Quote:
Originally Posted by partofme
The social darwinist argument could be that the kids are the next generation of the genes of their parents and by the parents bad decisions there genes will then not be passed onto the next generation which weeds out the people that make poor decisions out of the gene pool. I'm not saying I completely agree with it but I guess it's a way to look positive towards parents that make the decision not to get vaccinations. This issue is sort of a tough one for me because I believe in freedom of choice but then again the idea of a child suffering or dying because of a disease because or a parent's decision seems pretty damn awful and if there is every a time to cross the line to make something mandatory then this is it. Personally I can see both sides of the issue and hope this discussion helps me settle on something a little better.
|
Personally, there's just something that doesn't sit well with me when it comes to "forced inoculations" and "the government". We've had public schooling in this country for about 180 years or so without the need for forcing students to get vaccinated in order to attend class. From what I understand, there hasn't been any mass deadly outbreaks in schools due to this.
The article says that as of now, there are about 1,000 students who haven't attended school in over a month due to this policy. Sure, we could say it's the parent's fault for not getting their kids vaccinated, but I think the responsibility lies on the government here. After all, they're the ones who implemented this policy.
I dunno. I just always get weary when government 'forces' people to do things.