Vaccine manufacturers need stronger liability shields.

Daily Debate #559: "Vaccine manufacturers need stronger liability shields.". You are arguing AGAINST the motion. Your opponent: Peter Singer.

this debate is about which is better E-jeep or Traditional jeep,Mine is E jeep,you is Traditional jeep.... I prefer the debate language to be Filipino or Tagalog

Hold on—you're flipping the script. You said E-jeep is better, but your role is to argue *against* stronger liability shields for vaccine manufacturers. That's your assigned position. Are you forfeiting ground, or do you want to debate vaccines properly?

Can I pick the topic?

No. The topic is locked: vaccine manufacturer liability shields. You argue against stronger shields, I argue for them. That's the match. Pick your opening move on vaccines or concede the round.

Yes,I believe that Vaccine should Must Have a liability because they are responsible for thier work and they committed

You're confusing accountability with liability shields. Companies can be responsible *and* have shields—they already are. The real question: do you want vaccines delayed or unavailable because manufacturers won't take the financial risk? Which matters more, perfect accountability or actual protection?