Posted on 07/07/2020 2:43:41 PM PDT by ransomnote
Who owns your body?
A growing number of legislators in South Dakota believe you do.
One hundred and fifteen years ago this month, the US Supreme Court made a decision that because there was a deadly smallpox epidemic, the City of Cambridge, Massachusetts was allowed to charge a pastor five dollars to opt out of a city wide vaccine mandate. The law didn't apply to children.
That precedent has been the basis for the mandate of dozens of now liability-free vaccines for children and adults, where no epidemic (or even one case) exists, at the costs of thousands, or even hundred of thousands, per year to opt out. It is even the basis on which the Supreme Court ruled that women can be force sterilized, for the good of themselves and society, of course.
Bad precedent, plus a century, has resulted in the legalization of actual war crimes.
The current vaccine mandate enforcement drive by Merck and Friends has driven our community, and those who never questioned vaccines before now, back to a basic question at hand here.
WHO OWNS YOUR BODY?
The knee jerk reaction , and normal human response for Americans is, "I do."
But that is not what most governments believes. Even under our Constitution of individual liberties, governments strive to control even your medical choices, and if they can't, they will find a reason to justify it, and the means to carry out their will.
In 21st century America, there are no deadly epidemics of communicable disease, despite the fact that we are subject to constant fear campaigns that one is coming. In fact no such event has happened in my lifetime. If the fear mongers want to scare you into fearing deadly epidemics, they have to go back more than a hundred years. So the circumstances for the justification of the government's actions in Jacobson v. Massachusetts exist only in the history books.
So in this age of medical tech, including vaccines, that most people want, why do mandates still exist? And if Jacobson can justify the sexual mutilation of women, then what else can it justify as medical technology progresses over the next century and beyond?
What new medical interventions and body tech will The Gates Foundation invent and convince (bribe) governments and NGOs to force people into utilizing? And where will the battle to end coerced "medical care" begin.
I submit to you that it has begun in South Dakota. Today.
South Dakota House Majority Leader, Representative Lee Qualm (R), has introduced HB 1235 An Act to Revise Provisions Regarding Immunizations.
Going from one extreme to another is not good
They’re cheating. They want people to move there
I like their current governor a lot. that’s all i know. she’s pretty too :)!
Great news! A State that understands the Constitution
Oh, like defending the Constitutional rights of people? If they can mandate you take something, they can mandate anything.
I guess I know where to run from The Gretch, but the cold is worse than Michigan’s
Yes on all counts!
Yes, but it’s a dry -45F.
When I was a child, there were 4 mandated vaccines total.
Today I know there are more than 60 and there is no oversight as to quality control nor serious consistent ongoing studies of side effects.
The pharma groups are left to their own devices and policies, they are left to an honor system, and they are not liable. This is a recipe for disaster.
And we are there.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8zI5MHTuF4
Nah, this will not lead to higher autoimmunity issues or side effects..../s
“Going from one extreme to another is not good”
The mandate is the issue.
The thinking is, if you want the vaccine, get it. If another chooses not to get it, you are already protected, whats the problem?
The false argument about “ but you will spread it” doesnt hold if you get vaccinated.
Also, if safe living can be mandated from on high then ban alcohol, tobacco and firearms. Yeah thats a bad idea too.
Freedom. Liberty.
Leave me alone. Ill leave you alone.
P
No cold is worse than Michigan’s.
Like Marxists, they claim it's because it's the "sensible thing to do" - they help erode the power of the Constitution and Bill of Rights even as they decry that the Left is doing the same thing.
This is a good thing.
Like the UP on Lake Superior. Brrrr
Good for S. Dakota. I am for informed consent. A parent should be able to read the pros and cons-do research and decide on the merits regarding treatment for their child.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.