[vivant]

Originally Posted by Aliantha

I think people who live in cultures where millions of people from past generations have gone to the trouble of immunising their children, not only for the benefit of their children (as a personal choice) and for the betterment of society (as a moral choice), and then choose not to immunise their children are being incredibly short sighted.

Short-sighted, how so? Millions of people from past generations have always "gone to the trouble" to do many things that seemed right at the time for the benefit of children and/or the betterment of society; but many things came and continue to come under scrutiny as society modernized/-es. It's been the case for centuries, no?

Morality is a trickier topic, and the main interest of my original post. I do feel a certain morality towards society, as indicated by many of the personal choices I make day-to-day. However at the end of the day - an d I've already admitted my myopia here, my primary responsibility (and therefore my moral obligation) rest with my children. I won't do what I personally perceive to be wrong to them, for the socially perceived better good.

Have a look at the number of people who died from diseases like tetanus and polio during pre-immunisation days before you make any claims about mild rises in disease resulting from populations who all of a sudden choose to stop immunising.

I have. It's tragic. Any death is tragic, really. But while we're discussing the numbers, let me also say that this is exactly what I meant when I said earlier that we all interpret the same data differently. Because when I examine the numbers I see that diseases were already experiencing a natural (if mild) decline when immunization became all the rage. Did people still die? Sure. It sucks all around, but .. people die. And need to die. Disease serves a purpose, however ugly a purpose that is.

I ask, then: if our moral obligation is to eradicate all disease, and/or to "take advantage" of the "miracles" that "make our lives healthier" ... what is our moral obligation in addressing issues that stem from compensating for the rise in population and resulting further taxing of resources?

We live in a society that has worked miracles to make our lives healthier. If you choose not to take advantage of that then that's your personal choice, but before too long we'll see parents being sued by their partners or getting court orders for immunisation over this issue, if in fact it hasn't already happened.

It's a possibility, and I agree - a sad one at that. It's an important conversation to have before bringing a child into the world together, for sure.