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.

Reports on the internet and social media of infertility problems and changes in women’s menstruation abound. Popstar Nicki Minaj has recently stated her hesitancy with the vaccine due to an anecdotal story about a friend of her cousin who suffered impotency following the vaccine. Leftists who usually celebrate Minaj’s debauchery now view her as a social pariah as she questions the vaccine’s safety. However, her acquaintance is not the only individual reporting reproductive issues, making her questions valid.

Reports from women experiencing menstruation changes following receiving the vaccine are growing. In the United Kingdom, there have now been over 30,000 women reporting changes to their menstrual cycles. These changes include extreme bleeding, pain, and skipping cycles. As reports spread through the U.K. and the U.S., some young women are concerned that the vaccines could affect their reproductive ability.

Despite these reasonable concerns, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) and their mainstream media sycophants have dismissed any possibility of reproductive or menstruation problems occurring following the vaccines. However, as the CDC publicly dismisses claims, the National Institute of Health (NIH) awarded $1.67 million to five institutions to research links between the coronavirus vaccines and changes in women’s menstruation. The NIH announced on August 30th that researchers with Michigan State University, Boston University, Harvard Medical School, Johns Hopkins University, and Oregon Health and Science University, in coordination with NIH Office of Research on Women’s Health, would research reported menstruation problems in vaccinated women.

Reports of vaccine side effects are made to the Vaccine Adverse Event Reporting System (VAERS), a reporting site co-managed by the CDC and the Food and Drug Administration (FDA). However, numerous problems exist within the system. Healthcare providers are only required to report side effects if they are listed by the manufacturer or appear on the VAERS Table of Reportable Events Following Vaccinations.

Unfortunately, there is no list on the Table that refers directly to any of the COVID vaccinations. Nor are menstruation or reproductive issues recognized as a side effect by manufacturers.

There is a list for “New Vaccines,” which specifies required adverse reactions to report. Those reactions include: shoulder injuries following the vaccine, vasovagal syncope (fainting) within seven days of inoculation, any acute complication including death, or any side effect listed in the manufacturer’s insert information. There is no indication that healthcare workers are required to report possible links to changes in menstruation or reproductive health.

The CDC claims that “VAERS is not designed to determine if a vaccine caused a health problem,” asserting that a determination of that sort is not the purpose of the site. Rather, they claim their main objective is to “assess the safety of newly licensed vaccines.”

How can the CDC claim a vaccine is not causing women’s reproductive issues if VAERS cannot determine health problems? If they cannot determine if a vaccine has caused a health issue, how can they assess the safety of vaccines? Women should demand answers to these serious questions.

Another issue with VAERS is that many physicians say it is a complex reporting process that is time-consuming. Doctors have objected to filling out the report in the past, and even the CDC has recognized its limitations. In the CDC’s Manual for the Surveillance of Vaccine-Preventable Diseases, the authors state that:

“A survey was conducted in 2005 to assess the knowledge, attitudes, and practices among healthcare providers about reporting to VAERS. Data indicated that although 71% of respondents were familiar with VAERS, only 17% said they were very familiar with it. Approximately 37% of healthcare providers had identified at least one adverse event after immunization, but only 17% stated that they had ever reported to VAERS.”  

Drastic underreporting limits our knowledge of the type of side effects the COVID vaccine is causing. Taking these factors into consideration, it is highly likely that few doctors actually report the impact of the vaccine on menstruation and reproduction.

Although the NIH is investigating the possibility of problems with women’s menstruation following the vaccine, other medical agencies are charging ahead with vaccine approval. The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) is urging FDA approval of vaccines for children under the age of 12. Not only are they recommending approval, but Pfizer has now claimed that the vaccines are safe for ages 5-11 when reduced to one-third the standard adult dosage. If adults are potentially experiencing reproductive and menstruation issues due to the vaccine, the question remains: how will it affect children’s reproductive development?

This ramrod, rushed dispersion of the COVID vaccines without resources to report adverse effects is complete lunacy. Reported side effects are essentially ignored. When confirmed, manufacturers quietly add side effects to the manufactures’ list without any public notification. Pfizer recently added myocarditis risks to their growing list of side effects. Will manufacturers do the same if it is determined that menstruation and reproductive problems are linked to their product? If given to young children, could side effects lead to sterility in these children? There are more questions than answers currently, and the federal government prefers avoiding any scrutiny.

However, it may be possible that the CDC, FDA, NIH, and vaccine manufacturers will have to answer questions. Project Veritas recently released a video from Jodi O’Malley, a registered nurse employed by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) in Arizona. O’Malley recorded herself speaking with fellow employees, including an emergency room doctor, who felt the federal government was not adequately tracking side effects from the COVID vaccines. The medical staff lamented that they had seen numerous people suffering from side effects. O’Malley forwarded the video to Project Veritas and has become a whistleblower to report on the federal government’s failures related to the vaccines’ adverse reactions. The failure of the government to report on side effects may mean vaccine related-problems with reproductive health and menstruation could be widespread. Perhaps if more whistleblowers come forward, the public will finally be made aware of existing adverse reactions.

