It’s been 115
years since the Supreme Court
ruled that states can mandate vaccines to protect the public health, and 98
years since the court ruled
that learning institutions could exclude unvaccinated students from attending
schools in their districts.
Every challenge to both rulings has been swept aside, apparently
due to a cosmic awakening to the wonders of indisputable medical science. Or
perhaps it was just common sense: In 1900, 30 percent of all deaths in the US were children less than 5
years of age. Today, it’s barely 1 percent, because children who would have
previously died from childhood infections live full lives now, thanks to
vaccines and antibiotics.
It isn’t the mandatory compliance bill that lawmakers had promised
for nearly a decade, because the anti-vax forces brought their percussion
instruments and windy cascade of First Amendment rhetoric to Trenton to blow
open a loophole that may not benefit anyone at all.
The compromise bill “allows private schools or
day care centers to accept unvaccinated children.”
I posted the following comments:
I’m always suspicious when
science is used to push a political agenda. Science is not an infallible
omniscient authority. Science should be consulted when making law, but only in
conjunction with the broader picture. For example, individual rights, the
foundation of free societies, should always overlay the law. Rights are not
mere “rhetoric.” Properly understood, individual rights are inviolable. They
are crucial protectors against all forms of tyranny. With that perspective,
some points:
- Individual rights means equality of
rights. For both 1st and 14th Amendment reasons, there should never be a
strictly religious exemption from any law. If there be exemptions, it
should extend to all conscientious objectors, religious or
non-religious.
2.
Schools
public or private have the right to establish entry requirements, including
vaccine requirements. Parents’ right not to vaccinate their kids does not mean
the “right” to force a school to risk infecting other kids.
3.
But
if kids are excluded from a school, the parents should not be forced to pay for
that school. This is clear with respect to private schools. But the same should
go for public schools. If a kid is excluded from a public school, the education
tax dollars should follow the unvaccinated kid to whatever alternative the
parents choose.
I side with the vaccine
requirement. I believe science should always be consulted, and its clear to me
that vaccine benefits far outweigh the risks, both regarding personal health
and the health and rights of others. But individual rights should always be respected
and protected as well. On this basis, there is a compromise that can protect
both “public health” and individual rights; a vaccine mandate coupled with
parental school choice.
Rights “properly understood” means every
individual has the right to live by his/her own judgement so long as his
actions don’t violate the same rights of others. Clearly, walking around with
an airborne infectious disease crosses the line into other peoples’ rights.
On Monday, January 13, 2020, the bill failed to
pass. It is now dead, as the current legislative session is over. The bill will
have to be reintroduced in the next session and begin the approval process
anew. State
Senate President Stephen Sweeney vowed to get the bill passed eventually.
Related Reading:
Related Viewing:
2 comments:
If somebody is vaccinated against a disease, what difference does it make if he is exposed to that disease? It's a violation of individual rights (an initiation of force) to force anybody to be vaccinated against anything. If some kids in school are vaccinated and others in the same school aren't, how does that hurt or endanger those who are? But, at the same time the school may, by its own right, require all its students to be vaccinated. Such a requirement is not an initiation of force. It's not force of any kind.
On another subject, many people complain that many others object to prayer in public schools. They accuse those others of being against religion. If some, or all, of those others object only to prayer being REQUIRED by the public school, the accusation is unwarranted. But if it is shown that those others object to ALL prayer in public schools, then the accusation is warranted. A requirement of prayer in a public school would be a union of religion and state. Objection to that is not being against religion. It is only objections to all prayer in public schools that can be considered being against religion, because a student choosing to pray on his own doesn't constitute a union of religion and state. He's only exercising his own right to religion.
Herbal Penis Enlargement product is 100% guarantee to Enlarge and get a better ERECTION ,the reason why most people are finding it difficultto enlarge Penis is because they bedlieve on medicalreport, drugs and medical treatment which is nothelpful for Penis Enlargement . Natural roots/herbs are the best remedy which can easily Enlarge your Penis permanently Contact Dr Olu via Email : Drolusolutionhome@gmail.com or via WhatsApp : +2348140654426 for Natural root and herbal remedies put together to help you get Enlarge and Erect healthy. Thank you
Herbal Penis Enlargement product is 100% guarantee to Enlarge and get a better ERECTION ,the reason why most people are finding it difficultto enlarge Penis is because they bedlieve on medicalreport, drugs and medical treatment which is nothelpful for Penis Enlargement . Natural roots/herbs are the best remedy which can easily Enlarge your Penis permanently Contact Dr Olu via Email : Drolusolutionhome@gmail.com or via WhatsApp : +2348140654426 for Natural root and herbal remedies put together to help you get Enlarge and Erect healthy. Thank you.
Post a Comment