Should any vaccines be required for children?

Childhood vaccines have been a hot topic and I wish to argue for them. These arguments should suffice- 1. Disease eradication 2. Milder symptoms of a disease 3. Lives saved 4. And herd immunity I will also put down arguments like abridging freedoms, etc.

Mandatory Childhood Vaccines

Children should receive vaccinations? Well, some vaccines are untrustworthy, and may even be harmful to children.

Children should receive vaccinations.

There are laws about what vaccines are required for a VISA both to certain countries and from them. Unless the African family hid in a suitcase while going to a country without the disease, taking a vaccine would be mandatory and the proof of vaccination (usually a yellow sheet of medically verified paper) would be required to get the visa. If they ALREADY had the disease they would have failed the blood tests required to get the VISA and/or vaccination in the first place. You seem to not understand that although some vaccinations should be mandatory to make all vaccinations mandatory for children would be most ridiculous and be wasting precious biological resources which could save adults and/or be used to better understand the virus as opposed to worrying about wasting it on vaccinating children in a nation where that microorganism isn't even present.

Mandatory Childhood Vaccines

Vaccinations should be mandatory to eligible children before reaching adolescence not just to protect them, but to protect the health within the community. Vaccines are safe and effective. They are cost-effective compared to medical treatment. Severe reaction from vaccines occurs rarely. Deaths due to vaccine-preventable diseases are undeniably high. Preventing this deaths through vaccinations does not only save lives, but it is also beneficial for the growth of the community. Stories that lacks scientific evidence continues to spread and if this continues to happen, future generations will be unvaccinated and can lead to a big outbreak. Take an action. Parents will do everything to keep their children safe. Protect them. Vaccinate them.

Mandatory childhood vaccination

I believe vaccines are a useful tool at preventing illness and saving lives. The smallpox vaccine was able to eradicate smallpox from the earth, which has saved countless lives. The rabies vaccine is the only way you can survive rabies, otherwise it would be 100% lethal. And there is work on an ebola vaccine which would stop ebola outbreaks in the future. Yet despite my support of vaccines, I do not think they should be mandatory. Making vaccines mandatory is a bad idea for two reasons. Reason one, some people have dangerous or even fatal reactions to vaccines. Reason two, the government should not force substances into people's bodies. I will expand on these point in the next round.

should kids be vaccinated

It is true that some people can't be vaccinated due to allergies, BUT all other children should have to be vaccinated as it prevents awful diseases such as influenza and whooping cough which if a baby gets she/he will most likely die.

vaccinating children must be a law

you shouldn't vaccinate children since it gives autism and it contains the virus if you get the choice of contracting non-deadly diseases that you are likely not to contract vs getting autism what would you rather have.

On balance, children should be vaccinated.

Vaccination is a relatively new process. For this reason, there are risks to using any vaccine. However, these vaccines are not limited to the HPV vaccine. Because of the nature of our health system, these risks should be taken into account, and the risks that a parent wants expose their children to should be their own decision. Second of all, all public school systems and most private school systems already require the immunization of children. The fact that most parents send their children to school is clear sign that most children are already being vaccinated for the biggest diseases(such as hepatitis.) The few parents without children attending school would not have much risk of having their child exposed to such a diesease, as the vast majority of the population (attending public or private schools) are immunized. Therefore, it can be seen that an official mandate to REQUIRE all parents to immunize their children is unnessesary because the vast majority of our population, that attend public and private schools have already been vaccinized, and with a majority of the population immune, a spread of diesease is unlikely.

Not getting children vaccinated

I think that all children who CAN be vaccinated, many children and adults are immunocompromised, or undergoeing chemotherapy, etc., etc. But other than that, hear hear sir.

vaccinating children must be a law

Not only are vaccines possible to cause fatal (life-taking) results in certain children http://www.uptodate.com... it's also an issue of wasting vaccine biogenetic material for the mere purpose of vaccinating children.For example no typhoid is found in USA, Canada, Australia and most of Europe and Russia (including its Asian half) http://tinyurl.com..., so why waste resources causing this to be a mandatory vaccination if the family aren't taking the child on holiday to africa/asia Additionally hepititis B is very rarely found in USA http://tinyurl.com....It should be up to parents for the issues their child will face, not mandatory for all children.

Mandatory Childhood Vaccines

Vaccinations are a scam, cause Autism, and all sorts of other negative consequences. It is mean to do this to a child who has no say in the matter and he/she could die from it. It's a eugenics program, aimed at killing people slowly.

There should not be Mandatory Vaccinations

u say that vaccines can cause autism but this has been proved to be false and here's a point for you witch parent do you think would be the happier the parent that doesn't believe in the propaganda of jabs causing health problems of the parent who's child is blinded by measles or worse because they did believe it ?

State mandated administration of childhood vaccinations is justified.

Mothers need to vaccinate their children in order for them to avoid getting fatal diseases. Most diseases are prevented by getting vaccinations. Due to vaccinations diseases like smallpox have been eradicated. The CDC (Centers for Disease Control) on their website wrote an Article title Smallpox writing "Thanks to the success of vaccination, the last natural outbreak of smallpox in the United States occurred in 1949." Vaccines have allowed and continue to allow protection to children from diseases that were once deadly.

Children should be vaccinated

See above.

Children should receive vaccinations.

Good LuckFirst off, I would like to remind my opponent of the topic- State Mandated administration of childhood vaccinations is justified. We are argueing on the fact whether or not childhood vaccinations should be mandated or not. Not whether vaccines are good or bad. We want the parent to have a choice instead of it being mandated. This could go against religion, and beliefs. If parents want to believe that the vaccine causees autism, let them, as they must have a choice. Your first argument is the autism claim is false. My response is that since I have evidence that vaccines cause autism while you have no evidence proving me wrong. Thus that stands. Your second argument is that people will be blinded by measles because they didn't get the vaccine. Again, look at the topic and again I will state that the parents will have choices. Second, If almost everyone in the US takes the vaccine, and if one person doesn't because of beliefs/religion, then he/she will not get the disease since every one around he/she will be sterile.

I think that if kids are required to get vaccines that there shouldn't be religious exemptions. The parents risk getting their kids seriously sick for there personal beliefs.

Should Religious parents be exempted from getting their children necessary vaccines.

Some vaccines include toxic materials such as chemicals including mercury, formaldehyde, aluminium, and a variety of other known toxic materials. Vaccines might be capable of causing recurrent infections in children because they weaken the immune system. Parents should have the right to choose on behalf of their children whether they should be vaccinated at all, or to choose vaccination against some diseases but not others.

Vaccination is a natural way to stimulate our immune system to fight a disease. Through vaccination...

Well it is time for me to expand on my previous two points. My first point is that people do have dangerous reactions to vaccines. The probability of these dangerous reactions are different depending on the vaccine. Each vaccine has a different probability of a bad reactions and different types of bad reactions (1). By forcing everyone to take a vaccine forces some to take something harmful, and in rare situations even lethal. Currently working at a bio-lab with a safety level of 3 requires mandatory vaccines, but its reasons for being mandatory are far more justifiable since it deals with working with harmful pathogens as part of the job. But the requirement points out crucial effects of making vaccines mandatory, it prevents people with harmful reactions to vaccines from being able to be in the job. For example, Nancy Jaax couldn't get vaccinated without negative reactions so she had no chance of working in biosafety level 3. Instead she had to try to get into biosafety level 4 since the diseases there had no vaccines or cures. If vaccines were to be mandatory, it would force people with bad reactions to either do something that makes them sick or even worse kill them, or be force to go through any punishments for not following the mandate. My second point is that the government should not be able to force people to have a substance injected into their body. There are certain things that should not be in the governments power do to the possibility of abuse. While it may currently seem that the government cannot do anything wrong, that doesn't mean that it can't go down hill in the future. The last thing you need in the future is a corrupt government that can inject the citizens with what it deems fit. In addition mandating vaccines encroaches on our rights. People should have a right to decide what doesn't go into our body. Sources 1 http://www.cdc.gov...

should kids be vaccinated

There is no need for vaccines. Our immune systems can fight most ailments. Not only that, but vaccines result in almost 30,000 adverse events each year, including death, according to the department of Health and Human Services. [1] Sources: 1. www.vaers.hhs.gov

