You and I obviously disagree about the meaning of "forced" and "mandatory". To me these aren't difficult words to understand, but in the case of Guardasil and the Perry E.O., they are words that have been misapplied by Perry's detracters.
Carry on, if you must. If you want to maintain that view, you're going to wind up arguing with nearly every Texan you meet, about this issue.
What Perry did in the Gardasil episode wasn't just misguided, it was wholly un-American on its face. That's why the people of Texas erupted in anger about it.
You say that he's not your candidate, but you're defending him harder than most of his acknowledged supporters on this site. You might as well just admit that he's your guy.
Perry is not my guy yet, although I find alot to like about him. If he gets in the race, I would expect him to move quickly to the first tier. I’ll probably make a decision about my choice after Labor Day.
Defending Perry’s E.O. is a losing proposition, opt-in always was the way to go with a non-communicable disease. Debating the matter in the legislature would have been preferable to Perry’s hamhanded approach. It’s one of at least three contentious issues that Perry must address, the highest flying red flags. The TTC and immigation are the other two, IMO. I don’t defend the E.O. as I’ve made clear. I’ve only been interested in pointing out the options available to parents at the time.
By acknowledging that the opt-out provisions exist, the “forced vaccination” and “mandatory” arguments lose their meaning and ring hollow , which has always been my main point.
As far as arguing with Texans, well, I don’t mind doing that from time to time.