Persuasive argument should vaccination be mandatory or voluntary Assignment

Persuasive argument should vaccination be mandatory or voluntary - Assignment Example It should be noted that according to the laws of many countries, vaccination is entirely voluntary preventive measure, so the rejection of vaccination is the completely personal choice. It is how it looks â€Å"on paper†. Do not forget that the vaccine is a foreign protein, so its introduction into the human body, especially for a small child, causes the â€Å"over-voltage† of the immune system (Buchwald 117). As a result, vaccination without the analysis of the initial state of immunity may play a decisive role in the appearing of immunological and immune diseases in the future. Simply said, if the organism is weakened for some reasons, and we add more â€Å"problems† - that would not lead to good results. In addition, I would like to remind that the man who had endured an infectious disease receives â€Å"lifetime† insurance from her in the future, while most vaccines provide only temporary immunity. Ideally, the vaccination requires to conduct immunodiagnostic before it, but public institutions, received the order â€Å"from above† – make mass vaccination of children - do not only carry out a preliminary survey, but can use vaccine without the parental permission. Such a formal approach to immunization reduces all the gains of preventive medicine in this area. According to human rights defenders, mandatory compulsory vaccination process is contrary to the freedom of choice. The fact that doctors are forced to do something with the child is already causing the internal protest. Opponents of the voluntary vaccination oppose this for favour of mandatory vaccinations: unvaccinated person presents a danger to the health of others, thereby already infringing their rights. It turns out that the problem of compulsory vaccinations is a particular case of a large ethical problem: how much we can restrict the freedom of the individual for the purpose to make a person not to threat to society. The essence of problem is that children (of the younger

Conception of the Citizen in Book Three of Politics Essay

Conception of the Citizen in Book Three of Politics - Essay Example His area of study remains mostly the Greek states but he also includes as a part of his study the states that were in contact with Greece at that point of time. Aristotle was a part of ancient Greece and many of his worldviews may appear to be outdated and outmoded to any contemporary observer. However, the value of his contributions lies in the fact that they enabled a discussion of the relative worth of different modes of government. This played a great role in shaping future conceptions of governments and the state. The role of the citizen within such structures is also something that Aristotle discussed at length in his book. The importance of such discussions in the contemporary world lies in the fact that they enable the modern political commentator to be aware of the origins of democracy, which is the most favored form of government in today’s world. A deep understanding of the origins of this form of government and the earliest objections to it and the earliest appreci ations of it is necessary for the smooth working of democracies in today’s world. Aristotle’s understanding of these political structures and his meticulous research into the roots of the problems that he discusses reveals an urge to understand the problems of the Greek states and press for a solution. This displays an objective and non-mercenary approach to the problem of politics, something which may again serve as a model for present-day commentators. The concept of the role of the citizen in a state is what is discussed at length in Book three of Aristotle’s work, Politics. This paper shall seek to analyze the concept as it is put forward by Aristotle. The analysis in this paper shall also seek to understand the reasons that Aristotle may have in conceptualizing the citizen in the way that he does. The class leanings and the misogyny in the conceptions of the citizen that Aristotle holds shall be made clear in this paper. An attempt shall be made to look at the conditions in ancient Greece that made it necessary and in a certain sense, inevitable for Aristotle to hold the views that he does in Book three of Politics. The arguments that shall be used in this paper shall employ modern theoretical frameworks such as feminism and Marxism as well, for the analysis of Aristotle. Aristotle’s conception of the citizen depends greatly upon the kind of state that a person lived in. in certain cases, he argues that the very question of a person’s citizenship had to be questioned for it to be determined eventually whether he or she was a citizen or not. He details the characteristic of a democracy, an oligarchy and a monarchy and the merits and demerits of each, according to the role that the citizen was expected to play in each of these forms of government. Who would be considered to be a citizen and who would not, would also depend heavily upon the character of the government, according to Aristotle. Aristotle thus, destabilized th e notion of geographical citizenship. According to this notion, a person would be considered to be a citizen of a particular place as long as that person would be present within the geographical boundaries of that state. By doing so, Aristotle makes the status of citizenship extremely contingent upon the needs of the state and also upon the responsibilities and duties of the citizen towards the state. In this