Why parents should immunized or Vaccinated they're kids

Not a full case yet.. Just some little points I put together... Governments should not have the right to intervene in the health decisions parents make for their children. 31% of parents believe they should have the right to refuse mandated school entry vaccinations for their children, according to a 2010 survey by the University of Michigan. Many parents hold religious beliefs against vaccination. Forcing such parents to vaccinate their children would violate the 1st Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to the free exercise of their religion. Vaccines are often unnecessary in many cases where the threat of death from disease is small. During the early nineteenth century, mortality for the childhood diseases whooping cough, measles, and scarlet fever fell drastically before immunization became available. This decreased mortality has been attributed to improved personal hygiene, water purification, effective sewage disposal, and better food hygiene and nutrition. Vaccines interfere with natural law and God's plan for humanity. Disease is a natural occurrence, and humans should not interfere with its trajectory. Common childhood vaccinations may cause rare yet serious reactions including anaphylactic shock, paralysis, and sudden death. This risk is not worth taking, especially considering most diseases vaccinated against are not necessarily life threatening. Vaccines can trigger auto-immune disorders such as arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Guillain-Barrï¿½ Syndrome (GBS), and other disorders. Vaccines can cause brain inflammation (encephalopathy) which can lead to death or permanent brain damage and disorders such as autism, ADD/ADHD, and other developmental problems. In addition, the vaccine additive thimerosal (found in most pre-1999 vaccines) has been associated specifically with the development of autism and is still found in certain meningococcal, tetanus, and flu vaccines such as the H1N1 vaccine. Vaccines clog and disrupt the lymphatic system with large foreign protein molecules (the active ingredients contained within vaccines) which may lead to lymphatic cancers such as leukemia and lymphoma. All vaccines cause immune system suppression, and can permanently damage the natural immune system. Unvaccinated children build and strengthen their immune systems through fighting off infection and developing natural immunity to diseases like measles and chickenpox. Artificial immunity, generated through vaccination, weakens the immune system and leaves children more vulnerable to all other diseases and infections. Children should not be required to receive the DPT (diphtheria, pertussis, tetanus) vaccine. Some studies have shown that children who receive the DPT vaccine exhibit shallow breathing which has been associated with sleep apnea and may be a causal factor in sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). Studies of infants whose deaths were recorded as SIDS show a temporal relationship with DPT vaccination (these infants tended to die at similar time intervals in relation to when they were vaccinated). Children should not receive the hepatitis B vaccine. Hepatitis B is a blood-born disease and is primarily spread by sexual intercourse and intravenous drug use. Children are not at great risk of contracting the disease. In addition, researchers have found that immunization with the hepatitis B vaccine is associated with an increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis. Young girls should not receive mandatory vaccination for HPV (human papilloma virus). The vaccine was approved in 2006 and the long-term effects are unknown. Since approval, adverse side effects such as severe allergic reactions, Guillain-Barrï¿½ syndrome, spinal cord inflammation and pancreatitis have been reported to the US Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System. Although these adverse reactions may be rare, they are not worth the risk since the vaccine only protects against two of the 15 strains of HPV that may cause cancer of the cervix (20-40 years after an individual is infected). Vaccines are promoted primarily to generate profits for manufacturers and financial donations for medical organizations that endorse vaccines. In 2003, a House Committee on Government Reform report revealed that the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices had members with significant financial ties to vaccine companies. The American Academy of Pediatrics, a leading pro-vaccination organization, receives millions of dollars from vaccine companies.

Resolved: State mandated administration of childhood vaccinations is justified.

Extend. Also freedom of religion is expressed in the first amendment. Making it mandatory would be a violation of this. But justified by the risk of spreading disease? Vaccines don't actually help that much. It is healthy practices such as hand washing that get the job done.

Mandatory childhood vaccination

1. Why are Christians, Mormons, and Jehovah's Witnesses opposed to vaccination? (by the way, Mormons and Jehovah's Witnesses are Christian.) Are there other types of Christians that oppose vaccines? (Christian in a broad term) How many parents of these said religions oppose childhood vaccinations? 2. How many children actually get these rare yet serious side effects? 3. Do people continue to get vaccinations made before 1999? 4. What scientific studies prove your second contention, subpoint B? 5. Are you advocating that instead of vaccinating, children should choose to strengthen their immune systems naturally? 6. Aren't very young children (under 1 year old) especially susceptible to disease, especially without vaccinations? 7. Do you believe that if a large percentage of the population favors/opposes something, the government should do as the population says? 8. Is one of the duties of the government to protect its citizens? 9. You state "Governments should not have the right to intervene in the health decisions parents make for their children". So, it is completely alright if a parent has a child with a life-threatening (but curable with proper medical care) condition but refuses medical care for that child, correct? Should the government intervene when parents deprive their children of food?

State mandated administration of childhood vaccinations is justified

Thank you, Strike, for responding I would like to set a road map: First, I would like to refute my opponents points Second, I would like to bring up my own points I do realize that the road map is quite useless, however it is a nice addition to organization, and I hope you grade accordingly. [1]My opponent has consistently stated that "without vaccinations diseases will spread. " However, only the parents who do choose to not vaccinate their children will find that their child has the sickness. According to my opponent himself, the children who are vaccinated should be okay. Therefore, the parents' decisions will not impact other children, if vaccinations are as useful as my opponent suggested. [2]Thank you for giving us a lecture on the usefulness of the Hepatitis B vaccine. However, judged by your [#] symbols that is not normal for you, I believe that you have copied and pasted this from a website. If not, you still produced many statistics that require a source; Readers, please grade accordingly [3]To defend myself, the fact that vaccines frequently cause unintentional deaths is a well known fact that has been proven by many scientists. However, to support this, over 5,500 cases alleging a causal relationship between vaccinations and autism have en filed under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the US Court of Federal Claims between 2001 and 2009. Also, The US Court Federal Claims Office of Special Masters, between 1988 and 2009, has awarded compensation to 1,322 families whose children suffered brain damage from vaccines. To top it off, about 30,000 cases of adverse reactions to vaccines have been reported annually to the federal government since 1990, with 13% classified as serious, defining serious as "associated with permanent disability, hospitalization, lifetaking illness, or death. I would like to bring some of my points into this debate. [1]Governments should not have the right to intervene in the health decisions parents make for their children.31% of parents believe they should have the right to refuse mandated school entry vaccinations for their children, according to a 2010 survey by the University of Michigan. [2]Many parents hold religious beliefs against vaccination. Forcing such parents to vaccinate their children would violate the 1st Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to free exercise of their religion. [3]Vaccines are often unnecessary in may cases where the threat of death from disease is small. During the early nineteenth century, mortality for childhood diseases whooping cough, measles, and scarlet fever fell drastically BEFORE IMMUNIZATION BECAME AVAILABLE. This decreased mortality has been attributed to improved personal hygiene, water purification,effective sewage disposal, and better food hygiene and nutrition. [4]Common childhood vaccinations may cause rare yet serious reactions including anaphylactic shock, paralysis, and sudden death. This risk is not worth taking, especially considering most diseases vaccinated against are not necessarily life threatening. [5]Vaccines can trigger auto-immune disorders such as arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), and other disorders. [6]Vaccines can cause brain inflammation (encephalopathy) which can le to death or permanent brain damage and disorders such as autism, ADD/ADHD, and other developmental problems. In addition, the vaccine additive thimrosal (found in most pre-1999 vaccines) has been associated specifically with the development of autism and is still found in certain meningococcal, tetanus, and flue vaccines such as the H1N1 vaccine. [7]Vaccines clog and disrupt the lymphatic system with large foreign protein molecules (the active ingredients contained within vaccines) which may lead to lymphatic cancers such as leukemia and lymphoma. [8]All vaccines cause immune system suppression, and can permanently damage the natural immune system. Unvaccinated children build and strengthen their immune systems through fighting off infection and developing natural immunity to diseases like measles and chickenpox. Artificial immunity, generated through vaccination, weakens the immune system and leaves children more vulnerable to all other diseases and infections. I would like to top this off by giving some facts and statements to support my points. [1]All 50 states require vaccinations for children entering public schools even though no mandatory Federal vaccination laws exist. All 50 states issue medical exemptions, 48 states (excluding Mississippi and West Virginia) permit religious exemptions, and 20 states allow an exemption for philosophical reasons. [2]over 5,500 cases alleging a causal relationship between vaccinations and autism have been filed under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the US Court of Federal Claims between 2001 and 2009. [3]The US Court Federal Claims Office of Special Masters, between 1988 and 2009, has awarded compensation to 1,322 families whose children suffered brain damage from vaccines. [4]About 30,000 cases of adverse reactions to vaccines have been reported annually to the federal government since 1990, with 13% classified as serious, defining serious as "associated with permanent disability, hospitalization, lifetaking illness, or death.

Vaccination for children under 13 should be mandatory.

A very good point you have made but if you realize these mandatory vaccines include a wide variety of vaccines include a wide variety of "disease preventers" so yes although some of the diseases are uncommon safety must always be considered. I hate using what it's but what if a family from Africa moved next door and they carried a rare disease you are not vaccinated against, then you have a high chance of contacting that disease. My opponent also mentions that vaccines pose dangerous threats against human life (and I want to mention the theory that vaccines cause autism has been disproven), the chance of getting a life threatening condition is much slimmer than getting the affects of an actual disease such as polio or smallpox which are highly life threatening and painful. A few arguments I shall pose are milder affects because I know a large portion of people feel like vaccinations don't 100% protect people from the disease they create milder affects so the difference between a fever and death.

Mandatory Childhood Vaccines

I know I lost already... I just felt so bad that no one accepted, so I will try my best. Despite causation and correlation, I believe that vaccines shouldn't be given. The amount of autistic kids have increased, while the amount of vaccinations have also increased. Please read my comment (first one) which follows this argument.

Children should receive vaccinations.

I do not believe that vaccines should be banned. I do believe that they should not be mandatory and that each parent should choose wether they have their kid vaccinated or not. Most of the time vaccines do not cause harm to people. But sometimes they do. Everyone has different body types. Every body will react differently to vaccines. Most people will not be harmed by them but because some people will be hurt or even killed by them, vaccines shouldn't be mandatory.

Vaccines can cause autism and other problems

I do agree that is a public health issue, and that everyone should get themselves vaccinated. However, I do not believe in the use of force to achieve this. Though, I believe all private businesses should refuse service to any un-vaccinated individuals, especially in the case of hiring workers, and children in schools. Forced vaccination violates the non-aggression principle, and thereby cannot be justified. You need to find a flaw in the logic of the NAP, (back in round 1) OR make a case for why forced vaccination is not subject to this moral principle.

