Public Health Concerns Justify Compulsory Immunization.

I affirm the resolution resolved: Public health concerns justify compulsory immunizations ===================================================== Observations: ===================================================== We must remember that due to the fact that the question is to the public, that the agent of action becomes the government and we are looking at society's health in general rather than specific. Because in a contractual setting it is impossible to offend against one of the members without attacking the body, and still more to offend against the body without the members resenting it. Duty and interest therefore equally oblige the two contracting parties to give each other help; and the same men should seek to combine, in their double capacity, all the advantages dependent upon that capacity. A government would never vaccinate individuals who, by medical reasons, would suffer traumatic injury or death. ===================================================== Definitions ( Random House Unabridged Dictionary): ===================================================== Public Health: Health services to improve and protect community health, especially immunization, and preventive medicine. Concerns: A matter that affects a person's happiness or welfare. Justify: To uphold as warranted. A Priori: That the definition of public health combined with that of concern show that the only course of action to take is that of immunizations when the welfare of the society is at risk. And because of the agent of action is the government they are warranted in forcing vaccination. ===================================================== V: Societal Welfare ===================================================== - Societal welfare is protection of society as a whole, its health, safety, order, etc., When the agent of action does that which is in their ability to ensure protection, health, safety, etc we are achieving societal welfare. The reason this ought to be the value for the round is the fact that is a textually based. When the resolution talks about public health it is talking about Societal welfare. ===================================================== VC: Upholding contractual obligations ===================================================== - If we do not uphold contractual individuals we sink into an anarchic state loosing, safety, health and order. When we uphold these obligations we achieve these necessities. - Now in order to uphold these obligations we must first know what they are. Rousseau says what these obligations are. What man loses by the social contract is his natural liberty and an unlimited right to everything he tries to get and succeeds in getting; what he gains is civil liberty and the protection of himself and all he owns. In the context of this resolution, we must not abstain from vaccination, unless we have a medical pardon to do so, because the governments job is to protect and because we give up liberties in the social contract. As a result we are vaccinated and societal welfare is achieved. ===================================================== C1) The Social contract justifies compulsory immunization in order to protect society. ===================================================== We have already established that; A) the social contract is designed to protect society, B) We give up liberties and some agency to gain this protection, and C) Without upholding these reciprocal obligations societies welfare can not be achieved. To further prove this point we can once against look to the social contract. It says, "Protection from the sovereign is only obtainable when an recognizes that he has given up agency. In fact, each individual, as a man, may have a particular will contrary or dissimilar to the general will which he has as a citizen. the person which constitutes the State as a persona ficta, because not a man, he may wish to enjoy the rights of citizenship without being ready to fulfill the duties of a subject." This being said we can't give citizens protection who do not give up the autonomy that they they are obligated to give up, therefore it can be found true that through upholding contractual obligations we achieve safety for individuals and thus safety for citizens in society. ===================================================== C2) Immunization does carry risks, but; the social contract warrants putting individuals into danger for protection of society, and vaccination pro's outweigh the cons. ===================================================== The social treaty has for its end the preservation of the contracting parties. He who wills the end wills the means also, and the means must involve some risks, and even some losses. He who wishes to preserve his life at others' expense should also, when it is necessary, be ready to give it up for their sake. Furthermore, the citizen is no longer the judge of the dangers to which the law-desires him to expose himself; and when the prince says to him: "It is expedient for the State that you should die," he ought to die, because it is only on that condition that he has been living in security up to the present, and because his life is no longer a mere bounty of nature, but a gift made conditionally by the State. At first glance this may seem cruel but we must realize that what we are doing is risking, not taking lives, when getting vaccinated. But when we look at the statistics we realize the risk is minimal. World Health Organization reports that Analysis has shown that vaccinations are among the safest of injections and serious reactions are very rare. Comparing the risk of disease with the risk of vaccine shows that 1000 out of every 1 million people infected with measles will contract encephalitis, while only 1 person out of every 1 million vaccinated with measles-mumps-rubella vaccine (MMR) will do so. Sub A: When individuals do not get vaccinated they put the public in danger. If an individual decides not to be vaccinated they put the public safety at risk because they become another viable host for the illness, infection, disease, to take root in and spread. When the disease is able to spread to a large enough population (defined as equal to or less than 84%) an epidemic occurs hurting society. Therefore forcing immunizations on individuals, ensures that epidemic will not occur even if a small enough percent of the population slips through the cracks. good luck to you to, also we are following LD rules like you said, and no CX correct?