If you are concerned about the lack of data collected and the lack of informed consent regarding the side effects of the COVID vaccine, please contact your U.S. Representative and ask him/her to force the CDC and the FDA to collect and publicly report all side effects of vaccines. If you feel you have suffered any type of side effect from the COVID vaccine, you can report the issue to the CDC HERE.

With the increasingly extreme attack on parental rights and medical freedom represented by Governor J.B. Pritzker’s COVID mask and vaccine mandates for schools, there has never been a better time for parents to sever all ties with the government’s “education” system.

As if the dumbing down, perverse sexualization and extreme indoctrination were not serious enough already for parents to make serious moves protecting their children, government officials in Illinois decided last month to double down on the extremism.

Among other deeply controversial policies, Gov. Pritzker decreed that all staff and even some eligible Illinois students must receive the experimental COVID injection. The Democrat governor also ordered all students over age 2, as well as all staff, to wear a face mask throughout the school day.

“This is a pandemic of the unvaccinated,” Pritzker claimed, falsely, during a press conference, citing debunked figures while ignoring the overwhelming evidence that fully vaccinated people are being hospitalized and dying in significant numbers. “People can slow the pandemic by masks and vaccinations.”

In reality, the latest data appear to show the COVID injections are practically worthless in protecting anyone from the virus — especially after some months have gone by. According to the latest government data out of the United Kingdom, (see p. 20) about two thirds of those who died from the so-called “Delta” variant were fully vaccinated at least two weeks earlier. Just 28 percent were unvaccinated.

On the mask mandate, Pritzker again appears to be ignoring actual science and data. For instance, as Florida Governor Ron DeSantis pointed out in his recent executive order banning mask mandates in public schools, a Brown University study found “no correlation” between masks and COVID in Florida schools.

DeSantis also pointed to studies showing an extremely low risk of children contracting a serious case of COVID. And he noted that there is no real evidence showing that counties with mask mandates fared any better than those with them during the previous school year. Even more concerning, the popular Florida governor warned of dangerous health consequences associated with face masks.

In any case, parents have the right to make medical decisions for their children, not bureaucrats and government officials, he said.

“Given the historical data on COVID-19 and the ongoing debate over whether masks are more harmful than beneficial to children and to school environments in general, we should protect the freedoms and statutory rights of students and parents by resting with the parents the decision whether their children should wear masks in school,” DeSantis said in his order.

Ironically, just two weeks before imposing his new mandates, Pritzker similarly argued that families should be involved in making decisions and that local policymakers should be making decisions for their jurisdictions.

But when not enough families and school districts bowed to the demands of the COVID totalitarians, Pritzker issued mandates and claimed to be merely following the “recommendations” of the disgraced CDC.

“Far too few school districts have chosen to follow the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention prescription for keeping students and staff safe,” Pritzker proclaimed. “Given the CDC’s strong recommendation, I had hoped that a state mask requirement in schools wouldn’t be necessary, but it is.”

Despite the media hysteria and the governor’s decrees, the non-profit group Illinois Policy pointed out that the number of daily deaths attributed to COVID in Illinois has been below 20 since mid-June, and COVID patients occupied just a small fraction of available ICU beds and ventilators.

Meanwhile, in Sweden, where authorities consistently advised against masks and shunned any sort of mandates at all, daily deaths have fallen to virtually zero.

Still, the threats from the governor and his supporters are already ramping up. The Illinois High School Association warned last month that any schools violating the governor’s decrees would have their student athletes banned from playoff games this fall.

Even private schools are being bullied. Christian Liberty Academy in Arlington Heights had its state recognition revoked for failing to comply with the mandates. Adding insult to injury, Pritzker even claimed he would deny students their diplomas if schools did not comply with his edicts.

Republicans in Illinois blasted the governor’s antics. State Senator Darren Bailey, who is himself running for governor, blasted Pritzker as a “tyrant” who has overstepped his authority by issuing “unilateral mandates.”

“Unless you are part of a powerful special interest group that can help his campaign, he will continue to try and control your life,” Bailey added, saying masking should be a personal choice and that parents must “let their voices be heard on this despicable tyranny.”

One powerful way for parents to make their voices heard on this issue — and to protect their children from a wide range of other evils — is to exit the public school system entirely.

These outrageous abuses of power by Pritzker represent an attack on parental rights, medical freedom, the well being of Illinois children, and common sense. A growing amount of research is also pointing to very serious health risks poses by face masks, not to mention the catastrophic psychological damage being done.

Add to all of that the fact that in recent weeks, Pritzker signed a radical “sex ed” bill that is among the most extreme in the nation. Under the scheme, government schools will more vigorously promote abortion, promiscuity, gender confusion, homosexuality, and more.

