Vote
28 Total Votes
1

Yes

16 votes
3 comments
2

No

12 votes
6 comments
Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
CosmoJarvis says2016-12-16T03:39:19.4176339Z
Nanubot's main argument for why he voted no was because, if a doctor doesn't have the right to commit an abortion on a random pregnant lady, then a child does not need a vaccination. Gr8 reasoning there, m8
Nanubot says2016-12-16T03:41:05.8667820Z
I was relating that a doctor doesn't make random choices without a parents consent.
Nanubot says2016-12-16T03:42:14.3883555Z
Though I should expect nothing less from a weaboo libertarian, should I?
Gareth_BM says2016-12-16T15:54:09.6014343Z
As I said in my comment vaccinating children affects more than the child being vaccinated. Not vaccinating someone puts other people at risk. Its no different from outlawing reckless driving, it doesn't just endanger the driver it endangers everyone around them
AnonymousAthiest says2017-04-03T16:33:51.8744088Z
Samantha's argument is baseless. Vaccines do prevent the spread of diseases, not cause them. Do they always work? No, because vaccines basically prepare the immune system of who they are used on for a specific disease, so if the person is immuno-compromised they obviously won't help (its like giving weapons to an army that doesn't exist). We have empirical evidence to prove this.

Freebase Icon   Portions of this page are reproduced from or are modifications based on work created and shared by Google and used according to terms described in the Creative Commons 3.0 Attribution License.

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