Mandatory vaccines.

Just so you know, That has already passed in California. If you have no medical reasons, You must be vaccinated to go to school. It works perfectly. It is a very good reason to not allow kids to go to school. If parents will put a risk on their kids and other kids, Why do we have to give them the same treatment as other kids? They are anti-vaxxers. They spread lies and don't want to listen to evidence. It isn't millions of kids. Lots of states are making a push to have mandatory vaccination.

Mandatory vaccinations (for government services)

Yes, but that is only if they want to, what if children don't want to be vaccinated, if compulsory immunizations are carried out, there could be major strikes by kids and teens, also, what if the child becomes autistic due to this? As of now, people are allowed to decide whether or not they get vaccinated. If your value is Justice, this is a major question. If this law is carried out, who knows what terrible things could happen? Also, the resolution is not asking about whether or not vaccination is a bad thing, but if the government should have to FORCE the child to be immunized. Parents should be the primary decision-makers of their child's life, as they know whether or not the child will actually be exposed to the virus. Vaccines usually are not free, they cost money, and may actually risk the baby's life by exposing the virus. Thus, parents must make the child's critical decisions. If they are inadequate at doing this, we do have a thing called child custody requirements.

A child has a human right to be protected from preventable diseases from birth

Vaccinations should not be mandatory, because of peoples religious beliefs. Many people hold religious beliefs against vaccination, forcing parents to vaccine their children would violate the first amendment, which is the freedom to exercise their religion. Vaccines interfere with the natural law and God's plan for humanity. Disease is natural and humans should not interfere with it. The ethical dilemmas associated with using human tissue cells to create vaccines. Also people believe that the body is sacred, it should not receive certain chemicals or blood of tissues from animals, and should be healed by God or natural means. www.vaccines.procon.orgwww.historyofvaccines.org/content/articles/cultural-perspectives-vaccinations-cultural

Vaccinations (mandatory/ disbursemenet)

I am in awe and opposed to people not getting their children vaccinated. Not getting children vaccinated is why we are suddenly having outbreaks of diseases we haven't seen in years. Since vaccines have been found, we are living longer than we ever lived in the past. There is a reason for them. To not get your children vaccinated is irresponsible. I think it should be mandated that everyone get their children vaccinated. The only vaccination that I believe should still be up to a parent is the new HPV vaccine because it is new, cost money and is not neccessary until your child starts to have sex.

Not getting children vaccinated

First off i am throwing a link at you. https://magic.piktochart.com... It isn't the vaccines that are eradicating diseases, it is quarantine conditions. What did they do when someone infected with E-bola? They immediately closed the person off to society. Vaccines are not necessary. Now for ethics... You know abortion? Killing fetuses? Yeah, they inject you with them. http://www.vaccines.gov... If that isn't enough for the ethics then what is? Is it by chance they put that part at the very bottom? I think not. Then there is freedom of religion. I am not vaccinated because of my faith (religion).

Mandatory childhood vaccination

"That night she became agitated and feisty, then she fell asleep and never woke up." This quote is from a man whose daughter suffered devastating side-effects from the mandatory Hepatitis B vaccination on his 5-week-old little girl. Hello. I am on the CON side for the debate that Vaccination for children under 13 should be mandatory. Definitions: mandatory-an action that you must perform without question vaccination-an injection into your body consisting of weak or dead bacteria which is or is similar to a disease. Because I am CON, I will allow my opponent to go first.

Our society needs to be healthy, we want it to be healthy.But does that mean that we start giving vaccinations to every person would help in being disease free. In olden days there were no vaccines but still the rate of getting ill was very less. there are natural ways for protecting ourselves from the diseases. Moreover the chances of getting ill have increased from the past when there were no vaccinations. Pharmaceutical Companies Can"t Be Trusted. ALL Vaccines are Loaded with Chemicals and other Poisons which make the immune system of a lad weaker and if confronted by a disease takes a longer time to heal. Fully Vaccinated Children are the Unhealthiest, Most Chronically Ill Children I Know.A Number of Vaccines Have Already Had Problems/Been Removed from the Market so you can't trust all vaccines maybe you would take the vaccine now but later you come to know that the vaccine is faulty. You Can Always Get Vaccinated, But You Can Never Undo a Vaccination. Vaccination does not guarantee even immediate immunity, and boosters are necessary for all vaccinations. I think there is no care taken of our body,immune system or our health by ourselves ... we don't want to prevent it by natural methods and take vaccinations which gradually weaken your immune system. There are new diseases which have originated recent days because of our practices. So I conclude on saying that children must not be given so many vaccinations that their body becomes weaker.

Children should receive vaccinations.

should kids at school have to be vaccinated. Yes! if the kids are not safe it could cause them to no be going to school because they are sick. do you want your child to have a good education. vaccination should be mandatory

should kids be vaccinated

They are a waste of time and money.

Vaccines should not be mandatory.

How childish. If we have mandatory seatbelt laws, why not with vaccines? I don't have the right to threaten the health and safety of others. Toughen up, buttercup, no one is taking your rights away.

Mandatory vaccines.

My opponent has no evidence and since I have proved that his arguments are blocked and mine are not. Since my arguments are standing and his are not, the con should win this debate

I personally believe that vaccinating children is a normal and highly beneficial procedure, however in recent years the subject of the safety of vaccines has become controversial. I challenge anybody who disagrees with my view to debate with me on the topic.

Vaccinating your Child

Vaccination should be mandatory because a vaccination does nothing to harm ones religion or other beliefs. If the human body is so precious then shouldn't we be doing anything to protect it? Advances in medical science can now protect our society, families, and friends from disease that could have wiped away our race. These vaccination have completely eliminated disease like polio and whooping cough. Vaccinations have no serious side effects, they only side effects are redness or soreness. When people say that vaccinations can cause autism or other deadly side effects are just myths.

Vaccinations (mandatory/ disbursemenet)

Do you think childhood vaccinations should become mandatory? >Yes, it protects everyone >No, it's a family decision I>'m undecided Thank you, we have already counted your vote. Yes, it protects everyone 79.08% (707 votes) No, it's a family decision 18.12% (162 votes) I'm undecided 2.8% (25 votes) Total Votes: 894 In this poll, 80% of people, 4x the people have proven that they have low intelligence. All thos people have no idea what's in the vaccines nor read the leaflets. They want 96% of people to be vaccinated where I live!!! They are forcing me to get a vaccination or they're gonna fire me!!! That's against freedom and I totally disagree with it... You think even more diseases can be cured?! Come on! You listed like 10 that we *must get* which is absurd!!!

Vaccines are a waste of time, money, and cause health problems.

sure, All that stuff about herd immunity is true. However, That still doesn't tell me why it should be mandatory. where's the imperative justification? Sure I can say "you ought to do this or that". But what's the basis for the ought. We certainly can't just go denying kids school for no good reason. The problem here is that once we open this flood gate of mandatory vaccines, Then the government can just tell us what vaccines to get. What if a harmful vaccine comes out? Just because they're all good now doesn't mean they always will be right? So while we can say that people should get vaccines. We can't say they should be mandatory because it violates our civil rights and those are held to a high standard. All you've shown me so far is that vaccines are a good idea. You haven't shown me a good enough reason to deny millions of kids education. That's a tall order to fill.

I support this and will continue vaccines to avoid getting and making others sick. I don't have the right to spread infections to other people, end of story.

Mandatory vaccines.

The fact that vaccines cause autism is a fallacy and should not be treated as fact. I see that you are one of those people that believe that, unfortunately. Vaccines can be helpful for the body. They prevented smallpox, measles, and other dangerous diseases. I wonder what your counter-argument will be.

I don't really know what to say now...

vaccinating children must be a law

I would like to address two things before I really get into the argument. 1. Yes I was using necessary to mean "required by public schools" 2. I don't think I have 100% BOP because I'm arguing against the current accepted policies. However I would agree I have more BOP then pro does. Most likely 60-40 I will now debunk all of you're contentions. -Contention 1 There isn't really much to debunk here you basically just pointed out that most places allow religious exemptions. Just because most places allow it doesn't make it correct. -Contention 2 Yes it's true that there are ingredients that can violate the parents religious convictions. However when you are talking about getting first graders vaccinated, it's irrelevant. Because first grader don't have a religion. They have whatever there parents tell them they have. A first grader hasn't but any thought into it. He's whatever his parents tell him to be. However my bigger issue with it, is that I don't think the religion of the parents of one kid should be allowed to endanger the health of all the other kids in that school. You address this later in your argument saying something along the lines of " If my kid doesn't get vaccinated it doesn't matter if your kid is. The issue with this is that vaccines are not 100% effective. They work very well and everyone should get them, but sometimes they fail. So if one kid doesn't get vaccinated because his parents don't want him to and he gets say chicken pox, well he is a danger to other kids even if they have there vaccination because if the vaccination they got didn't work, well now that kid has gotten someone else sick because his parents don't personally like that vaccination. However even that isn't my biggest issue with religious exemption. My biggest issue is that parents are legally allowed to put there kid's health in danger because they personally don't like what's in the vaccine. If the parents don't want to get there kids the measles vaccine because they're religion doesn't like it and the kid gets measles then the parents religion put the child in danger. ColeTrain would you honest say that parents should be allow to risk getting there five and six year old children getting sick and even possibly dying all because the parents don't like it. It's the same reason i don't think faith healing should be allowed. Because the parents religion can't be used as a justification to put a child in danger. -Contention 3 You say religious exemption is protected under the first amendment. Well I disagree. Here is why. The first amendment protection is only when religion doesn't conflict with other peoples freedom or harm others. As I showed above not vaccinating your kid puts that kid and others around him in danger. So your religion is harming others and so is not protected under the first amendment. - Contention 4 Yes it's true vaccines can cause side effects. For most people it doesn't but it can. I am in favor of medical exemptions. If getting a vaccine poses a significant risk to a kids health and safety then yes they can be exempted. However that is rare and for everyone else they should get vaccinated. Also you bring up the vaccine and autism link. This has been disproved many times and in fact the author of that study lost his medical license and got thrown in jail because the study was so bad. So that's invalid. -Contention 5 I have addressed everything in this argument. But I will address one thing. You say that if people accept the risks then let them take them. However this doesn't work because we are talking about kids. So the parents are not the one who are taking the risk. They are forcing there kids sometimes as young as six to accept life threatening risks. If a adult doesn't want to get vaccinated I don't care. However parent forcing little kids to take life threatening risks is unacceptable and should not be allowed. So I think I have debunked all of your points I would like you respond to my points I made.

