“Liberty is always dangerous, but it is the safest thing we have.” – Harry Emerson Fosdick, in Robert B. Fox, ed., Our Freedom – Our Liberty, 81.
Vaccination is one of the most contentious issues of our time. We could argue the efficacy – or demonstrable lack thereof – of vaccines all day long. However, that is not the key issue. In fact, it’s wholly irrelevant. The real issue is free will. Said differently, the question at hand is this: Does the government or the community have a right to force you to be vaccinated against your will? That is the paramount question our society must decide.
On the face of it, it seems obvious that no government or majority of citizens should ever be allowed to force you to let a needle pierce your skin and inject chemicals and viruses into your body. People don’t think about it in those terms, but that is the reality of what we’re discussing. We are talking about whether society has a right to force you to inject foreign substances into your body. It seems preposterous that any sane and just person would agree that the community has authority over your body to such a degree that they can force you, via the police power of the state, to inject yourself with viruses and chemicals. Yet that is precisely what the pro-vaccine lobby is proposing.
You must ask yourself what you support more – individual free will or state coercion. If the state, or the majority of citizens represented by the state, has the authority and power to force you to inject yourself with risky substances – or any substances at all no matter their benefit or efficacy – what can’t they do? Remember, the cry for mandatory vaccination has behind it the rationale that it is “for the public good” and for the “safety of the community.” Using this same rationale, what else can you be forced to do if the state, or your neighbors, deem it in the community’s best interests?
If the state can force you to inject a needle into your body in the name of “health” and “public safety,” then can they also force you to eat foods deemed “healthy”? After all, obesity is a major problem and a healthy society is surely better than an out-of-shape one. If society can force you to introduce polio and small pox into your body for the sake of “health,” can they likewise force you to be microchipped for the easier detection of criminals and the “safety” of society? If they can tell you that you must inject a flu virus into yourself of your children or else be denied public services, employment, and the rights of citizens, can they also require you to submit your DNA to a national database? Honestly, what can’t they do if they can legitimately force you to inject live viruses and man-made chemicals into your body via injection?
If you have never pondered the totalitarian implications of this train of thought, it’s high time to begin. The issue is not health. It is not public safety. It is not the well-being of society. It is not the efficacy of vaccines. The issue is Freedom, free will, individual Liberty, separation of powers, and constitutional authority. We are talking about the difference between majoritarian democracy and constitutional republicanism with its rule of law.
Arguments like “it’s for the public good” or “it’s for national security” don’t pass the scratch test for constitutionality and justice. For millennia, tyrants have used the cry “for the public good” to justify illegality, self-serving policies, war, oppression, persecution, and genocide. When people say that we must force people to be vaccinated against their will “for public safety,” it might be well to remember what Benjamin Franklin said. That wise Founding Father warned:
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety” (Franklin, January, 1775).
Those who would force you and your family to be vaccinated are not your friends. They are enemies to the Republic! They are enemies to the Constitution. They are enemies to the Declaration of Independence. They are enemies to the high-minded principles of the American Revolution. They are enemies to George Washington and Thomas Jefferson. They are enemies to the basic concept of free will and personal Freedom.
America was founded on the Christian concept of individual free will and personal accountability. This noble thought was codified in our official documents and throughout our law code. The American People was made for Freedom. From our forefathers’ mouths gushed timeless declarations such as:
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed.”
We once understood that the People is the source of all political power and that the government is merely its agent to secure its God-given rights. Since government receives 100% of its power from individuals, and an individual cannot delegate power he does not inherently possess, the government, then, cannot assume such powers. When it does, it becomes tyrannical and has violated the very purpose of its creation.
Let’s explore this principle further. If I, as an individual, do not have the right nor authority to go into your home and forcibly inject substances into your body, then I do not have the authority to empower government to do this on my behalf.
Do you understand this? This is the core concept of Americanism! If you do not understand and thoroughly believe this concept, I submit that you are not a true American and that you lack the spirit of our great People.
Again, I cannot give the government power I do not possess. This principle does not magically change if more people are involved. Extra rights and powers are not suddenly bestowed when a majority is involved. We are not a democracy. Our system is based on rule of law. The law protects the one just as it protects the majority. Neither a minority nor a majority – no matter how large and powerful – can justly strip a single soul of his rights.
