The Instigator
CatalyticConvertersRule
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
passwordstipulationssuck
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Vaccines should not be mandatory.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
passwordstipulationssuck
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/18/2018 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 808 times Debate No: 108220
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

CatalyticConvertersRule

Pro

They are a waste of time and money.
passwordstipulationssuck

Con

I would like to preface my argument by pointing out that the currently mandated vaccines have opt out clauses for those with religious objections or other conscientious reasons. Beyond that it's imperative for herd immunity among other variables that the majority of people be vaccinated and thus should be mandated

First, What is herd immunity? the resistance to the spread of a contagious disease within a population that results if a sufficiently high proportion of individuals are immune to the disease, especially through vaccination. Why is this important? according to vaccines.gov Germs can travel quickly through a community and make a lot of people sick. If enough people get sick, it can lead to an outbreak. But when enough people are vaccinated against a certain disease, the germs can"t travel as easily from person to person " and the entire community is less likely to get the disease.

That means even people who can"t get vaccinated will have some protection from getting sick. And if a person does get sick, there"s less chance of an outbreak because it"s harder for the disease to spread. Eventually, the disease becomes rare " and sometimes, it"s wiped out altogether.

Who does community immunity protect?
Community immunity protects everyone. But it"s especially important because some people can"t get vaccinated for certain diseases " such as people with some serious allergies and those with weakened or failing immune systems (like people who have cancer, HIV/AIDS, type 1 diabetes, or other health conditions).

Community immunity is also important for the very small group of people who don"t have a strong immune response from vaccines. Essentially, when the vast majority of people are immune to a disease, it protects those of us who can't get vaccinated.

Now to address my opponent's points. He claimed that it's a waste of time and money, However, both of these are not priority issues. saving the few minutes it takes to get vaccinated cannot hold up to saving lives with herd immunity. the same can be said for saving a paltry sum of money. This is a not a priority issue at best and selfish at worst.

Protect our communities, save lives. vote con.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Stupidape 2 years ago
Stupidape
Vaccines save lives.

"The diseases vaccines prevent can be dangerous, or even deadly. Vaccines reduce your child"s risk of infection by working with their body"s natural defenses to help them safely develop immunity to disease."

https://www.cdc.gov...
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Anonymous 3 years ago
CatalyticConvertersRulepasswordstipulationssuckTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't have much to say, and so I'll be brief. Pro presented one single argument, which was easily refuted by Con, by examining priorities among vaccinations, time and money. Furthermore, Con argued that community immunity, an outcome of the use of vaccines, would greatly benefit the society, thus winning the argument points.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 3 years ago
David_Debates
CatalyticConvertersRulepasswordstipulationssuckTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Do I really have to explain this? Fine, I suppose I will. Pro argued that vaccines are a waste of time and money. Con argued that herd immunity is essential to survival of humanity. Since the instigator (pro) chose for there to only be one round, he removed any chance of rebuttal he had. For these reasons, Con clearly wins in the arguments category. No sources, no spelling, no conduct issues. My vote to Con.
Vote Placed by ApotheosisOrangutan 3 years ago
ApotheosisOrangutan
CatalyticConvertersRulepasswordstipulationssuckTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: While I had views other than the Con side at the beginning, his argument contained much more evidence and valid point as well as more than one sentence which helped show their professionalism. Neither shared any sources, thus me tying them.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.