In an ideal society, everyone would be healthy. Vaccines prevent sickness, and therefore work at this goal. In addition, childhood is the most important time to get vaccinated to build strong antibodies and be able to fight off disease in their adulthood. Parents shouldn't be able to stand in the way of their children's good health because of radical and incorrect suppositions. Another reason would be herd immunity. Everyone has the right to protect everyone else by being vaccinated. That way, if someone who physically cannot get the vaccine (such as someone with an allergy, an elderly person or a baby) is almost as immune as everyone else because nobody else has the sickness. This only works if everyone around them is vaccinated, so in order to protect this, we need to keep people vaccinated. Vaccinations work well. A couple of diseases that are no longer majorly present in first-world countries because of vaccinations are smallpox, polio, tuberculosis, diphtheria, tetanus, whooping cough and so on. There is proof that vaccines are the reason: Recently, in California, there was an outbreak of measles because so many people there are not vaccinated and in a crowd. The measles disease rapidly spread and now many people are infected. This is another example of why herd immunity is so important. In conclusion, children indisputably need to get vaccines. They promote health well, and provide herd immunity.

Children should receive vaccinations.

It is also in the constitution that we have a right to bear arms, but there are laws placed on who and at what age a person is allowed to carry one. Making vaccinations mandatory for those children in school would just be like placing a law on gun carry. Heath.harvard.edu stated that an individual that is vaccinated is less contagious to others, if they were to get sick. So by definition if the majority was to get vaccinated then there would be no worry about getting infected. This is also called community immunity. By not having a child get vaccinated they are now risking the heath of not only those near them, but also the rest of the community.

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

Not true , there are ways to get around vaccinating your children before attending school. You can state that it goes against what you believe in and you can be excused. Many parents don't have their children vaccinated. There is a sudden rise we are seeing in diseases such as measles. This occurs because children are not all being vaccinated. There are also many immigrants coming to this country with their children not getting vaccinated. It is also not fair to risk your child's health by not getting them vaccinated. Many parents that don't get their children vaccinated were vaccinated themselves. Would you rather the small chance of your child being vaccinated or risk them contracting diseases such as small pox, polio, hepatitis A , measles , mumps , rubella, hepatitis B , meningitis, some ear infections. It is more harmful for your child to contract these diseases than to actually have the vaccine. It is very rare for side effects and for the most part they are small. There is no actual evidence to link the MMR vaccine to autism.

Not getting children vaccinated

Forfeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeit!

Although it is ultimately up to the parents on whether they wish to vaccinate thier kids, I think it breaks a social contract to exclude your child from vaccination and place them into an environment that may put your child and other children at risk. Vaccinations have proved to be more good than harm children and if you decide to to not vaccinate you should not be able to enter your child into a school that requires vacvcinations as a standard. This is not to say that not vaccinating isn't a right parent have, but that right should have consequences. Those children should not be intergrated with others in order to avoid reversing our progress against nearly eradicated diseases.

Unvaccinated children should be home-schooled

Vaccinations are not the reason that whooping cough went down. The mortality rate for childhood diseases such as measles whooping cough and scarlet fever fell before any vaccinations came out because of more sanitary living conditions, and more healthy ways of living and eating. (vaccines.procon.org) Most influenza A (H1N1) virus strains tested from the U.S. and other countries are now resistant to Tami flu. It has become a nearly worthless vaccination against the disease yet it is still used and it is a waste of money. (mercola.com) Many children who receive the hepatitis B vaccine find that it is completely unnecessary because it is a blood related disease and vaccines cannot do anything to prevent it. The only results found from it are that the only children that contract the disease are those who previously received the vaccination. (Vaccines.procon.org)

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

My opponent has violated good conduct by forfeiting, extend all arguments.

Some people don't want their kids to get autism or become paralyzed. Read about 10 year old Marysue grivna from Florida who got Adem, a brain infection after a flu shot and is now completely paralyzed.

should kids in public school be allowed to not get vaccines for religious reasons

Con states, baselessly, that parents shouldn't be allowed to vaccinate their children because "they lead to autism." He provides zero evidence for this assertion. Note that he has the burden of proof. Moreover, he has dropped every single point I raised in the past round. Extend all of those points.

Should doctors be aloud to give you vaccines

I accept. Roll up your sleeve kiddo's-we got a surprise for you!

You say that we should not be allowed to risk the health of others according to religious views. But, many parents hold religious beliefs against vaccination. Forcing such parents to vaccinate their children would violate the 1st Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to the free exercise of their religion

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

I would just like to note, for absolutely no relevant reason, that he is my classmate and that I was very excited to take this, due to the previous fact. I am on the Proposition, arguing that, "Vaccination for children under 13 should be mandatory. " Many thanks for allowing me to go first. I will begin with a refutation of the first, small quote my opponent has stated, which, to my disappointment, does not have a source. Refutation "This quote is from a man whose daughter suffered devastating side-effects from the mandatory Hepatitis B vaccination on his 5-week-old little girl. " This Hepatitis B vaccine is still good, no matter how many deaths (very small amount) occur. Would you rather like to possess this horrible disease. If so, the very small bacteria of this disease will cause liver inflammation, vomiting, jaundice, and, sometimes, death. Chronic Hepatitis B will result in liver cirrhosis and liver cancer, which means the chances of death are greatly increased [1]. A third of the world's population, more than two billion people, is infected with this disease. The most infection occurs within areas in Asia, mostly China, and Africa. There are also 350 million carriers of chronic Hepatitis B [2]. Chinese vaccinations are not mandatory. They are voluntary or optional. If more of the Chinese were treated with a Hepatitis B vaccine, then most would not have this disease. Africa is a very poor country. Many families can't afford vaccinations for their children and thus, get sick. Arguments 1. Vaccinations help children. Vaccinations help children. There can't be any doubt about it. Without vaccinations in America, many children would be sick and subject to violent diseases. Diseases will simply make children suffer more compared to a small dose of that disease. Diphtheria is an small respiratory sickness where a membrane forms that covers the throat and then makes it very hard to breathe. Whooping cough is named after the whooping sound that is made by its victims during one of their coughing periods. Mumps is another disease that can cause swollen glands on the face, but can be prevented with a vaccine. Tetanus is a horrible disease due to the fact that if obtained, you can die. You have a 50% chance of survival if you contract this sickness. There is also Rubella, Polio, Chickenpox, Measles, and Meningitis. All of these diseases are life-threatening and can only be stopped with a vaccination. There will be dangers when parents don't get their child vaccinated. In Boulder, Colorado, half of the 292 students attending Shining Mountain Waldorf School did not receive all vaccinations, with some not receiving any. The result of this has been a case of spreading whooping cough. In Colorado, all a parent needs to do have a child exempt from vaccinations is to sign a sheet of paper. 2. Vaccinations should be mandatory because diseases can spread. Children can get diseases that they could have prevented with a vaccination, and spread it to others who think they are safe without a vaccine. Children touch many things, such as park structures, and then others will get sick. There are some diseases that seem very small at first, but then develop to be potentially dangerous. The only ones that can be free of this disease are the vaccinated children. Just look at countries in Africa. They have numerous children with diseases, not because bacteria separately went and touched them all, but because they spread it among each other by playing, working, and using the same supplies. An African child dies every minute due to Measles [3]. This could be stopped with vaccinations. I eagerly await for the response. Sources: 1. . http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov... 2. . http://www.mayoclinicproceedings.com... 3. Cuttino, Phyliss A. "Where a Child Dies Each Minute. " UN Chronicle. June/August 2002:26.

I accept. I think some of the definitions are curiously worried, but if the "no semantics" rule is followed I am sure we will have no trouble working this out.By the way, vmpire321, if you are actually 14 years old then I am very impressed by your debate record. Otherwise, stop pretending to be 14 on the internet, that's just creepy.

State-mandated administration of childhood vaccines is justified.

Voters, please don't vote solely for forfeiture. This debate is on whether or not children should receive vaccinations, and I am saying yes.

Children should receive vaccinations.

April PF Topic.... Waiting for opponent!

