I am not an anti-vaxxer, and plenty of my friends and colleagues have been vaccinated. And, from the perspective of those who believe that the COVID-19 vaccinations are safe and effective and even life-saving, I can understand the desire to see everyone vaccinated. But what I cannot possibly understand is the threatening, vindictive, heavy-handed bullying in conjunction with the mandates. Not only are these unfair and even cruel, but they give fuel to the fire of those who view the mandates as nothing less than dangerous governmental overreach.

Consider this October 18 story on The Hill which states that, “Chicago police officers could face repercussions, including losing retirement benefits, if they choose to not comply with the city’s vaccine mandate, according to a memo from the Chicago Police Department.

“The memo states that anyone who chooses to disobey the city’s vaccination policy will become the subject of a disciplinary investigation that could result in a penalty up to and including separation from the Chicago Police Department,’ according to CNN.

“‘Furthermore, sworn members who retire while under disciplinary investigations may be denied retirement credentials,’ it continues.”

How can this possibly be justified?

We’re talking about people who, in good conscience, will not be vaccinated, be it for medical reasons or religious reasons or something else (including having natural immunity after having COVID). They are even willing to lose their jobs rather than get vaccinated.

But, as if that was not bad enough, according to this report, the city of Chicago may actually strip away their retirement benefits. Is this anything less than outrageous?

A few weeks ago on my radio broadcast, a caller asked for counsel regarding the vaccine. He had served in the military for years but had serious reservations about getting vaccinated. Yet, if he chose not to get vaccinated, not only would he be dismissed, but, he explained, he would lose all the military benefits he had accrued over the years.

I was shocked to hear this, searching online for confirmation after the show (although the caller seemed quite sure that this was the case).

Although there are varied reports circulating online, early last month, U.S. House legislators openly challenged the announcement that those who refused vaccination would receive a dishonorable discharge. (For the record, and as noted on a military transition website, “A Dishonorable Discharge is the harshest discharge status a military service member can receive, as it is given via court-martial and not by military administration. Service members who receive this standing are accused of felonies involving homicide, fraud, desertion, and crimes that would put any person, service member or not, in hot water. If you receive a Dishonorable Discharge, it is not possible to reenlist with the military.”)

But was this charge true? Were military members being threatened with a dishonorable discharge? Some fact-checkers have said plainly that this is not correct and that the Biden administration does not have the authority to do this.

Yet this does beg the question of why the Military.com website reported on September 2 that, “House lawmakers have backed legislation prohibiting dishonorable discharges for troops who refuse the COVID-19 vaccine.” It also begs the question of how and why news outlets were reporting this very thing. Was it manufactured out of thin air?

Even if this was being reported erroneously and dishonorable discharges were never being considered, we do know that on October 15, it was reported that, “The US Navy said Thursday that personnel who refuse to be vaccinated against COVID-19 will be expelled from the force, ahead of the November 28 deadline for the injection.”

And this: “People expelled for refusing the vaccine will receive a general honorable discharge, but could lose certain benefits or be forced to repay the cost of training and education in some cases, the statement said.”

Note carefully those words: “lose certain benefits.” And all because, in good conscience, they will not be vaccinated. How can this be justified?

The article also stated that, “Navy personnel who can claim an exemption from mandatory vaccines, for health or other reasons, can be reassigned from their current duties.”

And, it explained, “The navy has been particularly sensitive to the pandemic, because of the risk that a single COVID case could infect an entire ship or submarine at sea, forcing it out of action.”

But what about natural immunity for all those who have had COVID? Since this is far more effective than a vaccine, why must those people be vaccinated? As reported on Medical News Today, a major study from Israel “indicated that people who had never had the infection and received a vaccine in January or February of 2021 were up to 13 times more likely to contract the virus than people who had already had the infection.”

Yet these people face the choice of vaccination or else – and that “or else” is quite ominous. How can this be justified?

When it comes to those serving in the military, we’re talking about people who, for the most part, are in one of the lowest demographics for Covid fatalities. And we’re talking about people who have chosen to serve in the military, some for many years of their lives. And in some cases, we’re talking about people who have risked their lives and disrupted their families and perhaps even been wounded in the field of duty.

Yet, if for reasons that are valid in their eyes, they cannot receive the vaccination, not only do they lose their current jobs. Not only do they lose their military career trajectories (where that applies). But they also lose all the benefits they have accrued over the years.

What an outrage, especially when you consider that it is for those very benefits, such as college tuition aid, that some of them enrolled in the first place.

Again, I am not an anti-vaxxer. And, as much as I very strongly differ with the vaccine mandates, I can understand some of the thinking behind the mandates. But these vindictive and punitive measures are outrageous and completely unjustifiable. In the end, they will do more harm than good, hurting lives more than saving lives while increasing our general mistrust of authority.

May those in government (along with others enforcing these mandates) think long and hard. There is still time to reconsider, retract, and reverse course. That would be the honorable thing to do.

This article was originally published by AskDr.Brown.org.

In the early morning hours of August 9th, looters ransacked stores along Chicago’s Magnificent Mile. Known for its high-end retail shops, the 13-block stretch along North Michigan Avenue filled with people, quickly descending into chaos and overwhelming the Chicago Police Department (CPD).

Early reports claimed the rioting and protests were in response to police shooting and killing a child Sunday afternoon in the Englewood neighborhood. That was quickly proven false when police reported the actual incident involved a shootout with a 20-year-old man who was wounded, but not fatally, and had fired first at officers in an hours-long standoff.

But that did not matter to leaders of the group Black Lives Matter Chicago. The Chicago Sun-Times reported the group warned the City’s Mayor Lori Lightfoot in a statement that the unrest would not end until “the safety and well-being of our communities is finally prioritized.”

The statement continued, “The mayor clearly has not learned anything since May, and she would be wise to understand that the people will keep rising up until the [Chicago Police Department] is abolished and our Black communities are fully invested in.” True to their word, the group has continued to hold protests around the city.

CPD Superintendent David Brown said that police have arrested over 100 people, two were shot that night, and 13 officers were injured. Brown described the looting as “pure criminality.” BLM Chicago countered that people were just “protesting.”

According to the BLM Chicago statement, “Over the past few months, too many people — disproportionately Black and Brown — have lost their jobs, lost their income, lost their homes, and lost their lives as the city has done nothing and the Chicago elite have profited. When protesters attack high-end retail stores that are owned by the wealthy and service the wealthy, that is not ‘our’ city and has never been meant for us.”

The next morning, Superintendent Brown said the shooting led to a wave of overnight looting downtown and on the Near North Side that resulted in two people being shot, over 100 arrests, and 13 injuries to officers. Though Brown characterized the looting as “pure criminality,” Black Lives Matter Chicago again claimed that those involved were protesting.

Ariel Atkins

That same day at a demonstration in the city, Ariel Atkins, a Chicago BLM organizer, encouraged looters to take “anything they want to take” as “reparations.”

“I don’t care if somebody decides to loot a Gucci, or a Macy’s, or a Nike,” Atkins said, “because that makes sure that that person eats. That makes sure that that person has clothes. That’s a reparation. Anything they want to take, take it, because these businesses have insurance.”

Atkins doubled down on her previous statement the following day, telling WBEZ radio that BLM supports the looters 100% and they should take “anything they want” as “reparations.”

When questioned about the looters who tried to break into a nearby Ronald McDonald House where frightened sick children and their parents were staying, Atkins defended them, stating, “I will support the looters ’til the end of the day. If that’s what they need to do in order to eat, then that’s what you’ve got to do to eat.”

It’s not just Atkins and BLM Chicago who feel that way. In June, CNN’s Christine Amanpour interviewed Nikole Hannah-Jones, the lead writer for the New York Times’ 1619 Project. Amanpour asked Hannah-Jones about a statement she had made about the act of taking being symbolic for restitution. Hannah-Jones replied,

When we see someone killed by the police, that is the worse manifestation of police violence,”  “but it doesn’t get to the daily violence that doesn’t end in death, or the daily degradation that black Americans face. The fact that these communities have been preyed upon by predatory lenders, it goes on and on. When we think about someone taking something from some big-box name store, it is symbolic. That one pair of shoes that you stole from Footlocker is not going to change your life, but it is a symbolic taking.

