|
|
|
|
|
by s1artibartfast
2180 days ago
|
|
You are correct that there is a utilitarian argument that vaccinations will save lives. You and the parent post disagree about the new vaccine risk level.
Do you think that they should be compelled to vaccinate their child with the unproven vaccine. What if the risks outweigh the benefit for the child, but are positive for society at large? |
|
I don't think we disagree about the new vaccine risk level, since we don't have a vaccine, nor know anything about its side effects.
If a vaccine is has differing risks based on age group, then I would hope that we vaccinate the lowest risk group; assuming the risk variance is significant.
As a society, vaccinations are naturally government infringement upon individual rights. But a well-functioning society routinely infringes on individual rights. We place children in protective services when their parents don't care for them properly (in the mind of the government). We (in extreme times) invoke a draft for military personnel. As my dad used to say, your right to swing your fist stops at my nose. Rights are not inviolable; though care should be taken to limit infringement.
As SC Justice Robert Jackson once said, the protections afforded by the Constitution "must not be discredited by an interpretation to mean liberty without law."