Ah yes, state health insurance. Yes most states have SOME form of health insurance, however not all citizens are eligible for it. If they were, than we would not have this whole hype about Universal Healthcare Plans among the Democrats! Therefore the reasons that I gave before in 2nd round still stand. Also you stated that all vaccines except for HPV should be made mandatory. This is quite a long list of vaccines, and insurance would not completely cover the entire list without making premiums go through the roof. This would also raise the strain on the state health insurances that you have mentioned, leading to possible raised taxes, cut education funds. If in the event, that a diesease does pop up upon an unvaccinated population, it can be quickly controlled. It is very unlikely that a child with symptoms of measles would be allowed to contact your child at a party. Quarentine of the sick child is likely. Yes, vaccines are meant to prevent dieseases, however vaccines also work in creating "rings of immunity" around outbreaks. This is how small pox was eradicated. By immunizing in regions AROUND out breaks, the disease was contained. A similar infrastructure is already in place in the United States with our current usage of immunizations. Now, there are carriers of dieseases with no visible symptoms. However, a person can be a carrier of diesease even with a mandatory immunization. The government does have the right to protect the citizens of a country, however there are limits to how far the government can go. Our federal government does not have the right to completely disregard one's religious beliefs, like I said before. This is one of our base constitutional rights and would be violated if your plan were to be enacted. However, I also find it disagreeable that the government should have a right to dictate what goes into our bodies without personal choice. I do not completely disagree with your statement about parents needing to be responsible-- in fact quite the opposite. Parents should be given their own reins to how to best protect their children, for children are the Parents responsbility, and not the responsibility of politicians in our government. Finally, I would like to thank you for starting this debate. I found it very informative and interesting. Thanks!

Not getting children vaccinated

Extend.

Mandatory childhood vaccination

PrefaceI've talked with several people recently about a trend among parents not to vaccinate their children. Personally, I find this trend to be alarming, and view the decision to not vaccinate a child to be morally reprehensible. I would therefore like to debate this issue, to air my feelings on the subject. There is a 48 hours response time on this debate, so please bear that in mind prior to accepting. Full TopicOn balance, parents have a moral obligation to vaccinate their children. TermsOn balance - means in general and after weighing all the available evidence. Vaccine - a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease. Rules1. No forfeits2. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be provided in the text of the debate3. No new arguments in the final round4. Maintain a civil and decorous atmosphere5. No trolling or semantics6. My opponent accepts all definitions and waives his/her right to add definitions7. The BOP is shared8. Pro must go first and must waive in the final round9. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a lossStructureR1. AcceptanceR2. Constructive CasesR3. Pro rebuts Con's Case, Con rebuts Pro's CaseR4. Pro defends Pro's Case and Crystallizes, Con defends Con's Case and CrystallizesThanks.

Parents Should Vaccinate Their Children

Sorry I accidentally posted this below ... As for the cost of vaccinations, In my state anyway, any child in my state is eligable for Mass health if they have no insurance. I am almost caertain that all states have some form of state insurance. What if my child is an infant and I go to bring my other child who is vaccinated to a party .. One child is not vaccinated , that child has a disease from not being vaccinated and chances are so does my infant that hasnt become old enough for a vaccine yet. The parent of the child who is not vaccinated is now responsible for both their own child and my child becoming sick. There is a reason we have vaccines and if a parent abuses a child , then they are held accountable , well in my eyes risking a childs health by not getting them vaccinated is a form of abuse, although it may not be as bad as hitting a child .. it is putting your child at risk to contract a disease that is preventable. The Government should have the right to rid our country of potential disease outbreaks and threats . Since I made the mistake of posting this below let me add more There are also elderly that are not vaccinated because a vaccine may not have come out until after they were older, and they can't get the vaccine at their age... why should these parents be allowed to chance their children infecting others. Someone needs to protect these children, they will have to suffer the risk and worry later on in life because their parents didnt get them proper vaccines ..I would want someone to step in and help me if my mom wasnt making sure that I was properly vaccinated as a child.

Not getting children vaccinated

"Governments should not have the right to intervene in the health decisions parents make for their children. 31% of parents believe they should have the right to refuse mandated school entry vaccinations for their children, according to a 2010 survey by the University of Michigan." Appeal to majority and authority, I need reasons why the Gov has no right to intervene in health decisions. "Many parents hold religious beliefs against vaccination. Forcing such parents to vaccinate their children would violate the 1st Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to the free exercise of their religion." Frankly I don't care what rules the parents think they are breaking of some book written thousands of years ago, I stand for the well being of the children. If I prove that vaccines have health benifits then this point falls. "Vaccines are often unnecessary in many cases where the threat of death from disease is small. During the early nineteenth century, mortality for the childhood diseases whooping cough, measles, and scarlet fever fell drastically before immunization became available. This decreased mortality has been attributed to improved personal hygiene, water purification, effective sewage disposal, and better food hygiene and nutrition." Yes I agree with you. There is a lot less disease, and the black plagues gone. It's true this isn't entirely due to vaccin ation. But the fact is there are still many infectious diseases rampant in all socieites, and hepititus is a plague. You're closing your eyes to a very important problem-disease still exists and spreads very regularly. "Vaccines interfere with natural law and God's plan for humanity. Disease is a natural occurrence, and humans should not interfere with its trajectory." Yes I agree! Let's all be literal Darwinists and kill the babies who are born with deformations in the hospitals because God obviously wanted them to die! People with leprosy are being punished for sins in a past life! Oh wait this isn't the dark ages any more, if a member of our society is sick we do our best to cure them and prevent sickness. Gods plan for humanity is a future without disease. "Common childhood vaccinations may cause rare yet serious reactions including anaphylactic shock, paralysis, and sudden death. This risk is not worth taking, especially considering most diseases vaccinated against are not necessarily life threatening." Can I have some sources for this ourageous claim? Just because HPV isn't life threatning we don't protect our children from it? Vaccines aren't supposed to be life savers all the time-their job is to stop the spread of infectious diseases around our society. As for these reactions you talk of, first please source. Secondly, they are proabably one in a million scenerios and the child is surrounded by health proffesionals will make it a minor issue. I agree that they might happen, but we still go to surgery even though their are risks of side effects yes? Vaccines destroy an immediate risk to our health. "All vaccines cause immune system suppression, and can permanently damage the natural immune system. Unvaccinated children build and strengthen their immune systems through fighting off infection and developing natural immunity to diseases like measles and chickenpox. Artificial immunity, generated through vaccination, weakens the immune system and leaves children more vulnerable to all other diseases and infections." You're trying to prove that un-vaccinated children are more resistant then vaccinated children? Do you even know why children get vaccines? It's to protect them from the diseases thier bodies can't cope with on their own. Vaccines don't push out a natural defense-they provide the only defense. Having your child contract hep C won't toughen him up. It will kill him or her. "Children should not receive the hepatitis B vaccine. Hepatitis B is a blood-born disease and is primarily spread by sexual intercourse and intravenous drug use. Children are not at great risk of contracting the disease. In addition, researchers have found that immunization with the hepatitis B vaccine is associated with an increased risk of developing multiple sclerosis." When the subject is children and disease, well to be honest any risk is enough to warrant vaccination. Plus, you need to source the information that shows there's more than a one in a million chance for a child to contract a disease from a vaccine. There's also a chance kids can contract bone cancer from cell phones, but that doesn't mean we outlaw cell phones-the risk simply isn't larg enough. "Vaccines are promoted primarily to generate profits for manufacturers and financial donations for medical organizations that endorse vaccines. In 2003, a House Committee on Government Reform report revealed that the CDC Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices had members with significant financial ties to vaccine companies. The American Academy of Pediatrics, a leading pro-vaccination organization, receives millions of dollars from vaccine companies." Of course the vaccine companies make tons of money...people buy their products because it makes them immune to diseases..supply and demand...I think there's a large market for people who want to stop the spread of disease.. MY ARGUMENT P1. Vaccines make children immune to certain diseases and illnesses p2. Being Immune to certain diseases and illnesses is good p3. Any Parent who does not want their child to be immune to certain dseases and illnesses is not acting in the childs best interests p4. It is the role of the state to act in the childs best interests C. The state should administer vaccinations

