So why didn't Michele or Sarah do anything about the mandatory vaccinations required by each of their states for Hep-B when they were in state government? Hep-B is behaviorally obtained, primarily through sex and IV drug use, yet both Alaska and Minnesota mandate these vaccinations for infants and toddlers. If they are so adamantly against forcing vaccinations for sexually transmitted diseases, why didn't they say anything about that when they could have affected that situation.
For them to ignore that vaccination mandate and focus on this one smacks of crass political posturing, not true concern based on conservative principles.
When my son was freshly born, the hospital wanted to give him a vaccination for Hepatitis B. It required a strong stand on my part to dissuade them from doing it. But in the end, I found out I still had a free choice. When the state requires that vaccines be received, that choice no longer exists.
In other words, it was a mandatory vaccine with an opt-out, although apparently a more difficult opt-out to exercise than the Texas one. It was actually easier for parents to choose not to vaccinate their daughters against HPV than it was for you to choose not to vaccinate your child against Hep-B.
Somebody should read the WHO sponsored study on HPV. Turns out not all the vectors are known, but for the major HPV virus varieties SEX is the major, but not exclusive, vector. They simply haven’t studied all the different HPV variants yet ~ but they will get “a round to it” I am sure http://www.zazzle.com/a_round_tuit_magnet-147352616101335538
The point of my post was to cite the moral factor as a reason why people oppose mandatory vaccination for diseases like Hep-B, HIV, or HPV, while not opposing vaccines for diseases like mumps, rubella, measles, or pertussis.