Dear Connecticut, It's not about Vaccines

Dear Connecticut,
​
I've spent the majority of my life in this beautiful state, the shell-filled beaches and spectacular falls are my favorite. Your legislation, however, is not. We appreciate the freedom you allow homeschoolers in the state, making it one of the top places to homeschool in the country. But, the other laws you’re trying to put into practice are just plain ludicrous. 

This battle isn't about vaccines, if it was, you'd be pleased to know that the rate of unvaccinated children is incredibly low in this state. The most recent data says 96.5% of the state’s schoolchildren are vaccinated. This isn't about public health, because if it was then the effectiveness of vaccines in the inoculated population would protect them from a health threat. This is government overreach in an attempt to control people, that's very unfitting in a state named "the constitution state."

When it comes to abortion, the left cries, "my body, my choice." And, the government applauds them and beckons to their every wish. Hopefully, the person with the next great vaccine creation for say, the coronavirus, wasn't already killed in a forced Chinese abortion years ago.

When concerned parents decide to take a different path, delaying or denying vaccines, saying “my body [and my children’s body], my choice,” you say no and start looking a little like 1940’s Germany with proposed registration of everyone who disagrees with you. I don’t necessarily find fault in saying that unvaccinated children can’t go to public schools. If it’s a state resource and people aren’t following the laws of the state, then that sounds reasonable. Perhaps, you should take away welfare benefits too. Now, history will tell us of times when those liberties have been taken, once again in Nazi Germany. But it could still be just? Maybe, all anti-vaxxers should sew on yellow emblems of a vaccine with a line through it to be easily identified. Or, is that too far? It’s hard to draw the line in the correct place.

For The Constitution State to support women’s choices, but not a mother’s choice is quite a paradox. It gets more paradoxical when we consider that women’s choice to abort their babies provided the necessary ingredients for the HP vaccines and further medical testing for potential vaccines against other viruses.I know that no one likes to think about that, but it happened. To judge the morality of something as “just” because it happened a long time ago is a philosophy that would feed the demise of civilization. To prevent the demise of civilization, many have relied on religious values.  The Buddhist practice a philosophy that involves harming no one, therefore they rely on a religious exemption for vaccinations because of the harm inflicted in the creation of the vaccines (Pelčić et al., 2016). Catholics too may rely on that exemption because of their stance of abortion, and Jews and Muslims may deny vaccines because of the use of pork products used (Pelčić et al., 2016).

With a stroke of a pen, those people will lose their freedom to exercise their religion guaranteed in the first amendment of the constitution. Have you prepared the cattle cars to round up the deflectors, Connecticut? I hope they’re not wealthy because God knows the state needs the tax dollars.

What about the people who are not able to move out of the state and are forced to inject their children with an unheard-of amount of vaccines all before the start of the next school year? What are the health consequences of so many injections so close together? Or is this one of Dr. Mengele’s experiments?

Dare I ask, why not spend your time and energy getting pharmaceutical companies to make vaccines that people wouldn’t object to on religious grounds, rather than taking away parent’s constitutional rights? Every other industry is forced to change and innovate to please consumers. Heck, even McDonald’s has reduced the sodium in their french fries to please their customers (Bhushan, 2016). Why not pressure pharmaceutical companies to make more alternative vaccines that wouldn’t be rejectable for religious reasons? It can be done and has been done, but the availability is sparse (Pelčić et al., 2016).

So, now the great debate rests in our legislature. Do parents have a constitutional right to decide how to raise their children, or do they have to follow legislation that violates their conscience? It’s a political battle I would not like to personally fight. I know what choice I’d make, and it stems from my constitutional right to make choices.

I sincerely hope your choice is wise,
Auf Wiedersehen.
 


References:

Bhushan, R. (2016, August 5). McDonald’s goes on a healthy diet, reduces sodium in its mayonnaise and fries. The Economic Times. Retrieved from https://economictimes.indiatimes.com/industry/cons-products/food/mcdonalds-goes-on-a-healthy-diet-reduces-sodium-in-its-mayonnaise-and-fries/articleshow/53549504.cms?from=mdr

Pelčić, G., Karačić, S., Mikirtichan, G. L., Kubar, O. I., Leavitt, F. J., Cheng-tek Tai, M., … Tomašević, L. (2016). Religious exception for vaccination or religious excuses for avoiding vaccination. Croatian Medical Journal, 57(5), 516–521. https://doi.org/10.3325/cmj.2016.57.516

Offit PA and Moser CA. Vaccines and Your Child: Separating Fact from Fiction. 2011. Columbia University Press.