I'd like to start right away. Refutations "However, only the parents who do choose to not vaccinate their children will find that their child has the sickness. According to my opponent himself, the children who are vaccinated should be okay. Therefore, the parents' decisions will not impact other children, if vaccinations are as useful as my opponent suggested." Exactly. That's the problem. Their child will have the sickness. They think they're safer off without the vaccination, however, that is untrue. They will obtain diseases, spread it onto other children who think they're safe without the vaccination, and then spread it to the kids who were going to get a vaccination. One child can get infected, due to a careless or careless parents, and then spread the danger to all his classmates or friends. The argument is not that the vaccinated kids will be sick, it's that one child can spread it to many others. The only ones who, in a sense, "benefit," are the vaccinated ones. "Thank you for giving us a lecture on the usefulness of the Hepatitis B vaccine. However, judged by your [#] symbols that is not normal for you, I believe that you have copied and pasted this from a website. If not, you still produced many statistics that require a source; Readers, please grade accordingly" Who are you to judge me as such? If you did research, you would have found that in many of my recentd debates, I decided to use the brackets and the number. I found it a very useful tool to ensure that you are not lying, and I am not. So please refute my argument that vaccinations actually benefit people, as seen in previous argument. "Vaccines are often unnecessary in may cases where the threat of death from disease is small. During the early nineteenth century, mortality for childhood diseases whooping cough, measles, and scarlet fever fell drastically BEFORE IMMUNIZATION BECAME AVAILABLE. This decreased mortality has been attributed to improved personal hygiene, water purification,effective sewage disposal, and better food hygiene and nutrition." Plagarized from here [4]. Vaccines are very necessary, even if percentages of death is small. Vaccine deaths are even smaller. The sicknesses I previously listed out are all very harmful and potentially death-threatening diseases. They cause an extreme amount of suffering. Imagine if you were a child, suffering from a very horrible disease, and you know you could've been saved if you just took one needle in the arm. That's it. Whooping cough (pertussis) was the cause of 5,000 to 10,000 deaths in the United States a year [1]. Tell me that's not small. As my source states, pertussis was a deadly killer BEFORE VACCINES WERE CREATED [1]. The annual amount of deaths are now only 30 [1]. Measles is a much less serious circumstance, however, there are 20 million cases each year when children get them [2]. That could be stopped with one vaccination! Also, this rash is contagious and can be spread among kids. Why would these diseases just suddenly decrease in numbers before vaccines became available? Why would there suddenly be improved hygiene, purification, and other methods? Where is the source for this? "Common childhood vaccinations may cause rare yet serious reactions including anaphylactic shock, paralysis, and sudden death. This risk is not worth taking, especially considering most diseases vaccinated against are not necessarily life threatening." Plagarized. The "risk" is most certainly worth taking, as the percentages of problems are very, very, very, very small. Most diseases cause huge amounts of suffering among children, and all that could be ended with a vaccine. "Vaccines can trigger auto-immune disorders such as arthritis, multiple sclerosis, lupus, Guillain-Barre Syndrome (GBS), and other disorders." Plagarized as well from previous site. However, no vaccines means a child can obtain these numerous diseases: Anthrax Chickenpox Diphtheria Hepatitis A and B Hib HPV Japanese Encephalitis Lyme Disease Measles Meningococcal Mumps Pertussis Pneumococcal Polio Rabies And many, many more [3]! "Vaccines clog and disrupt the lymphatic system with large foreign protein molecules (the active ingredients contained within vaccines) which may lead to lymphatic cancers such as leukemia and lymphoma." Plagarized from the same site, as well. I have to once again weigh down on this one refutation. The good of the vaccination far outweighs the bad of the vaccination. There is a very small chance you will obtain such diseases. "All 50 states require vaccinations for children entering public schools even though no mandatory Federal vaccination laws exist." Plagarized. What's the argument here? "Over 5,500 cases alleging a causal relationship between vaccinations and autism have been filed under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program in the US Court of Federal Claims between 2001 and 2009." Plagarized. However, vaccines do not cause autism. Researchers at the John Hopkins University School of Public Help and Centers for Disease Control reject the idea that vaccine and autism are linked. The US Court of Federal Claims has said that, "theory of vaccine-related causation [of autism] is scientifically unsupportable." My opponent has listed several facts to "support" his case. They are all plagarized, but nonetheless, they are very strong supporting evidence... until you read the fifth argument from the site he copied from. "According to a 2003 report by researchers at the Pediatric Academic Society, childhood vaccinations in the US prevent about 10.5 million cases of infectious illness and 33,000 deaths per year. [4]" Clearly, this benefit outweights so many of the numbers my opponent has listed. Arguments 1. Because of a few ignorant parents, their children are at risk, putting even more children at risk of being infected with a horrible disease. 2. Most childhood vaccines have a 90-99% success rate in stopping disease [5]. When children who have been vaccinated do get sick, they usually have milder symptoms with less serious complications than an un-vaccinated child that gets the same disease. For example, an un-vaccinated child with mumps can become permanently deaf and spread the disease to more students, but the vaccinated child won't. 3. Children especially need to get vaccinated. Children have weaker immune systems than adults and thus, are more susceptible to various diseases than adults. The Proposition should currently be winning this debate due to the reason that I have refuted all of my opponent's arguments, and he has never completely refuted all of mine and some were left untouched. All of my opponent's arguments are plagarized and they are not his own work. Sources: 1. http://kidshealth.org... 2. http://kidshealth.org... 3. http://www.cdc.gov... 4. http://vaccines.procon.org... 5. http://www.healthychildren.org...

parents should immunized for the safety of community such as schools or any sorts of public place. if not it could cause a epidemic

No parents shouldn't be allowed to vaccinate their children because they lead to autism

I have refuted all of the con's points with superior evidence and logic, while upholding my own points. Just to sum up the main arguments: 1. Without a mandate, herd immunity will be threatened. A mandate is the only way to make sure that enough people will get vaccinated, and will ultimately remain healthy. Furthermore, it is not right to put someone else in danger if it can be helped. By depriving their children of vaccines, parents are not only putting their own children in danger, but also putting the children of others in danger. Referring back to my Contention 2, subpoint B, when people fail to vaccinate their children, kids with weak immune systems etc. can and will be hurt. 2. Parents don't always make the best choices for their children. Diseases that cannot be be protected through herd immunity, such as tetanus, creates a greater need for everybody to get vaccinated. A child should not be forced to endure diseases such as tetanus because of a bad decision of their parents. 3. Vaccines are expensive. If vaccines were mandated, those with less money would be able to get the vaccines. 4. All of my opponent's "religious beliefs" claims have been proven to be incorrect. First and foremost, biblical word isn't taken literally. All of the religions my opponent brought up allow vaccinations. 5. The constitution does not provide absolute rights. Furthermore, because my opponent cannot proven that any religions explicitly prohibit vaccines, this point falls in my favor. 6. Vaccines are safe. If a parent is concerned about certain ingredients, they can get an alternative brand of vaccines. 7. Vaccination is preferable to natural immune systems. (Refer to my Japanese example) 8. It is preferable to give children vaccines: So they're safe throughout their life. It's more effective when given to children. Because of these reasons, I can only urge a Pro vote.

Vaccines should be mandatory.

Mandatory Vaccinations

Challenge Accepted! xD

Parents Should Vaccinate Their Children

Children must be vaccinated it is a fact! 6 million lives if children are saved each year due to vaccinations.

vaccinating children must be a law

Well now I just agree with you.

vaccinating children must be a law

This debate is on whether or not children should receive vaccinations, and I am saying no.Voters think over it and vote . I strongly believe that students should not receive vacations

Children should receive vaccinations.

I believe vaccines should be mandatory (unless you have an allergy or some other medical problem), because it is for the greater good of the public. My preferred opponent would be an anti-vaxxer, although if you are a pro-vaxxer and against mandatory vaccinations, that is fine too.

Vaccines should be mandatory

We need to Weigh the Cost the Child Receiving a Possible "Illness" from remaining unvaccinated, against the Premise that they would be denied a Basic education. CONTENTION 1. Children Being Denied a Basic Education Vaccination is no prerequisite to anything. Regardless of Age, ethnicity, social and economic background, children should have the right to attend School. According to many Constitutional and Laws Globally, this would infringe on the Act of Liberty, and Free will, in accordance with the First Amendment of the US constitution.(1) CONTENTION 2. Denial of Free will As stated Above, this would infringe on the act of Free will, a Basic right that all Humans should have, regardless. REFUTATIONS "Although it is ultimately up to the parents on whether they wish to vaccinate thier kids, I think it breaks a social contract to exclude your child from vaccination and place them into an environment that may put your child and other children at risk." What Social Contract do you speak of, I've never heard of it. For whatever reasons an individual has, be it religious or Moral, they have the right to NOT have there children vaccinated. "Vaccinations have proved to be more good than harm children and if you decide to to not vaccinate you should not be able to enter your child into a school that requires vacvcinations as a standard." No Schools require children to be vaccinated, as of saying this. Vaccinations are very effective, and carry little side effects, but as stated, people have the right to not vaccinate there child. "This is not to say that not vaccinating isn't a right parent have, but that right should have consequences. Those children should not be intergrated with others in order to avoid reversing our progress against nearly eradicated diseases." What Studies do you have the Say not vaccinating your child "Reverses" our progress against nearly eradicated diseases? That sounds completely made up. You make another Statement based on opinion, rather then fact. " "Those children should not be intergrated with others" That's not for you to decide. You may or may not Vaccinate your child, if you have one, but Making decisions for others is Unjust, and Unconstitutional. (1)(http://www.google.ca...)

My opponent has forfeited again. All of my points from R3 stand unrefuted.