If an individual does not have a right or power, the community does not either. And since I cannot justifiably force my neighbor to inject substances into his body against his will, then the neighborhood also does not have that right. Government gets all of its power from the People, and “the People” is nothing but an aggregate of individuals. Thus, government’s reach can only go so far as an individual’s. Thank Heaven that individuals, and therefore governments, do not have a right to reach into your life and force you to live as they see fit!
Taking a leaf from Hans Verlan Andersen, let’s discuss the nature of Freedom. Andersen explained that Freedom consists of the following elements: Life, Liberty, Property, and Knowledge. In order to properly enjoy Freedom, one must have power over his own life, including the power to make choices and stand accountable for them. He has a right to defend his body – that is, his life – against assault, injury, and destruction. Naturally, Liberty, or the “absence of coercion,” is indispensable. Furthermore, in order to be a truly free agent and a steward over his own life, he must have the right to control, possess, and manage private property. And, finally, having a knowledge of the law and one’s duties and rights is necessary to acting intelligently and independently (see Hans Verlan Andersen, Many Are Called But Few Are Chosen, chapter 2).
In the case of compulsory vaccination, three of the elements of Freedom are violated by default. First, the control over one’s own life and body is violated when we are forced to inject needles into our skin. If “my body, my choice” is a valid argument, then it must be a valid argument in the case of vaccination. No one but you has a right to control your body. Next, mandatory vaccination obviously violates Liberty because it is a coercive measure that violates your free will and choice. Third, if your body can be considered your property, then forced vaccination violates your property.
I must take an aside and say that in certain situations I believe that what a person puts into his body can and should be regulated for the legitimate safety of others. To wit, drunk drivers kill tens of thousands of innocent and unsuspecting people every year. Thousands more are killed by drunk people or because of alcohol poisoning or related incidents. Some 88,000 people die annually because of alcohol. This is to say nothing of the unseen damage done to marriages and families and the cycles of criminality, depression, therapy, divorce, and abuse that are caused. The damage done to society by alcohol – as well as drugs, both illicit and prescription – is incalculable. Because of the damage begin inflicted upon it by the choices of others, I believe society has a right to defend itself by banning harmful substances.
Thomas Jefferson defined “rightful liberty” thus:
“[R]ightful liberty is unobstructed action according to our will, within the limits drawn around us by the equal rights of others. I do not add ‘within the limits of the law’; because law is often but the tyrant’s will, and always so when it violates the right of an individual” (Thomas Jefferson to Isaac Tiffany, April 4, 1819).
One’s Liberty is only rightful and, thus, protected, when it does violated the equal rights of others. The case can easily be made that a person high on drugs or drunk from alcohol is a danger to the right of life of innocent bystanders. I absolutely support this line of reasoning when it is demonstrably proven that a substance or action violates others’ rights or does perceivable damage to the community.
That being said, this reasoning does not easily extend to vaccines. Some have made a similar argument that because unvaccinated people get sick more often (or so they claim), they pose a threat to the health and well-being of the community. Let’s examine whether this is really the case. First of all, it is a myth that unvaccinated people carry more disease. I won’t dive into here, but suffice it to say that nearly all credible studies have conclusively proven that vaccinated people are more likely to contract the diseases they have ostensibly been vaccinated against and that unvaccinated people are healthier. Consistently some 90% of whooping cough victims, for instance, had previously been vaccinated for whooping cough, thus exploding the idea that vaccines are safe and effective.
What’s more, vaccine proponents seem to want it both ways. On the one hand, they claim that vaccines are safe and effective. Yet, on the other hand they act like they are totally helpless in the face of a scary unvaccinated individual. If vaccines truly work, why are vaccinated people so scared? If vaccines are so magically wonderful, then why do school districts persecute parents who choose to exercise their right to not vaccinate their children?
Much of this hysteria comes back to the ludicrous concept of herd immunity. The concept states that in order for vaccines to work, everyone must be vaccinated. Even one unvaccinated person, they claim, lowers the collective protection of vaccines. You don’t need a degree in medicine to realize how preposterous the logic of this thought is! The idea has been totally discredited, yet it lingers because of the mass brainwashing campaign carried out by the controlled media, Hollywood, and compromised medical establishment.
