• 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 vaccines be mandatory?

Should vaccinations be mandatory

  • yes

    Votes: 32 55.2%

  • no

    Votes: 23 39.7%

  • not sure

    Votes: 3 5.2%
  • Total voters
    58
Henrin said:
And my point is that usually speaking we don't punish parents for failing to give medical treatments to healthy children. In fact, several laws exist that punish parents for giving certain medical treatments to healthy children.
Click to expand...
Refuse to get help for a sick child and learn what the inside of a jail looks like. I said it is the parents choice so long as they are not exposed and exposing others, that said if the child dos get sick or die because of that choice then they should be punished, choices have consequences.
 
Henrin said:
Doesn't matter if they never leave the home. They are healthy children that do not require medical attention.
Click to expand...

Actually it does matter. Healthy until they catch something and it is too late to undo the mistake.
 
Casper said:
Refuse to get help for a sick child and learn what the inside of a jail looks like. I said it is the parents choice so long as they are not exposed and exposing others, that said if the child dos get sick or die because of that choice then they should be punished, choices have consequences.
Click to expand...

The choice to not vaccinate isn't the choice to get your kid diseased. Your argument is invalid.
 
Casper said:
Actually it does matter. Healthy until they catch something and it is too late to undo the mistake.
Click to expand...

FYI, medical treatments do exist for most if not all the things vaccinated.
 
Henrin said:
The choice to not vaccinate isn't the choice to get your kid diseased. Your argument is invalid.
Click to expand...

Actually it kinda is, they are playing Russian Roulette with their child's health. Sorry you cannot see that fact.
 
Henrin said:
The child is healthy, so it seems to fall into reason the parents shouldn't be compelled to act.
Click to expand...

The child might presumably be healthy, but that isn't a permanent condition, and he can still be a carrier or disease vector and put the rest of society at risk. As previously stated, not all vaccines are completely effective and there are whole categories of people who cannot receive vaccinations.
 
Casper said:
Actually it kinda is, they are playing Russian Roulette with their child's health. Sorry you cannot see that fact.
Click to expand...

So don't send your kid to school in the first place? After all, they might get a cold, so you're playing Russian Roulette with their health.
 
Masterhawk said:
One extra reason to support vaccination is due to the fact that some people cannot get vaccinated whether they are infants, allergic to them, or have compromised immune systems. They rely on herd immunity to keep mostly curable diseases at bay. When the amount of vaccinated individuals is too low, unvaccinated people are at risk of getting infected.

Should it be mandatory?
Click to expand...

Coming from someone who had their kids vaccinated... No. The government has no place demanding that a person do anything with their own body or their kid's body. No matter the circumstances. This country is based on Individual Freedom. Not Collectivist "Freedom" (a misnomer if I've ever heard one).

Casper said:
Actually it kinda is, they are playing Russian Roulette with their child's health. Sorry you cannot see that fact.
Click to expand...

You play Russian Roulette every single time you leave the house period. With or without your child. By themselves or with someone. LIFE is nothing more than one huge Russian Roulette. The Russian Roulette argument is an invalid one because of that plain fact.
 
Henrin said:
So is the government going to take way the mandate to educate your children to counteract that or what?
Click to expand...

Has nothing to do with educating the children. It's not their choice. They're kids.
 
Henrin said:
So don't send your kid to school in the first place? After all, they might get a cold, so you're playing Russian Roulette with their health.
Click to expand...

There is no vaccine for the common cold, find one and Bang you are Rich.
 
American said:
I'm not against immunizations, but I am against being stupid about it. It's appears the drug companies have gotten too zealous about this stuff.
Click to expand...

Drug companies hardly make anything off of immunizations. In fact, they would love for people to be stupid enough to avoid them and then make tons of money off of the drugs needed to treat easily preventable diseases.
 
Casper said:
There is no vaccine for the common cold, find one and Bang you are Rich.
Click to expand...

You damn well know that is not the point. The point is that sending your kids to school opens them up to all sorts of risks including but not limited to the common cold.
 
Henrin said:
You damn well know that is not the point. The point is that sending your kids to school opens them up to all sorts of risks including but not limited to the common cold.
Click to expand...