Many people abuse their first amendment rights to freedom of religion. When getting an exception from vaccinations for their child, parents don't have to explain the reasoning behind their religious refusal towards getting the vaccine. The merely have to state that they have a religious objection and are allowed off the hook whether they believe in that certain religion or not. (www.patheos.com) Not only this, but there are several mainstream religions that don't believe vaccinations are wrong, including Catholicism, Judaism, Buddhism, Christianity, and Islam. The Catholic Church believes there is no good or proper reason to refuse a vaccination against a dangerous and contagious disease. (www.whyimmunize.org.) Not vaccinating a child can affect more than just that child, and can endanger the lives of those around them. 29% of deaths of children between 1 to 59 months of age are vaccine preventable. This puts other children at risk of a lethal disease if someone chooses to not vaccinate their child (www.vaccinestoday.eu.) Measles is an extremely contagious airborne disease that lives in the air for 2 hours, making it unavoidable to breathe in (www.vaccinestoday.eu.) In 2008, a 7 year old boy's parents refused to get him vaccinated for the measles. He then infected his 9 year old sister and 3 year old brother, both of which were also not vaccinated for the disease. This then lead to 11 other children being infected, and 48 children too young to be vaccinated had to be quarantined for 21 days. (www.webmd.com)

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

First of all, I never said that vaccines are not worth their risks. I stated that one should have the right to consider the risks, and decide what to put into their or their children's bodies. And while I'm on the topic of free choice, you brought up an important point about people being exempt to due to religious beliefs. Now, proposing a mandate that would FORCE these individuals to vaccinate against their religion is clearly in violation of their Constitutional rights. However, lets move on to the point you brought up of certain dieseases spreading. The United States vaccination policy has used a concept known as "herd immunity" in which the majority of the population is vaccinated and immune. Now that we have established this "herd immunity," many dieseases cannot spread very far. You stated that due to lack of use for the MMR, measles cases have increased. However, because most of the American population are immunized with MMR, then these cases can be quickly contained. Therefore, our system already works, and it does not seem worth the effort to mandate vaccinations. While, yes it would have benefits, the problems that come with a mandatory vaccination make it unfeasible. There are two levels in which mandatory vaccinations for children would be ineffective. One is on the federal level. In order to make sure that EVERY child in the United States gets the vaccinations (and future boosters to vaccinations), a great deal of effort and money needs to be spent. If you have seen our national deficit recently, along with Social security fund security, then it is clear that it is not feasible for the government to implement, and ENFORCE this vaccination policy to all children. The second level that we can look at is on the citizen's level. While you are right, a responsible parent should get their children vaccinated (unless of moral and religous beliefs), you are assuming that every parent in America has the capability to pay for such vaccinations. This is not the case. In America, 45 MILLION americans, including 9 million children, lack health insurance. Some of the vaccines that have been mentioned, such as the HPV vaccine, consist of multiple shots. According to the Center of Diesease control, the 3 HPV shots can cost up to 360 dollars PER SHOT. Other vaccinations cost less, however, the way that you have proposed mandating vaccinations creates a long list of vaccines that must be paid by these uninsured parents. Since the incomes of many of these uninsured families are low, it is difficult to concieve a low income family paying thousands of dollars for vaccinations. While many low-income parents will still put their Children's safety first, it should not be forced upon them to pay for EVERY ONE of the vaccines available. Also, mandatory vaccinations will raise insurance premiums for all members of society. And many insurances might not cover all these vaccinations, therefore hurting the pockets of even the insured. In conclusion, a mandated vaccination not only infringes upon a citizens right to religious beliefs and choice, but the costs outweigh the benefits because of simply an inability on the federal and citizen's level to pay for such vaccinations. You have stated before that parents that do not vaccinate their children are irresponsible, yet it is the duty of the parent to do what is best for their kids.

Not getting children vaccinated

Duty to protect the child

Make Vaccination Compulsory

Some parents may not be in the budget to pay for vaccination for there child. Parents may fear that their child will have bad side-effects as well as allergies. it is also not illegal or compulsory to vaccinate your child, Australia is a free country and she parents should have the option of taking the risk of not vaccinating their child.

Parents who don't vaccinate their children should still receive benefits from the government

Vaccinations such as hepatitis B are unnecessary because as stated by professionals on VacTruth.com, "As of March 2012, disturbingly there were over 1500 hepatitis B vaccine-related deaths reported to the federal Vaccine Adverse Events Reporting System (VAERS), some of those classified also as sudden infant death syndrome (SIDS). In addition to a high number of deaths, there were a total of 66,654 adverse events reported to VAERS, including but not limited to brain inflammation, convulsions, multiple sclerosis, headaches, irritability, lupus, rheumatoid arthritis, and Guiilain-Barre Syndrome." (vactruth.com) Dr. Meryl Nass stated: "Many parents hold religious beliefs against vaccination. Forcing such parents to vaccinate their children would violate the 1st Amendment which guarantees citizens the right to the free exercise of their religion." The First Amendment clearly grants all citizens of the United States of America freedom to practice whichever religion they choose. Many citizens" beliefs are against allowing people to receive vaccinations. By forcing American citizens to vaccinate their children and themselves, it is a direct violation of the First Amendment. (vaccines.procon.org/#arguments) All fifty states require vaccinations to enter public schools, but 48 of them allow exemptions for religious reasons for this very reason! When students enroll, all they have to do is have their parent or guardian fill out a form stating that they do not allow the student to receive vaccinations because of religious reasons. (vaccines.procon.org/#arguments) The college of Physicians of Philadelphia stated "Certain religions and belief systems promote alternate perspectives toward vaccination. Religious objections to vaccinations are based generally on" beliefs that the body is sacred, should not receive chemicals or blood or tissues from animals, and should be healed by God or natural means." (Historyofvaccines.org)

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

Topic: State-mandated administartion of childhood vaccines is justified. Rules:1. No Ad Hominem2. No plagiarism3. No semantics/abusive arguments4. Dropping = Conceding5. By accepting, my opponent accepts the given rules.5a. If not, post in comments. =/Definitions:1. State-mandatedMandated is defined as requirement, so this phrase means each state has requirements relating to medical and safety issues.2. Administartion Administration, in this case, relates to allowing the government to give permission and obligating to trained medical professionals to give a shot to you. 3. Childhood VaccinesA series of vaccines, biological preparation, given during childhood to prevent future diseases. 4. JustifiedFor debate purposes, it means that on balance, it does more good than harm to the people. Good luck to whoever accepts.

The NVIC says, "there are problems, many doctors are in denial." They looked at measles and all these infectious diseases that were killing people, they found that the drop in deaths had nothing to do with the vaccines. The verdict concerning Dr. Andrew Wakefield denied sound scientific studies replicating his findings. The public, parents, doctors and scientists worldwide are calling for a enquiry: http://www.wesupportandywakefield.com... Total Signed 4328 as of April 27, 2013. 5 reasons why we should have a choice to get vaccines. #1: Vaccines have Chemicals and Poisons #2: Vaccinated Children are Unhealtly also #3: We Are Learning the Dangers #4: Vaccines Have been Removed #5: You Can Get Vaccinated, But Never Undo a Vaccination

Vaccinations Against Preventable Childhood Disease

To begin, I will remind my opponent that his/her next round will be their concluding round, in which they may not present any new information. This means that he/she can only weigh and crystallize arguments. My conclusion will be the first part of round 5, directly after my opponent's. My Arguments:My arguments have all been dropped by my opponent. This means that all my arguments have been accepted to be true. Refutations:Since my arguments have been accepted to be true, my opponent's incorrect and unproven assertions that vaccines are untrustworthy and harmful have been disproven by my arguments. I have proven that government-approved vaccinations work reliably, or as reliably as you can expect anything to. You can risk the slight risk of your child having an allergy and then have compensation from the government and protection from herd immunity. [1] This is obviously different from drinking orange juice from the grocery store, risk the slight chance of getting orange juice that is past expiration date, and then return it, get compensation from the grocery store, and get better orange juice. (Please infer sarcasm).

Children should receive vaccinations.

It is a HUGE SCAM by big Pharma. I don't care what anyone says!!!

There should not be Mandatory Vaccinations

I don't see how being new or using a cell phone is relevant to our discussion. Plagiarism isn't necessary in order to give us background information.

This is awkward

vaccinating children must be a law

Children should not be vaccinated because vaccinations are not safe. The Ecowatch a website who concentrates on our economy and problems in the society stated in an article titled " CDC Knew Its Vaccine Program Was Exposing Children to Dangerous Mercury Levels Since 1999", "Uncovered documents show that the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) knew that infant vaccines were exposing American children to mercury far in excess of all federal safety guidelines since 1999. The documents, created by a FDA consulting toxicologist, show how federal regulators concealed the dangerous impacts and lied to the public...In 1997, Congress passed the FDA Modernization Act. A provision of that statute required the FDA to "compile a list of drugs that contain intentionally introduced mercury compounds, and provide a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the mercury compounds on the list." In response, manufacturers reported the use of the mercury-based preservative, thimerosal, in more than 30 licensed vaccines...". Based on this article published in 2017, how do we know our children will be safe? If they have exposed our children once to dangerous chemicals, how do we know it will not happen again. This demonstrates the government does not care about our children, what are these vaccines really for? We are not experiments to simply test how many chemicals our body can intake, and neither are our children. Vaccines are not safe and neither are our children if we allow them to receive them. Kennedy, Robert. "CDC Knew Its Vaccine Program Was Exposing Children to Dangerous Mercury Levels Since 1999." EcoWatch, EcoWatch, 17 Apr. 2017, www.ecowatch.com/cdc-mercury-vaccines-kennedy-2199157054.html.

Children should be vaccinated

PrefaceI have worked in healthcare for a decade now and find that the anti-vaccination crowd has become a small but booming voice in the industry. I am genuinley interested in a cultered debate on the issue and would love an engaging and academic contest.There is a 48 hour response time on this debate. Please consider before accepting.Full TopicOn balance, children should be vaccinated.TermsOn balance - means in general and after weighing all the available evidence.Vaccine - a substance used to stimulate the production of antibodies and provide immunity against one or several diseases, prepared from the causative agent of a disease, its products, or a synthetic substitute, treated to act as an antigen without inducing the disease.Rules1. No forfeits2. Any citations or foot/endnotes must be provided in the text of the debate3. No new arguments in the final round4. Maintain a civil and humane atmosphere5. No trolling or semantics6. My opponent accepts all definitions and waives his/her right to add definitions7. The BOP is shared8. Pro must go first and must waive in the final round9. Violation of any of these rules or of any of the R1 set-up merits a lossStructureR1. AcceptanceR2. Constructive CasesR3. Pro rebuts Con's Case, Con rebuts Pro's CaseR4. Pro defends Pro's Case, Con defends Con's Case Thank you for your consideration

On balance, children should be vaccinated.

