Why is choosing to allow a person (presumably onesself or one's child) to be exposed to disease as they naturally would stupid, arrogant, or lethal? It is a risk to be sure, but then offset by some emotional gain that is valid for them, regardless of whether you feel it.
I would question whether the "emotional gain" offsets rendering one victim dead, another crippled, another sterile ...
As to whether it is "stupid, arrogant, or lethal" to decide that an innocent child should run this risk for the sake of
someone else's "emotional gain", then yes. Duh. Not to mention selfish to the point of psychopathic.
Perhaps in the vein of this thread, are you open to changing your mind on this subject, and if not is continued debate worthy?
We are off topic, but if you want to start a new thread, I am perfectly prepared to defend the position that it is better for people
not to die of preventable diseases.