The Real Villain Regarding Vaccines

by | Aug 27, 2022 | Regulation

If Cruz really wants parents, and all Americans, to have freedom of choice, he should call for the abolition of the FDA.

Sen. Ted Cruz is upset with the Muppets. Last year, when Big Bird announced that he had been vaccinated, Cruz responded by calling it “government propaganda.” More recently, when Elmo announced that he too had been vaccinated, Cruz tweeted, “You have Elmo aggressively advocate for vaccinating children UNDER 5. But you cite ZERO scientific evidence for this.” In criticizing the Muppets, Cruz is ignoring the real villain regarding vaccines.

In a letter to the administrator of the Food and Drug Administration prior to Elmo’s announcement, Cruz wrote,

Before the FDA approves an Emergency Use Authorization for a children’s vaccine, parents should be able to see the data and paperwork they would use to justify this decision. This is the least the FDA can do for families in Texas and across the country so parents can make the best decisions for their children.

Cruz makes it appear that he wants parents to have freedom of choice in regard having their children vaccinated. But appearances can be deceiving.

Freedom of choice means that one can select an alternative without coercion being involved. This is not what Cruz is advocating. Cruz wants parents to be able to choose to have their children vaccinated or not, but only after the FDA gives them permission to act on such a choice. Until the FDA gives its approval, it is illegal to take any medicine, including a vaccine. Until the FDA gives its approval, individuals are forced to abstain from taking the drugs that they would choose. Until the FDA gives permission, individuals must abstain from being vaccinated.

Cruz hasn’t expressed any disagreement with the FDA’s power to control what we can legally ingest. Cruz has said nothing to support our freedom to take medicines and consumer food without first obtaining the government’s permission. His silence on this issue speaks volumes.

If a robber sticks a gun in your face and demands, “Your wallet or your life,” he is not leaving you free to choose. He has used coercion to eliminate one alternative from consideration—keeping both your wallet and your life. Cruz’s position on freedom of choice is akin to the robber’s.

Absent the FDA’s permission, parents have no choice. A parent who has a child vaccinated is breaking the law. And when people break the law, they are thrown in jail, have their property seized, or both. So long as the FDA has a stranglehold on what we can legally ingest, no individual, including parents, has a choice.

If Cruz really wants parents, and all Americans, to have freedom of choice, he should call for the abolition of the FDA. Americans should be free to ingest whatever they choose without the government issuing threats. The FDA, not the Muppets, is the real villain regarding vaccines.

Brian Phillips is the founder of the Texas Institute for Property Rights. Brian has been defending property rights for nearly thirty years. He played a key role in defeating zoning in Houston, Texas, and in Hobbs, New Mexico. He is the author of three books: Individual Rights and Government Wrongs, The Innovator Versus the Collective, and Principles and Property Rights. Visit his website at texasipr.com.

The views expressed above represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors and publishers of Capitalism Magazine. Capitalism Magazine sometimes publishes articles we disagree with because we think the article provides information, or a contrasting point of view, that may be of value to our readers.

Related articles

Regulations are Making Housing Unaffordable

Regulations are Making Housing Unaffordable

Fox News reports that the International Code Council, an organization that develops model building code policies, is finalizing its codes for 2024. Critics correctly argue that the new codes are a “backdoor climate initiative” and will add to the cost of new housing....

National Labor Relations Act and Compulsory Unionism

National Labor Relations Act and Compulsory Unionism

Whether a worker wants union representation ought to be an individual decision. The federal and state laws that turn it into a collective decision should never have been passed and after they were passed, should have been declared unconstitutional.

No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.

Pin It on Pinterest