Dec 21, 20213 min read

Vaccine Mandates: The Two Sides

Post

Prefacing this article, The Front Page Initiative would like to reaffirm our stance on this argument as strictly pro-vaccine. We encourage you all to get fully vaccinated and to get your booster shot, if you're eligible!

The COVID-19 vaccination has proven to be effective at minimizing people’s vulnerability to infection, hospitalization, and even death. According to the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR), receiving two doses of a mRNA vaccine provides the optimal benefits, and strong protection against Delta and other known variants of Covid 19.

With this information, a question that arises is “Given the effectiveness of the vaccine, should federal and state governments have the authority to tell their citizens that they must get the COVID-19 vaccine in order to participate in certain activities?” While the government cannot force one to get vaccinated, a vaccine mandate would allow businesses, schools, and other public services to deny service to people without the vaccine. Many companies have implemented the ‘Path Out of the Pandemic COVID-19 Action Plan’, that was released by the Biden Administration in September of this year. This plan requires employers with 100 or more employees to mandate vaccination and require any unvaccinated workers to undergo weekly testing. Additionally, many universities have mandated the COVID-19 vaccine in order to attend school on campus. Colleges such as The University of Virginia have even unenrolled its unvaccinated students. Many states have made efforts to enforce COVID-19 vaccine mandates and passports as well. However, there is still conflict, as states such as Montana prohibit vaccination-based discrimination.

The pro-mandate perspective cites that vaccine mandates are effective, ethical, and lawful, as witnessed by previous mandates for the flu, Hepatitis B, and other vaccinations. They believe that states have the constitutional authority to mandate vaccinations, as the Supreme Court has upheld this authority twice: in 1905 and 1922. Lastly, the pro-mandate crowd rejects the “personal liberty and freedom” argument, due to their belief that vaccines not only protect the person vaccinated, but everyone else as well. They emphasize that getting vaccinated is an ethical responsibility, it is essential for the well-being of the general public.

It is true that the left-wing media is likely to advocate for a vaccine mandate or simply getting vaccinated for COVID-19 and while the scientific narrative of the efficacy of the COVID-19 vaccination is factual, an aspect that the left-wing media does not cover is who the unvaccinated people really are. The stereotype that many people envision is the typical “anti-vax redneck”. However, this is far from the truth. In fact, the data actually suggests that people of ‘all walks of life’ are hesitant to get the vaccination, meaning that all of these people will be negatively impacted by vaccine mandates. Of course, a case against mandates is not necessarily a case against vaccines. Many anti-mandate advocates recognize the effectiveness of the COVID-19 vaccine but, they believe that the people should have the right to make the decision to get it, not politicians. These advocates also suggest that forcing people to get vaccinated will not stop the Delta variant from spreading, stating that the fully vaccinated may transmit the Delta variant just as easily as the unvaccinated. Natural immunity is also a factor that the anti-mandate crowd believes is not being considered. Studies suggest that natural immunity may confer longer-lasting and stronger protection against infection—this is in comparison to two-dose, vaccine-induced immunity. Lastly, the anti-mandate perspective cites the poor records of pharmaceutical companies. For instance, in 2004, Johnson & Johnson paid $90 million for settlements linked to prescription heartburn medication and in 2009, Pfizer had to pay a settlement of $2.3 billion for fraudulent marketing.

Now that the data of efficacy is known, the mandate aspect of the COVID-19 debate is more relevant than the effectiveness of it. Both sides value different ideas, whether it comes to the general well-being of the population, our liberty to make medical decisions, or the demographics of the unvaccinated. Both sides also have methods of refuting the values and intentions of the other side, even when factual data exists. Ethics also come into play when discussing wheter people have the right not to get vaccinated, or if people have the right to deny service based on vaccination status. The ‘correct answer’ to this debate will inevitably stem from a source of bias, which is why it is extremely difficult for politicians to come to a partisan conclusion. In fact, there may not even be a partisan solution.

References

Vaccine Mandates: The Two Sides

Recent Posts

Comentarios