LU, becasue there is only one valid opinion on the matter. That one opinion just happens to be shared by virtually every pediatrician, GP, and vaccine researcher on the planet.
But, lets say there is room for personal choice here. So would anyone here who is a parent or intends to be one, make the choice not to vaccinate their child, and then allow their child to use a park, a pool, a school, a library, a camp, a playground? Because if there is even one immunosuppressed or immunodeficient kid there who can’t get vaccinated even if they want to, because of their condition, that child’s life will be endangered. Threatened, by your choice.
So, aside from all other issues, settled science, logic, statistics, or refusing to believe disproven and criminally prosecuted hoaxes, or the presumptions of a hollywood personality who wants to sell her books, Who is prepared to endanger someone else’s child? Who is prepared to take responsibility for a child’s death?
Not me.
A final thought. Many of us make the argument in the pro choice vs pro life debate that a potential life must be preserved, and that the rationale to end that potential life is in almost all cases false.
If one is pro life, does it not make sense to preserve actual life kal vechomer even more so than potential life? Vaccinating does so. Your choice to vaccinate your child preserves the life of another as I indicated above.
Choose life.