights of minorities, I'm perfectly happy not to force my views on others.

I really like this answer. Until I saw it I was going to post that though I don't like forced anything, if you're going to live in the herd you gotta submit to the need of the herd.
 
Unless there is some valid and demonstrable medical reason why not, absolutely. Screw religious and personal exemptions.
 
This won't be a popular response, but in the US if a woman can't be compelled to carry a "parasite" within her body because she has a constitutionally protected right to privacy, why should a child be compelled to be injected with a vaccine which is not 100% without side effects or worse in order to exercise their government mandated responsibility to attend school?

In addition, why should the interests of others override a first amendment right to freedom to exercise religion as the individual sees fit?

And let's be clear here - a child that is vaccinated is not susceptible to any affected disease from a child who isn't vaccinated. The only ones in danger are those who, like the unvaccinated child, chose not to vaccinate, or those children who are medically unable to vaccinate. We're talking about minute numbers in the big scheme of things.

For me personally, it's a no brainer - I'd vaccinate my children. But in a free society where the majority doesn't run roughshod over the rights of minorities, I'm perfectly happy not to force my views on others.

Since the efficacy of immunization is not 100%, the claim that the only children effected by non-immunization are the un-immunized is patently false.
 
Since the efficacy of immunization is not 100%, the claim that the only children effected by non-immunization are the un-immunized is patently false.

True. My son had the chicken pox vaccination in 7th grade and then in 11th grade got the chicken pox. Rare but it happens.
 
True. My son had the chicken pox vaccination in 7th grade and then in 11th grade got the chicken pox. Rare but it happens.
It isn't too rare with other common vaccinations, diphtheria vaccination is @ 83% effective.
 
yes, they should have to vaccinate their kids before they enroll them in a school. herd immunity only works if the herd is immune.
 
Recently, California passed a law requiring all children to be fully vaccinated in order to attend public and private schools. Otherwise they MUST be home-schooled. That makes it one of only three states with this requirement and no “personal-belief” exemption.

The question is: Should children be compelled to vaccinate in order to attend school or not. Please explain your reasoning.

For public schools yes but I believe the state has no right to mandate this for private schools. That being said every kids unless they are allergic should be vaccinated.
 
Since the efficacy of immunization is not 100%, the claim that the only children effected by non-immunization are the un-immunized is patently false.

If the treatment isn't 100% effective, all the more reason to leave the decision to the individuals concerned, not the state. Perhaps the state would be well served to a) be more trustworthy and b) provide more education and less authoritarian dictates.
 
If the treatment isn't 100% effective, all the more reason to leave the decision to the individuals concerned, not the state. Perhaps the state would be well served to a) be more trustworthy and b) provide more education and less authoritarian dictates.
Well, I see you have diverted from "the only children affected" falsehood....to "authoritarianism". Keep moving those goalposts without even having to remember what your argument was.

Those un-immunized children are not being forced, they don't have to go to a public school.
 
Back
Top Bottom