And so you are calling for a War on Tobacco, much like the War on Drugs - at least that's what it sounds like. How many billions of dollars (euros, yen, pick yer type o'cash) shall the world spend on such a war only to end up creating Tobacco Cartels (just like the Drug Cartels, only more so!) and get no where quickly - oh, except MORE people smoking because it's outlawed and reversing the trend of the last 20 years or so (at least in the States, iirc)

Personally, I'm all for vaccines that block/stop/eradicate major diseases and (possibly) some cancers. If you don't want your children vaccinated, fine - but your insurance should then have the right to not cover your childen if/when they contract polio, whooping cough, measles, mumps, etc. And no, that's not advocating forced immunizations - it's expecting the ADULTS to accept the consequences of their decisions - and I'll even state now that no, the children don't deserve these diseases, but hey! talk to your parents. They're the ones who made that (un)informed decision.

>>> You keep stating that it's less invasive but I don't think that's the case. Come on - which do you think is going to work better - give a child a vaccine to prevent cancer (or smallpox or any of the zillion things wiped out by vaccines) or to criminalize cigarettes?
>
>Exactly. It's more successful/more acceptable to jab a kid or force a bishop to offer contraception against his beliefs than to control a poison. The same people fiercely defending their own right to access poison, often are equally fierce in denying others the right to live by their beliefs or insisting that kids should be jabbed whether mom likes it or not. Do as I say, not as I do?