In addition, there is another concern – some of us do not like to play Russian roulette with our health. Health does not come in a needle. Health largely comes from diet and hygiene. Yet, the medical establishment wants us to believe needles, chemicals, and synthetic drugs give us health. They want us to believe that cocktails of live viruses, antibiotics, formaldehyde, aluminum, mercury, aborted fetal tissue, male foreskins, and other chemicals, is acceptable to inject into our bodies. If you are skeptical that the list of horrible things I just mentioned are found in vaccines, do yourself a favor and obliterate your ignorance by looking it up.
I tend to think “an apple a day keeps the doctor away” is a trustier philosophy than having doctors guess which strand of flu will be prevalent this year and inject that virus into me with their fingers crossed that its shady ingredients like thimerosal won’t give me a negative reaction. I tend to also agree with Thomas Jefferson who said: “Was the government to prescribe to us our medicine and diet, our bodies would be in such keeping as our souls are now” (Jefferson, Notes on the State of Virginia, 1787). But I guess I’m just old-fashioned!
In all seriousness, in a free society no one should have any objections to a person wanting to exercise his or her God-given right to care for their health in a manner pleasing to them. You might not like the Amish philosophy of living without modern technology, but you must allow them to live how they please. The same applies to every peaceable group or individual. No one should be forced to conform to the community’s health practices. That is tyranny in its vilest form.
We also need to disabuse ourselves of the notion that children belong to the community. They Do Not. Children belong exclusively to their parents. Parents, not the community or government or local school district, have the sole right to care for their children. If parents exercise their sacred parental rights to not vaccinate their children, for whatever reason they choose, who are we to deny them their rights? It is a symptom that we have been horribly indoctrinated when we believe that we, the collective community, have a right to dictate how parents raise their children. We do not have any such authority over our fellow citizens or their children.
I will note one final objection. In America, we have something called religious Freedom. Religious Freedom has been called the “First Freedom.” It was the foundation of all our other Liberties. If a person believes their religion or life’s philosophy does not permit them to engage in modern medial practices, who are we to force them to do that which violates their conscience? Or if a religion boasts a superior plan of natural medicine and faith, who are we to extinguish their beliefs?
There are numerous reasons why a person might choose not to vaccinate. In the end, their reason doesn’t matter. What matters is that they have a right – a constitutionally-protected, constitutionally-guaranteed right – to object to vaccines. Yes, you have a sacred right to reject the tyrannical concept of forced, mandatory vaccination. No one – no community, no government, no majority – has the authority to force you to inject yourself with anything, let alone chemicals and live viruses. Please let this concept sink in. It is vital to our Freedom.
To reiterate what I have said multiple times thus far: Conscientious objection to mandatory vaccination does not depend upon whether vaccines are “safe and effective.” We could cite vaccine experts like Dr. Sheri Tenpenny, Dr. Suzanne Humphries, and Neil Z. Miller, and even appeal to the CDC’s own numbers and charts, to prove the appalling truth about vaccines. However, that is fairly irrelevant. The only issue that matters is your individual right to object.
Thank God that in America we have a Constitution which guarantees our right to direct our own lives as we see fit! Thank God for our Freedom! Thank the Lord for the knowledge that the opinions and wishes of the majority do not supersede and cancel out our individual Liberties! I vehemently oppose mandatory vaccination because the very concept insults my conscience. It is an affront to the classic American concepts of Freedom, justice, and individualism. It is nothing by Soviet-style tyranny.
Every true American, every lover of Liberty, every just soul, must oppose mandatory vaccination at all costs. If we allow government to force us to inject viruses and chemicals into our bodies (“my body, my choice” be damned), then we open the door to totalitarianism like we’ve never seen before. If the government or community can force you to vaccinate yourself or your children, then there is literally nothing they can’t force you to do.
And if the tyrants in society can deny you public services for exercising your right not to vaccinate, then we are no better than Red China with their sinister “social credit” scheme. Think of the door we are kicking wide open when we demand, against all reason and justice, that people inject themselves with vaccines to make us feel “safe.” I close by repeating Benjamin Franklin’s warning. Ponder it and let it sink deep into your soul. And for the love of all that’s holy, oppose mandatory vaccination:
“They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety.”
Zack Strong,
August 9, 2019.