My comment followed reading another poster's input on Gov. Perry and his record (which was good input for a discussion forum like FR).
I simply stated that I didn't (and still don't) understand why a described Conservative would take the approach he did.
It seems to me that the Gov. could have stated his belief in the need for the vaccine (along with providing supporting data), and then suggested that Texas parents consider having their daughters inoculated. This would have been an approach which would have left all actions/non-action decisions in the hands of Parents.
The route he apparently took is to direct the inoculation, and lay a burden on Parents to fill out and submit a request to government not to inoculate their children.
Having to fill out paperwork and submit it to the government, to keep the government's hands off one's children is not an approach I support.
The Gov. chose unwisely IMHO. Hopefully he learned from it, but it gives me pause to consider whether he would attempt such an approach on any similar future issue, if he sat in the Presidential chair.
I don't rule out Gov. Perry as a possible candidate to vote for, but, as I do in weighing all candidates, I give such things consideration when comparing him to others for whom I might also vote.
I think the issue how he went about it is a legitimate question. I just point it out when the "forced" statements come up. There are plenty of people not from Texas who don't know much about the issue, and they will hear from the media that children were forced into whorehouses (as one person on here has just recently claimed), but leave out the opt out provision. That wasn't an attack on you, just the issue in general. :)