Saturday, May 17, 2014

Marketplace of ideas - freedom works

Vaccines evoke strong opinions, pro and con. There are some in the pro-vaccine camp who are proposing that those who don't agree with them not be allowed to express their views - for the sake of protecting the public, of course. At best this is condescending, at worst just plain dangerous because of the precedent that is set - don't agree with an opinion, silence the opposition. Hmmm ... our current administration has already set this precedent in using the IRS as a political tool against certain groups, so unfortunately, and example has already been set. 

It's condescending as it is a paternalistic attitude that assumes people cannot think for themselves and examine evidence and draw their own conclusions, make up their own minds about a matter (whether it is about vaccines or anything else). 

It's dangerous because if this is permitted regarding vaccines (silencing those who question the conventional wisdom of vaccination), then what other opinions or thoughts might be targeted next, simply because they do not conform to prevailing patterns crafted by the thought police? 

We are designed to live in freedom, and this is why more humans have flourished under free market capitalism than any other economic model. It expresses the collective wisdom of individual economic choices (bottom up), rather than the imposition of the will of a few from the top (a model that has failed spectacularly -- a model in which millions wait in lines for bread whereas in capitalism, bread waits for millions); 

Even as things are the market for vaccines is not free ... those who manufacture and deliver the product are shielded from liability, while the product in question is required by law or fiat before individuals can obtain employment (flu shots for healthcare workers) or schooling (children); If the market for vaccines were free(er), there would be no mandates, nor any liability firewall. If the product in question is so safe and effective as its supporters insist that it is, such things (mandates/liability limits) would not be needed as there would be a groundswell of demand for the product. 

Those who create the mandates have conflicts of interest in doing so ... 

Science is not settled - about vaccines and many other things. The marketplace of ideas benefits from the free exchange of ideas, so silencing anyone, about any issue, is foolish and unspeakably arrogant. 

What are those who are suggesting this so afraid of? If they are so confident in the concept of vaccination, why would it matter if those who question vaccination are wrong? 

We trust women to make life and death decisions regarding their children's lives (ie: they can determine whether or not to have an abortion) because "we trust them" and/or "they have the right" ... but we can't trust mommies to determine whether or not their child gets a vaccine - another life and death decision?! Parents/people can't have the right to determine whether or not they get a vaccine? 

Yet another eerily similar parallel between vaccines and abortion: pro-aborts want to limit the amount of information women get (lest they change their mind and not have the abortion ... and the abortionist not get the filthy lucre), while those who are pro-life/oppose abortion want women to have as much accurate information as possible prior to making their decision so they can make a fully informed decision! 

So the pro-vaccine camp wants to limit people's ability to obtain information (well, any information that might question vaccination), while those who do have questions want people to get as much information as possible prior to making the decision to vaccinate. 

Truth has no fear of the lie - it is quite telling that those who question vaccination do not shirk from the debate, nor are they (to the knowledge of this blogger at the time of this post) insinuating that those who are pro-vaccine be silenced. 

Our Creator designed us with free will, and even He respects our freedom to chose even when it causes us, and Him, great grief. He detailed reasonable boundaries in His word, the Bible, to help us not take freedom to far (like slaughtering innocent unborn human life for the sake of personal autonomy) -- but if He respects our freedom to choose, shouldn't we also respect one another's? 

Those who want vaccines should get them. 
Those who do not want vaccines should not be forced or manipulated to do so. 

Everyone should be free to speak their mind, and fellow citizens should be able to listen, unfettered by censorship.

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated - expect your post to be approved within 24 hours.
Polite, respectful discussion welcomed.