Senator Jeff Tarte of North Carolina has co-authored a bill to remove the religious exemptions to vaccines, and recently addressed the public to explain his reasoning for drafting this bill. He states that only two religious groups in the world oppose vaccines: Christian Scientists and the Taliban. Since when did the Taliban become a "religious group"? What exactly was Mr. Tarte trying to imply by comparing those who used religious beliefs to exempt themselves from receiving vaccines in North Carolina to the Taliban?
During the National Vaccine Advisory Committee’s (NVAC) February meeting, American adults were put on notice by Big Brother that non-compliance with federal vaccine recommendations will not be tolerated. Public health officials have unveiled a new plan to launch a massive nationwide vaccination promotion campaign involving private business and non-profit organizations to pressure all adults to comply with the adult vaccination schedule approved by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
California State Senator Dr. Richard Pan is a co-sponsor of a new proposed California bill, SB 277, which seeks to remove the personal belief exemption to vaccinations in California. Who is Dr. Pan? He is an "industry insider" when it comes to the medical industry. He is a teaching faculty member at UC Davis Children's Hospital, and has served in many organizations that set medical policy and funding, such as the American Medical Association, the United Way, Sacramento First 5 Commission, Healthy Kids Healthy Future, Sacramento Health Improvement Project, and others. Dr. Pan was also a supporter of AB 499 which allows minor children as young as 12 years old to be vaccinated with the Gardasil vaccine without the knowledge or consent of their parents.
Children should not be vaccinated by any health care provider for any reason without the voluntary, informed consent of their parents. Period. HB 212, by Rep. Toni Rose ((D), D-110, Dallas) circumvents federal and state parental rights and consumer protection laws by allowing a minor child 14 years of age and older in the Texas Juvenile Justice System to consent to vaccination on their own without their parent. It also allows for a health care provider to consent to vaccination for the child if a parent has previously consented to any medical treatment not specific to vaccination. Unless the health care provider has “actual knowledge” that a parent has refused to give consent for a particular vaccine in the past, the doctor only has to make a “reasonable” attempt to contact the parent before he or she can shift the decision making to a minor child and themselves. The bill also puts the responsibility on the minor child to reveal personal and family vaccine reaction and medical history to the vaccine administrator while protecting the vaccine administrator from liability for any harm caused by vaccinating a child without parental consent.
Constitutional attorney Jonathan Emord has written an excellent commentary about current legislative efforts to remove vaccine exemptions, and increase forced vaccinations against people's wills. Emord writes: "The current rush to revoke laws allowing conscientious dissent from compulsory vaccination, including encumbering or revoking grounds based on religious or medical grounds, are a return to a very ugly era of elitism, one of gross intrusion into rights of personal autonomy and liberty that left us only a few decades ago." Emord reminds us that it was not that long ago when "eugenics" was a popular "scientific fact" accepted by the majority in our society, and used to pass state laws forcing sterilization of people considered "genetically unfit" for society.
Health Impact Editor Comments
Do not be discouraged by this report just released by the National Vaccine Information Center! Citizens across the U.S. are taking action to oppose these bills, and there have been some recent victories as bills in Oregon and Washington to expand medical tyranny regarding forced vaccines have been defeated (for now)!
More than 1.2 million people in the United States are infected with HIV but government officials do not ban HIV infected children and adults from attending school, receiving medical care, being employed, or otherwise participating in society. In fact, there are anti-discrimination laws that guarantee civil rights protections for Americans infected with HIV or living with AIDS. In 2012, public health officials reported that about two million people in America are infected with chlamydia, tuberculosis, syphilis and gonorrhea, and they estimate another three million people are infected with hepatitis C. Like those with HIV or AIDS, these citizens are not targeted for discrimination and blocked from getting a public education, being employed or moving freely in society. But in 2015 after a handful of measles cases were identified at Disneyland, suddenly Americans are being asked to surrender civil liberties. Healthy children whose only "crime" is that their parents have chosen to refuse toxic vaccines are suddenly at risk for being denied an education in America and other freedoms granted to other citizens. How did a handful of measles cases at Disneyland turn into a full-scale assault on civil and human rights in America?
There is a national push to remove vaccine exemptions for school-aged children, and new laws and regulations are being proposed all across the U.S. for mandatory vaccinations. What are the legal challenges to now legislating mandatory vaccinations to a population that no longer has the right to legal redress against the manufacturer of potentially faulty vaccines that are known to maim and kill people? Is it Constitutional to remove the right to informed consent, and the right to refuse such a product if it is administered by force? Mary Holland, a research scholar and professor at NYU School of Law, addresses that question.
The Guardian is reporting that health officials in Pakistan are arresting and throwing into jail hundreds of parents who refuse to allow their children to receive the oral polio vaccine. These health officials are forcing children to receive the vaccine at gunpoint. Just to emphasize the point here, these are parents of children who are being rounded up and thrown into jail in Pakistan. Not terrorists, not murders, not thieves, but parents who do not want their children to receive the polio vaccine. Could we see armed health officials roaming the streets of cities in the U.S. forcing children to be vaccinated against the wishes of their parents at gunpoint? The rationale and the legal framework for such actions is actually already in place to do just that.
When one looks at the current FIVE new bills being proposed in Illinois to mandate and increase vaccinations for children, one has to wonder who is really profiting from these proposed new laws?? If you live in Illinois, do you believe that you need a new law in your state to protect DENTISTS from any liability due to injuries resulting from vaccines when they give them away FREE in public clinics?