Yes, I know that, but you do not seem to believe that your children should be protect against the risks that can be avoided. I already got all that and know where you stand, spin that cylinder and hope for the best describes it perfectly.
 
Abbazorkzog said:
No. Just like with the abortion issue, the government has NO RIGHT to tell me what I can or can't do with my own body.
Click to expand...

This topic always shows the double standard that exists with the majority of pro-choice people.
 
Fishking said:
This topic always shows the double standard that exists with the majority of pro-choice people.
Click to expand...

I'm pro-choice, but there is an overlap between the pro-life and pro-vaccine people, seeing how they both demand the government enforce laws that impede one's ability to determine what they can and cannot do with their own body. Their main allies are people who support expanding the surveillance state and taking people's rights to bear arms away, which is ironic because the latter would result in an increase in police brutality and simultaneously impede one's ability to defend themselves from police officers who abuse their power.

Whether one should vaccinate to prevent the spread of deadly diseases is a separate issue entirely.
 
Beaudreaux said:
Yes, mandatory, but only for children that will attend a school with other children, or attend functions with other children. If you're going to home school your kid and not allow them to attend public events, then not vaccinating them should be the right of the parent. I think it would be a very dangerous and ignorant choice, but still, it's their choice. But again, if you don't vaccinate your kid, the kid should not be allowed to be around other children. Here's just a few reasons why:

Study relates vaccine refusal to rise in measles, pertussis

Reemergence of 5 Vaccine-Preventable Diseases

4 Diseases Making a Comeback Thanks to Anti-Vaxxers
Click to expand...

Even though you specifically added "attend functions with other children" I would further clarify "any situation at all in which your children will interact with other humans." If you intend to keep your children chained up in your basement for the rest of their natural life, then you have the blanket right to refuse them immunizations.
 
This by far the most bizarre political topic. In order to hate it...you have to be a hippy liberal or one of those anti government extremists.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
blackjack50 said:
This by far the most bizarre political topic. In order to hate it...you have to be a hippy liberal or one of those anti government extremists.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

How does someone opposed to the government telling them what to do with their body(which this does indirectly) mean they are a hippy liberal or anti-government extremist
 
Absolutely yes. No one has the right to disregard the impacts their decisions and actions have on others. Society has come to it's senses with the banning of smoking in public places for the same reasons.

If you wish to live in a society of people then you must agree to obey the rules set forth by that society. That means you do not have absolute freedom to do whatever you damned right please.
 
Russell797 said:
Absolutely yes. No one has the right to disregard the impacts their decisions and actions have on others. Society has come to it's senses with the banning of smoking in public places for the same reasons.

If you wish to live in a society of people then you must agree to obey the rules set forth by that society. That means you do not have absolute freedom to do whatever you damned right please.
Click to expand...


I think the collectivist thinking is being pushed a bit too far here
 
Masterhawk said:
One extra reason to support vaccination is due to the fact that some people cannot get vaccinated whether they are infants, allergic to them, or have compromised immune systems. They rely on herd immunity to keep mostly curable diseases at bay. When the amount of vaccinated individuals is too low, unvaccinated people are at risk of getting infected.

Should it be mandatory?
Click to expand...

I voted no, but it was painful. Vaccination works, it is one of the safer things you will do in your life, and it benefits not just the person vaccinated, but those around them. However, I do not think it is the government's role to tell people what medical treatment they have to get. That just strikes me as antithetical to what we as a country should be.
 
TurtleDude said:
I think the collectivist thinking is being pushed a bit too far here
Click to expand...

So you have no problem with an irresponsible someone intentionally disregarding your welfare by blowing viruses or smoke into your airspace? Interesting. They have been informed by science that they are putting you at risk but you just don't care? Or maybe, once again we have a case of science denial.

As far as I'm concerned, someone blowing smoke or viruses into my airspace is guilty of assault, if not legally then in principle.
 
Yes, with exceptions for allergic reactions to the immunizations and compromised immune systems (and other situations like that).

Protecting kids against preventable diseases is an easy choice, unless the above is has relevance.

EDIT: They already are mandatory if they go to public school. Or even private pre-k schools.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom