You May Not Agree, But Let's Agree To Disagree.

 

You May Not Agree, But Let’s Agree To Disagree.

Australia’s national statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research, confirms no person should be subject to coercion, or pressure in deciding whether to participate in clinical trials. It is important that one never feels forced to take part in a trial. 

The Australian Human Right Commission Act 1986 article 7…no one shall be subjected without his/her free consent to medical or scientific experimentation. 

The declaration of Helsinki 1964 by the World Medical Association is a statement of ethical principles for medical research involving humans. Under the heading “Informed Consent” it acknowledges; “participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent, as subjects in medical research, must be voluntary”.

Article 23 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirm the right of people to work and not be forced to choose between the ability to work and the right not to be subject to cruel treatment. Those who choose not to have vaccine, see mandated vaccine for an experimental trial against the choice to work, as cruel and unjust.

Article 7 of the International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, a treaty signed by 173 nations states; no cruel, inhuman, or degrading treatment or punishment. (Degrading and punishing being unable to work and provide for family.)

To force a vegan to eat meat, for some would amount to torture, as is forcing vaccination on some, seen as torture. Both would violate their human rights. 

The Nuremberg code of 1947...

Free power of choice without force, fraud, duress, constraint, coercion. Experimental subject of the trial should be made known. It should be conducted, so as to avoid unnecessary physical and mental suffering.

Scientists in charge must terminate the experiment, if it’s believed the experiment to be risky, or to result in injury or death. Have you seen the clips on people who’ve had adverse reactions? Why have they not terminated this experiment?

The Nuremberg code serves as a blueprint, ensuring the rights of subjects and the necessity of protecting people. It includes the consent of the people and the right to withdraw from the experiment at any time.  

The Hippocratic oath to at least do no harm and its expanded ethics to protect the rights of the people, is a joke when you consider: No jab, no job. This makes a mockery of the Hippocratic oath and it’s “do no harm”, as the choice between coercion and pressure to take the jab, or be unable to afford to feed and house your family means there are no rights for the people here.

The Ezekiel declaration which states avoidance of segregation, as well as opposition to vaccine passports, where Christians feel the demands being made upon them, are demands that are objectionable to conscience. Conscience, one part of the backbone of Christianity.

Then there’s the government’s own Doherty report, which states that giving the vaccine to children between the ages of 12-15 causes minimal impact to the outcome of the trials. Why then are we subjecting our children to these trials? And yet we are being forced to vaccinate our children, when we don’t know the long-term effects, just so they can participate in school and sport, which is a right, in a free and democratic country.

The acceptance from Pfizer, of the vaccine for 2-year-old children, is abhorrent to many. With barely any testing, how can this be acceptable?

The same people, who are giving the vaccine away at the moment, will in in the future be charging for said vaccine. The same people who want you to have a double vaccine, are already pushing for the third vaccine. The same people who are making the vaccine, are also making the rapid antigen test kits (RAT) and they will also come at a cost – to the worker. 

If the flu vaccine is $45 per person (which it normally is) and you only need it once a year, imagine a vaccine every six months, plus the cost of the RAT. By the way, you can’t find the price of the rat online, although I did hear on a television program the cost could be $70. What if you need to use your kit more than once? Now you’re paying $45 x 2 (twice yearly vaccination) plus $70 (and maybe another $70 for a second kit to keep on hand - let's hope you don't need a third - not to mention double income families with children, who are already struggling with the cost of living. Now those costs are getting quite expensive). 

At the end of the day “big pharma” will be bringing in a lot of revenue on this. 

For those who choose to have the vaccine, that’s great. There should not be an ‘us and them’ mentality. If you want the vaccine, have it. If you don’t want the vaccine, don’t have it. The choice should be ours to make, not forced upon us by the government we’ve elected. 

This isn't about the vaccine. It's about our right to choose. 

*Yes, the above photo is of a pen, not a syringe. I don’t have any stringes, or needles that would fit a syringe. As this snippet of writing was penned (excuse the pun) by me, I thought a pen would do for the pic.