It's not nice to lump me in with anti-vaxxers but I guess that's how modern politics^W^W^W^W^W^W science is.
I don't take the stance that children have complete autonomy only because it leads to some very strange and disturbing consequences. Therefore, if the parents decide the child should not be vaccinated than I think that's a fine decision. I also think deciding your child should be vaccinated is a fine decision.
Where I draw the line is the prevention of attendance at a learning institution. Since you mentioned public school, then this should either have a distanced option (home schooling, etc) or permit the students regardless. Private institutions may do what they please. Yes, this also goes for public grant-receiving universities, community colleges, etc. Forcing people to manufacturer "exemptions" is simply an end-around to the government enforcing it's will upon people and their choices with their body. It's both immoral and unethical.
> The "pro bodily autonomy" message is smoke and mirrors, designed to put a palatable glaze on an increasingly fringe and reactionary position.
There is absolutely nothing fringe about wanting control of your body. This is a modern authoritarian take that is working to undo the last 50 years of increases in bodily freedom for everyone. I obviously won't win against someone espousing left-authoritarian views because neither of us will concede. But I do have some rhetorical things for you:
On "smoke and mirrors" for "an increasingly fringe, reactionary position". Do you think the same about abortion? Or is it, in your mind, okay for that form of bodily autonomy but some forms of bodily autonomy are more okay than others? Do you draw the line where "it harms people"? Who are "people"? It doesn't help you linked the CDC who has a vested interest in talking down the "bodily autonomy" argument as a public policy (public health is typically diametrically opposed to bodily autonomy because public health requires shirking the individual for the "common" good).
Arguing against bodily autonomy is binary. Either you are for bodily autonomy or you are for some level of government control over what people can and can't do with themselves. What I am willing to do to myself is my own business. Why should anyone but me decide?
Bodily autonomy is not smoke and mirrors. "Bodily autonomy" qua "I don't want to get a safe and effective vaccine" is smoke and mirrors.
The rest of the post is built on top of your initial incorrect assumption, and isn't worth a line response. Consider, instead, whether there is any meaningful sense in which getting a free and effective vaccine can be reasonably compared to reproductive rights.
Any useful comparison of outcomes would need to consider deaths instead of case rates as we have a well-known more-transmissible variant in play now compared to the beginning of the pandemic. Most of your sources don't do that.
The linked articles regarding Iceland in fact contradict your assertion. They provide a very clear graph of cases over time vs deaths over time and it is trivial to see that during the recent spike in cases, deaths are much lower in proportion compared to earlier spikes, a clear indicator of the vaccine working well.
It is also logical that most COVID cases in places with high vaccination rates are breakthrough cases, there are simply less unvaccinated hosts for the virus to potentially infect. It does not follow that the outcome would be better with less vaccinated hosts.
Finally, you've posted links to 7 deaths and 28 complications following vaccinations. Regardless of the merits of any particular one of those articles - this is scare mongering as it completely ignores that around 5 million people have died from COVID worldwide, while around 3 billion people have been vaccinated safely. (Source- Google searches for worldwide covid deaths and worldwide covid vaccinations).
It's also important to note that Iceland has a population of 370K and tourists this year will likely peak at about 400-450K (way less than a typical year). Of the 34 deaths attributed to Covid from the beginning of the pandemic in Iceland at least 3 were visiting tourists. All the Icelandic statistics do not differentiate between those living in Iceland and tourists so any calculations based on population will be off.
> an increasingly fringe and reactionary position.
If discussions on HN are any indication, opposition to lockdowns/vaccines is growing and anything but fringe. Risk tolerance is subjective, and the fact that someone's cost benefit analysis aligns against the extreme measures we are seeing does not imply heartlessness. This is not the plague. On the scale of deadly viruses, covid is quite close to a severe flu in terms of mortality/long term effects. It's high time that the moralists started listening to the rapidly growing body of opposition. Clearly this is a curve that we are not going to flatten without extreme measures, if ever given that this is now an endemic virus.
A stance becomes no less valid by being driven to the fringe by a population that is increasingly desperate to find a scapegoat for all of its problems.
The link I provided includes conscientious objections, and makes it abundantly clear that they are extremely limited in scope. In particular, nearly every state requires (1) a statement in writing, (2) confirmation from a healthcare and/or faith practitioner, and (3) evidence that the belief is genuine and not a transient product of merely political beliefs. Additionally, many states will not accept a "genuine" belief if it is not also the belief of the complainant's faith.
It's not nice to lump me in with anti-vaxxers but I guess that's how modern politics^W^W^W^W^W^W science is.
I don't take the stance that children have complete autonomy only because it leads to some very strange and disturbing consequences. Therefore, if the parents decide the child should not be vaccinated than I think that's a fine decision. I also think deciding your child should be vaccinated is a fine decision.
Where I draw the line is the prevention of attendance at a learning institution. Since you mentioned public school, then this should either have a distanced option (home schooling, etc) or permit the students regardless. Private institutions may do what they please. Yes, this also goes for public grant-receiving universities, community colleges, etc. Forcing people to manufacturer "exemptions" is simply an end-around to the government enforcing it's will upon people and their choices with their body. It's both immoral and unethical.