Parents who are sick of being bullied and terrorized by out-of-control officials do have options. Homeschooling is one excellent choice that is in line with the Bible and can protect children and families from this sort of abuse. The number of homeschooling families in the state has more than doubled over the past year already.

At this point, it should be clear that government schools are not safe for children or families — and the risks extend far beyond that. Only a mass exodus can neutralize the threat and protect Illinois’ future.

Vaccines are not a threat to liberty. However, being forced to submit to taking medicine and/or a medical procedure that is both controversial and troublesome to many of us is.

Vaccine mandates are a violation of the unalienable individual right to liberty, endowed by God our Creator, which is prohibited by the American system of government.

Christian responsibility in America isn’t to follow the wishes, and especially orders, of whomever in a position of authority recommends a particular action.

Christian responsibility in America, to submit to the governing authorities (Romans 13:1), is to: a) vote, speak, and hold office so as to protect and defend the Constitution (i.e., self-govern), and b) follow elected or appointed representatives exercising legitimately enumerated powers which don’t violate State and individual rights or God’s law.

Forcing an individual’s choice of medical treatment, such as mandated COVID vaccination, is about as un-Constitutional and un-American as one can get.  It was the medical experimentation on Jews in Nazi Germany that resulted in the Nuremberg Code [1].

Furthermore, an Illinois law that’s been on the books since the 90’s protects individuals from being forced to accept any health care service that violates their conscience. The relevant section:

(745 ILCS 70/5) (from Ch. 111 1/2, par. 5305)
    Sec. 5. Discrimination. It shall be unlawful for any person, public or private institution, or public official to discriminate against any person in any manner, including but not limited to, licensing, hiring, promotion, transfer, staff appointment, hospital, managed care entity, or any other privileges, because of such person’s conscientious refusal to receive, obtain, accept, perform, assist, counsel, suggest, recommend, refer or participate in any way in any particular form of health care services contrary to his or her conscience.
(Source: P.A. 90-246, eff. 1-1-98.)

Vaccines do not reduce disease spread, immunity does.

A new study out of Israel described by Bloomberg as “the largest real-world analysis comparing natural immunity – gained from an earlier infection – to the protection provided by one of the most potent vaccines currently in use” showed that the vaccinated were 13x as likely to be infected as those who were previously infected, and 27x more likely to be symptomatic. (emphasis added.)

Vaccines are for the purpose of inducing immunity, while reducing the impact of an illness as widespread public immunity develops.  Diseases like flu and COVID aren’t very good candidates for vaccination because with modern treatments, a) they aren’t serious enough for most people not to just conquer the illness on their own, thereby developing natural immunity, and b) viruses tend to mutate faster than we can safely develop new vaccines.

Vaccine-induced immunity, while worthwhile for some, is necessarily inferior to natural immunity, partly because of the measures taken to avoid producing the more serious symptoms of the illness itself.

Current COVID vaccinations have been rushed to market (the first “full” FDA approval of a COVID vaccine was last week [2]), with apparently substantial shortcuts and unusual [3] overlooking of severe adverse events. Never in medical history has a vaccine been developed and approved so quickly.

If you are now convinced, or already were, to defend your liberty (and those of other Americans) against heavy-handed government vaccine promotion, several legal organizations have provided sample letters to employers who are wrongly mandating vaccination in genuflection to current political despots or face losing their job.

Requests for religious accommodation by federal law must be in writing, and Alliance Defending Freedom [4] and other trustworthy sources have developed legally and Biblically sound template religious accommodation request letters below, including the most important objections reflected in law and recent U.S. Supreme Court affirmations of religious liberty.  We highly recommend these as a pattern for drafting such a letter to your employer.

Also provided below is a letter providing your pastor’s agreement to the religious objection, which can be submitted if you wish to further strengthen your religious objection. The America’s Front Line Doctors form provides a list of questions employers should be presented with relating to the assumption of responsibility if an adverse reaction should occur.

Resources:

ADF Sample Employee Request Letter for Religious Exemption to COVID Vaccine

ADF Sample-Pastor-Letter-Supporting-Religious-Accommodation-Request-1

GAB Religious Exemption Letter to Employer

Sample Student Request for Religious Exemption to COVID Vaccine

America’s Front Line Doctors: College Student Form

More templates and resources

We support your individual right to choose, as an American, to vaccinate or not.

Let us pray that God will use this effort to persuade businesses to protect the liberties of their employees against government tyranny rather than supporting it!

Footnotes:

[1] http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/

[2] https://www.fda.gov/news-events/press-announcements/fda-approves-first-covid-19-vaccine

[3] By contrast, in 1982 Eli Lilly recalled the popular and effective drug, Oraflex, a drug for the pain and inflammation of arthritis based upon 61 deaths in Britain and 11 deaths in the U.S.  3,867 (of 9,470, or 40%) adverse event reports have been filed with the FDA for deaths of those receiving the single approved vaccination (Pfizer).   https://wonder.cdc.gov/vaers.html

[4] https://adflegal.org/resources/covid19-vaccine-mandate