Going back to 1986, the situation at the time was a declaration of urgency by the vaccination industry that threatened to discontinue their production (and research capabilities) unless there was some kind of immunity from lawsuits. The urgency was further justified by the science at that time that vaccines are especially effective as controlling epidemics when applied to large populations of healthy people. The only ruling available to government is a permanent one that basically says from date forward to infinity vaccines are an essential part of life on earth so that any risks involved must be accepted.
The constitution was based on a population that accepted the concepts of individual independence. The current government is of a population that accepts a concept of granted or not-yet revoked privileges based on merit and trust. We reconcile the problem by operating a government for show that follows the canon set out by the constitution, and a government for real that operates largely independently of democratic control.
This interpretation presents a problem in that the first amendment is a single statement that contradicts itself. People have a right to attempt to persuade others, while the others have a right to never be persuaded.
A theme in my mind when I write about government is what appears to be a belief in some magical quality of our constitution that is assuring our continued success. Somehow our founding fathers and early pioneers in the government stumbled upon some supernatural essence that guarantees our success. The constitution has an aura…