system
Given the following post, respond as if you're commenting on Reddit:
human
CMV: Vaccinations for children under the age of 18 should be compulsory.

Vaccinations have been a vital tool for reducing, sometimes eradicating, deadly diseases. They have been a huge part in increasing the expected life expectancy of people. Therefore, I find find it terrifying that some parents refuse to allow their children to be vaccinated. I feel that it is ok for someone over the age of 18 to say no, because they are old enough to make informed decisions. But if a parent refuses to vaccinate a child, this borders on child abuse. The parent is witholding something from the child which could potentially save their life. 

I am now going to attempt to rebut some common arguments against vaccinations. One of the arguments that is common is that vaccines cause autism. Firstly, the studies that suggested this have been proven to be psuedo-science. And secondly, if they did cause autism, surely having a child with autism is better than having no child. Another common argument is the argument of herd immunity. I feel this is invalid as the child only has to meet one infected person to gain the disease. And whilst the vaccination rates are high, if a few kids are unvaccinated, that is still too many children that could die.

So Reddit, change my view.
gpt
>I feel that it is ok for someone over the age of 18 to say no, because they are old enough to make informed decisions. But if a parent refuses to vaccinate a child, this borders on child abuse.

So an adult can make an informed decision about themselves, but the same information does not apply to their child? What is a parent if not someone whose responsibility it is to make informed decisions for their children?