3 ms·

No, this take is bad. We do not need to allow things where the outcome is purely bad in the name of "freedom".

• hueving 8y ago
  Yet here we are with the ability to buy cigarettes, alcohol, and candy.
• everdev 8y ago
  If something looks "purely bad", you're probably polarized on the issue. There's usually positives and negatives to everything, even if one far outweighs the other in your mind or in the mind of the vast majority of people. When you run into stiff resistance like the anti-vaxx movement, which has little economic incentive (I can't think of who profits by a kid not taking vaccines), it helps to be able to understand where their points make sense even if you don't agree. Once you're that beyond right and wrong, then you can educate more effectively. I've had much more constructive dialogues with anti-vaxx people once they know that I understand how scary it is for a government to tell you you have to inject your kid with something you don't understand and doesn't feel necessary and might have risks. I think if you grant them the courtesy that they could be right (which science and medicine has examples of being highly confident and then being wrong), that then they are more open to at least getting the highest recommended vaccines on their own volition.
• esaym 8y ago
  You mean outcomes like a 1 in 2 autism rate? Or how about all the infants that die during the night after their vaccine shots?