Jacobs sidesteps the issue

Apparently, State Senator Gilda Jacobs missed my point. Or perhaps, she got my point but ignored it in hopes of avoiding the real issue.

First, Jacobs outlines evidence that supports vaccinating children against HPV. My letter never disputed this evidence. The vaccination appears to be an effective method to reduce the incidences of cervical cancer and all parents should seriously consider vaccinating their daughters.

From there, Jacobs attacks the argument that claims the vaccine is a tacit approval for underage sex. Again, my letter never mentioned this red herring. In fact, I agree with Jacobs that this argument is “specious and illogical.”

The only issue mentioned in my letter and the one that Jacobs failed to address was the abuse of government power. Her claim that parental rights are not infringed because of the opt-out provision is false. By mandating that parents must opt-out, the government becomes guilty of infringement because it asserts control over a right that is inherent to the parents. If Jacobs respected this, she would leave us alone to opt-in.

Contrary to arguments offered by her and another writer, the good intentions of this proposed legislation are irrelevant. The first role of government is to protect our rights, not hijack them. To her credit, Jacob provides the framework for respecting these rights in the final sentence of her letter: “For the safety of an entire generation of young women, I would urge all parents to provide them that protection.”

Urge - yes. Mandate – no.

[Letter to the Editor - Farmington Observer. Published 02/01/2007.]