Peggy Hall in California (TheHealthyAmerican.org) argues that health freedom fighters shouldn’t be basing our objections on scientific evidence at all.
A lot of solid scientific evidence strongly supports our position but it’s ignored by the medical tyrants who are asserting their power, so it’s useless.
Rather, Hall advocates for educating the school boards and employers that regardless of what any medical treatment is, whether any particular person believes or claims it’s safe, whether any particular person believes or claims it’s effective, doesn’t matter at all because they don’t have the legal authority to compel anybody do anything.
There is no state or federal legislation or judicial court case giving school boards or employers the legal power to compel people to wear medical devices (masks) and/or get pharmaceutical injections or any other medical treatments of any kind.
CDC guidance and the recommendations of advisory committees of local doctors and lawyers don’t have the same legal force as a statute or a completed court case.
They may not have any legal force at all.
SCASD attorneys seem prepared to force health freedom fighters to take the district to court on these issues, likely counting on the fact that filing a court case is a huge, expensive, high-stress undertaking, so families already battered by the last 18 months are unlikely to want to do it.
I was also intrigued to see recently, somewhere on Gab, that the reason the mRNA gene therapy injections promoted by government agents aren’t advertised on commercial television, radio or magazines, is because there are laws requiring pharmaceutical advertisements to include all known adverse side effects, and the FDA’s list for the mRNA gene therapy injections - compiled in October 2020 - is significant.
The lack of advertising may also have to do with the mRNA injections currently only having FDA “Emergency Use Authorization,” not full “approval.”
I don’t know.
I do know that most people who are declining the injections for themselves and their kids already know about the dangerous, life-threatening risks of the injections compiled by FDA and supported with further clinical evidence through the VAERS system and anecdotally ever since the injections started in December 2020.
And that’s why - when weighed against the minuscule relative benefits of the injections and the small relative risks posed by natural infection - they’re saying “No.”
I speculate that most people who are demanding that others take the injections - such as SCASD board members and administrators who have decided the injections are the right course of action for themselves and their own families - either:
a) don’t know about the serious risks presented by the injections - because they only listen to information provided by government agents who only tout the claimed benefits but don’t mention the risks - or
b) they know about the risks but are unable to cognitively process that different people in different circumstances can make different risk-benefit calculations, and are legally free to make those different choices and decisions without government interference.
