The Daily Orange's December Giving Tuesday. Help the Daily Orange reach our goal of $25,000 this December


Moderate Column

NY law banning religious exemptions for vaccinations is a step in the right direction

Cassie Cavallaro | Assistant Illustrator

Many who oppose vaccinations do so because they are protective of their personal freedoms — and rightly so — but those freedoms are all the more threatened if, in exercising personal rights, we infringe upon the rights of others.

America’s greatest threat may be the very principle it was built upon. From the moment it was founded in 1776, our young and ambitious nation set itself apart as a powerful symbol of freedom in a world still burdened by chains. Now, more than two centuries later, that ideal remains a source of pride for the American people.

But is there such a thing as too much freedom?

In late August, a New York Supreme Court judge rejected a request from parents to block a law that abolishes religious exemptions to vaccinations. On a campus as diverse as Syracuse’s, the impact is bound to be widespread.

Prior to this bill, New York parents were able to opt their children out of vaccinations based on religious beliefs. But with this new state law in place, unvaccinated children will be kicked out of their schools as early as next month. Although protections for religious freedom are abundantly important, they can’t put the public in danger.

The fight against vaccinations is not a new or uncommon one. According to a report from the New York Times, there are about 26,000 kids with religious exemptions to vaccinations living in New York.



vaccine

Karleigh Merritt-Henry | Digital Design Editor

Some New Yorkers have argued that the government making rules about citizens’ personal decisions sets a dangerous precedent. It doesn’t feel like a stretch to say that punishing those in the public who disagree with the medical community is a scary step forward. But the situation may not be as black and white as it initially appears.

Kent Cheng, a social sciences PhD student in SU’s Maxwell School of Citizenship and Public Affairs, thinks there is room for more compromise on this issue. Before enrolling in the PhD program, Cheng worked as a health policy researcher in the Philippines.

“It curtails the freedom of the people, and we don’t actually want that,” Cheng said. “We want them to make the choice as they see fit but at the same time we want to balance the negative societal impact when people are starting to not get vaccinated.”

The danger, however, lies in what he refers to as “herd immunity,” or the way that the general public’s safety is affected by unvaccinated individuals.

Cheng said the more citizens of a community who opt out of vaccinations, the more risk of infection there is for everyone else, including those that are unable to safely receive vaccinations due to issues such as pregnancy, old age or infection with HIV.

Many who oppose vaccinations do so because they are protective of their personal freedoms — and rightly so — but those freedoms are all the more threatened if, in exercising personal rights, we infringe upon the rights of others.

“We should push for better information, require people to know more about vaccines and regulate fake news,” Cheng said.

It’s true that misinformation is often a deterrent for those considering vaccinations. One of the most common arguments from those opposed to mandatory vaccination is that immunization can cause children to become autistic. According to the CDC, however, allegations like these are based upon a dated report that has not only been disproven, but also contained flawed evidence and intentionally manipulated data.

Providing the public with the resources to educate themselves while still allowing them the freedom to come to their own conclusions may be an effective compromise or even just a stepping stone for the near future.

In terms of the precedent we’re setting for the nation’s future, an individual’s religion should never be allowed to play into matters of law or health when the consequences will impact society at large.

This is not to say that religion should be disregarded entirely in government issues — that freedom is an integral part of American society, and its influence is woven throughout the country’s history. But if we allow any individual freedoms to endanger the country as a whole, we will transform from a symbol of freedom to one of narcissistic anarchy.

Dylan Williams is a freshman in the transmedia department. His column appears bi-weekly. He can be reached at dwilli39@syr.edu. He can be followed on Twitter @_DylanFox_.





Top Stories