Columnist decries looters

Liberal Sun-Times columnist Mary Mitchell came out against the looters in her August 10th column. “Sunday night’s assault on downtown businesses was a brazen display of criminal behavior, pure and simple,” she wrote.

Countering the BLM organizer’s statement, Mitchell wrote,

The people who smashed their way into luxe boutiques didn’t do it because they were fed up with police shootings, or because they are out of work and desperate.

They did it because they saw an opportunity to steal stuff they couldn’t afford to buy and because they have no respect for the rule of law.

More than a week has passed since BLM Chicago made its demands. CPD has bolstered efforts to track down looters through social media. Officers are working 12-hour shifts and days off are canceled. Businesses downtown are boarded up and some retailers have announced plans to leave the city. And the protests continue.

Will the mayor acquiesce to their demands? What exactly will it take for BLM Chicago to feel “the safety and well-being of our communities is finally prioritized?” Could the city see the violence get even worse as the November elections approach? Will President Donald Trump send federal intervention? Could the religious community unite and stand as one to push back the evil that’s overtaken Chicago? So many questions… no clear answers.

If you appreciate the work and ministry of IFI,
please consider a tax-deductible donation to sustain our endeavors.

Though open containers with alcoholic beverages are illegal during the Gay Pride Parade, missing in official police and parade rule announcements, however, are warnings against violating the Chicago Public Morals Laws, which have been on the books for years and rarely, if ever, enforced in the Boystown gay district throughout the year. 

WARNING: Offensive pictures from other parades HERE, HERE, HERE, HERE.

The month of June was designated as LGBT “Pride Month” by proclamation from Mayor Rahm Emanuel featuring dozens of social, cultural, athletic and political events scheduled by various sponsoring groups, culminating with the 44^th annual Chicago Gay Pride Parade on June 30th at noon. The grand marshal for the parade is former NFL player Wade Davis. Parade organizers claim to attract hundreds of thousands of onlookers each year, including young children.

TAKE ACTION:  Click HERE to use IFI’s advocacy system to contact Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy and 19th District Commander Elias Voulgaris and respectfully urge them to enforce Chicago Public Morals Laws. People with same-sex attraction insist on equality but don’t want to be held to the same standard of law as the rest of us. No one person, group or organization should be above laws that protect all citizens from public indecency and lewd behavior.

Chicago Public Morals Laws

Chapter 8-8-080     Indecent exposure or dress.

Chapter 8-8-090     Indecent publications and exhibitions.

Chapter 8-8-100     Sale of literature represented as immoral.

Chapter 8-8-110     Material harmful to minors unlawful.

Chapter  8-8-010     House of ill-fame or assignation.

Chapter  8-8-020     Directing persons to houses of ill-fame.

Chapter  8-8-030     Prostitution or lewdness in conveyances.

Chapter  8-8-050     Soliciting – Penalty.

Chapter  8-8-060     Street solicitation for prostitution.

Quoting from the MassResistance website which features a multi-part series titled, What Boston “Gay Pride” Reveals About the LGBT Movement in America:

Everything you’d want to know about the homosexual-transgender movement in America– its goals, its dark and destructive sides, its targets, its supporters (including many you’d be surprise by) — is brought out in the open during the huge public “gay pride” events in major US cities. In many ways, these are their public statements to the rest of us… Most of America is shown “gay” life on television and in the media in a very sanitized way, as if it were natural and that the latest “civil rights” struggle… Besides “gay marriage,” a major goal of the homosexual movement is normalizing “transgenderism” throughout society, including changing our basic foundations such as the family structure. Make no mistake: This movement is well organized and focused. We all see it through the intense lobbying to push “non-discrimination” on the basis of “gender identity” through legislatures and court rulings. It’s also pushed hard in schools, large corporations and government bureaucracies. On the federal level, the Obama administration has brought it into most top federal agencies… Making a dysfunctional and dangerous behavior the “new normal.” If the transgender movement achieves its goals, this is what people in your businesses, government offices, classrooms, and public facilities will look like — whether you like it or not.

Parade participants include law enforcement, lawmakers and other elected officials, churches, schools, various organizations, agencies and businesses. The entire list is here.

Sources:  http://chicagopride.gopride.com/    http://chicagopridecalendar.org/