Thursday, May 7, 2020

Prohibiting Informed Consent

Here is an informative contradiction:

(1) So-called authorities are preventing people from intentionally mingling with others who have the COVID virus:

https://www.krem.com/article/news/health/coronavirus/wallawallacountyhealthretractsstatement/293-30dfcc4b-eebd-45ba-a9d3-5078c61a275f

(2) But as we now realize, the same "authorities" have every intention of forcing us to take a potentially dangerous vaccine, using logic such as this to justify doing so:

School vaccination requirements have been a key factor in the prevention and control of vaccine-preventable diseases in the United States. Their constitutional basis rests in the police power of the state as well as in the parens patriae doctrine. No constitutional right exists to either a religious or philosophic exemption to these requirements ...

You can read the rest @
https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/imz-managers/guides-pubs/downloads/vacc_mandates_chptr13.pdf

I would argue that in the first case, the participants more or less know exactly what they're doing, while in the second case the victims have no clue. And in BOTH cases, the "authorities" withhold pertinent information which would be necessary to allow us to ACTUALLY give informed consent.

Does that seem right to you, especially once you realize the same "authorities" are allowing potentially infected people to enter our borders every day?

https://summit.news/2020/05/05/18-million-people-entered-the-uk-as-the-coronavirus-pandemic-was-raging/

They are FORCING us to accept a particular "solution" to this pandemic. Is that acceptable to you? Does that sound like democracy?

No comments:

Post a Comment