The topic that most interests me is forced immunizations on college students. When I went to high school in California, a new law was being implemented concerning immunizations. Before the summer of 2016, students could refuse immunizations on the grounds of personal or religious reasons. The new law ended this policy, and now only medical waivers are suitable exemptions. Specifically at UD, the MMR and meningococcal vaccine are required. I think the issue of the immunization controversy is interesting because although I believe immunizations are necessary for public health and should be enforceable, those who disagree for religious or other personal reasons do have a valid argument. I’d like to explore this issue and focus on the necessity of immunizations and why their benefits justify their necessitation, with a focus on the benefits of the immunizations required at UD. Questions I’d like to explore are: to what extent can a college in a democratic nation with the freedom of religion enforce immunizations on those who disagree because of their religion? do the benefits of immunizations for the public health and security of the nation outweigh the concerns of the few who are against them? what are the advantages of immunizations? what legal rights do those against immunizations have?
Another topic I’d like to consider is the issue of guns on college campuses. There is a growing number of colleges that allow guns. Eight states allow guns at colleges, and 24 others allow the individual colleges in their state to decide. A study done by Johns Hopkins University in 2016 determined that campus carry laws are “unlikely to deter rampage shooters and may in fact lead to more injuries and deaths.” Some argue that guns make the public safer, but as demonstrated by the Johns Hopkins study, it can also be argued that guns lead to increased violence. Others believe that prohibiting guns on campus would be an infringement on the second amendment right to bear arms. Although I don’t believe that guns should be permitted at college, those who argue for the protection of the second amendment do have a sound point. Questions I would consider are: to what extent can a college, established within a nation that has the right to bear arms, restrict that right? what are the dangers of allowing guns to be carried on campuses?
The third topic I would consider is the subject of internet privacy. With the recent repeal of certain internet privacy rules, broadband companies can now use the sensitive data (i.e. browsing history, geolocation, and medical and financial information) of their customers without permission. Particularly with college students who use technology extensively, internet privacy is extremely important. I think internet privacy for college students would be a valuable issue to explore because internet privacy is esteemed by the public but is sometimes relinquished for the benefit of businesses. Questions I would pursue are: to what extent can college students expect their online actions to be private when there is no written national amendment concerning internet privacy? what are the benefits of relinquishing online privacy? what is currently private online for college students?