You want to do what is best for your children. You know about the importance of car seats, baby gates and other ways to keep them safe. But, did you know that one of the best ways to protect your children is to make sure they have all of their vaccinations? Immunizations can save your child"s life. Because of advances in medical science, your child can be protected against more diseases than ever before. Some diseases that once injured or killed thousands of children, have been eliminated completely and others are close to extinction" primarily due to safe and effective vaccines. Polio is one example of the great impact that vaccines had have in the United States. Polio was once America"s most-feared disease, causing death and paralysis across the country, but today, thanks to vaccination, there are no reports of polio in the United States. Vaccination is very safe and effective. Vaccines are only given to children after a long and careful review by scientists, doctors, and healthcare professionals. Vaccines will involve some discomfort and may cause pain, redness, or tenderness at the site of injection but this is minimal compared to the pain, discomfort, and trauma of the diseases these vaccines prevent. Serious side effects following vaccination, such as severe allergic reaction, are very rare. The disease-prevention benefits of getting vaccines are much greater than the possible side effects for almost all children. Immunization protects others you care about. Children in the U.S. still get vaccine-preventable diseases. In fact, we have seen resurgences of measles and whooping cough (pertussis) over the past few years. Since 2010, there have been between 10,000 and 50,000 cases of whooping cough each year in the United States and about 10 to 20 babies, many of which were too young to be fully vaccinated, died each year. While some babies are too young to be protected by vaccination, others may not be able to receive certain vaccinations due to severe allergies, weakened immune systems from conditions like leukemia, or other reasons. To help keep them safe, it is important that you and your children who are able to get vaccinated are fully immunized. This not only protects your family, but also helps prevent the spread of these diseases to your friends and loved ones. Immunizations can save your family time and money. A child with a vaccine-preventable disease can be denied attendance at schools or child care facilities. Some vaccine-preventable diseases can result in prolonged disabilities and can take a financial toll because of lost time at work, medical bills or long-term disability care. In contrast, getting vaccinated against these diseases is a good investment and usually covered by insurance. The Vaccines for Children program is a federally funded program that provides vaccines at no cost to children from low-income families. To find out more about the VFC program,. Immunization protects future generations. Vaccines have reduced and, in some cases, eliminated many diseases that killed or severely disabled people just a few generations ago. For example, smallpox vaccination eradicated that disease worldwide. Your children don"t have to get smallpox shots any more because the disease no longer exists. By vaccinating children against rubella (German measles), the risk that pregnant women will pass this virus on to their fetus or newborn has been dramatically decreased, and birth defects associated with that virus no longer are seen in the United States. If we continue vaccinating now, and vaccinating completely, parents in the future may be able to trust that some diseases of today will no longer be around to harm their children in the future.

Firstly, you have said that "parents may not be in the budget for the vaccination for their child', which is indeed possible, but that doesn't mean that they should be allowed to not give provide the vaccination, the government should provide the funds in that case. Which is the case in several countries already. For example, there is the Universal Immunisation Programme in India which pays for the vaccination for the children in poor families. In the USA, there is CDC (Centres for Disease Control and Prevention) which does so as well. Secondly, you have said that there are negative side effects of vaccinations on children. However if you would have researched the topic, you would have realised that the only possible issues that could arise are mild fever, shivering, fatigue, joint/muscle pain and headaches. These- by the way, are not in anyway going to hurt the child since active immunisation (that is what vaccination is) is the injection of dead or inert pathogen into the recipient's body for the white blood cells to create memory regarding the antigen's structure to fight a similar alive one in the future. Which would explain the negative effects. Next, just because it isn't legal to not vaccinate your child doesn't mean it is okay to not do so. As a matter of fact it should be illegal since a child's life is risked. And moreover, the statement is inaccurate as well since in the USA alone, it is legally required in all the 50 states to do so if he/she is entering an educational system (school, day care, etc). In addition to that, the motion suggests that the issue being debated refers to al the countries all around the world and not only Australia, so we should broaden our horizons and not only focus on one country. Additionally, you have said that parents should have the option of taking the risk of not vaccinating their child simply shows that you have said that it is wrong for children to be deprived of the medical necessity. Which is basically saying that you agree with me. Finally, I would like to say that if the government does indeed give these benefits to these families, it just suggests that it is okay to be ill and be a possible reason that a epidemic is spread. It will have a negative impact on all the future generations. It is the government's job to improve the standard of living of a nation, not deteriorate it. That is why the citizens have chosen them.

Vaccinations against highly infectious childhood diseases such as the measles, mumps, rubella, and pertussis (aka whooping cough) have saved millions of lives and improved the quality of life in countries where vaccines are accessible to the public. Unfortunately, more than half of the parents in the United States and some parts of the United Kingdom are choosing not to vaccinate for fear that vaccinations are harmful to their children. Autism, mercury, and aluminum are commonly cited as reasons against vaccinations: all reasons which have been poorly researched by antivaxxers. The Andrew Wakefield article loosely correlating the MMR vaccine and autism has been thoroughly debunked and retracted. The mercury used in Thimerosol (ethylmercury) is much easier for the body to break down than the mercury found in seafood (methylmercury), and an infant will have greater aluminum exposure from 6 months of breastfeeding than from their full vaccination schedule in the same time frame.

No one should be allowed to risk the health of others just because of their personal, moral, philosophical, or religious views. The needs of the many is more important than the needs of the individual.

Vaccinations (mandatory/disbursement)

http://www.vaccines.gov... I ask the voters to consider this when voting on this debate.

h

Resolved: State Mandated Administration of Childhood Vaccinations is Justsified

Evidence suggests that the dramatic rise in ear infections, allergies, and asthma in children can be attributed (at least in part) to the damaging effects of vaccines. The incidence of asthma, the most serious and life threatening of these conditions has steadily increased in the modern era since the introduction of vaccines. In the UK controversy surrounds the use of the MMR (measles, mumps, rubella) triple vaccine, with many parents refusing vaccination for their children or insisting that they be vaccinated separately against the three illnesses.

Compulsory vaccination leads to a better health situation in a state. The child mortality rate is l...

I myself do not think vaccinations are necessary. Usually every time I get one I end up getting sick after. Also some may have the risk of cancer or actually do cause it. There have been many recalls on vaccines, and the people who were the first to get them were at risk for disease or were left sick. If people ate right and took care of their bodies we would not need them. Yes, there is bacteria and virus's but the healthier the person the less chance they are of getting sick.

Vaccinations are necessary

Pro makes the claim that there shouldn't be mandatory vaccinations on the premise that they cause autism, are a scam, and have other negative consequences. However they haven't provided any evidence this is the case. The claim that vaccinations cause autism isn't true. :The MMR vaccine controversy started with the 1998 publication of a fraudulent research paper in The Lancet linking the combined measles, mumps, and rubella vaccine to colitis and autism spectrum disorders." [1] The key word there is fraudulent. "An investigation by journalist Brian Deer found that Andrew Wakefield, the author of the original research paper linking the vaccine to autism, had multiple undeclared conflicts of interest,[9][10] had manipulated evidence,[11] and had broken other ethical codes. The Lancet paper was partially retracted in 2004, and fully retracted in 2010, when Lancet's editor-in-chief Richard Horton described it as "utterly false" and said that the journal had been "deceived" [2]. As we can see, basing the outlook that vaccinations shouldn't be mandatory because they cause autism is completely unfounded. Claims ought to be based on fact to be considered true. A scam can be defined as a dishonest scheme. It vaccinations are a scam, about what and why in particular? A case hasn't been provided. So with Pro not offering cant substance whatsoever, allow me to showcase why vaccinations are important. Immunizations can save your child's life. "Because of advances in medical science, your child can be protected against more diseases than ever before. Some diseases that once injured or killed thousands of children, have been eliminated completely and others are close to extinction" primarily due to safe and effective vaccines. Polio is one example of the great impact that vaccines had have in the United States. Polio was once America"s most-feared disease, causing death and paralysis across the country, but today, thanks to vaccination, there are no reports of polio in the United States [3]" Immunizations protect the future generation. " Vaccines have reduced and, in some cases, eliminated many diseases that killed or severely disabled people just a few generations ago. For example, smallpox vaccination eradicated that disease worldwide. Your children don"t have to get smallpox shots any more because the disease no longer exists. By vaccinating children against rubella (German measles), the risk that pregnant women will pass this virus on to their fetus or newborn has been dramatically decreased, and birth defects associated with that virus no longer are seen in the United States. If we continue vaccinating now, and vaccinating completely, parents in the future may be able to trust that some diseases of today will no longer be around to harm their children in the future [4]". Humans have been able to live longer, flourish often, and progress society due to the lack of bubonic plagues and mystical diseases we previously died from before the research of science. Mandatory Vaccinations not only save lives, but allow the human race to be stronger than ever before. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org... [3] https://www.vaccines.gov... [4] https://www.vaccines.gov...