patrick.net

The tool for ending the Constitution under 'emergency mandates' has itself been broken.

With the Globalists, you can't just have nice health.

Ignorant fuchs in Florida.

Ignorance is insisting that mandatory vaccination is healthy.

Best decision to promote freedom in a long time. The people who still want to vaccinate themselves can, and will be “protected” from what they fear. The people who would rather not take an injection or multiple injections won’t. It will be up to them to monitor their own health for potential diseases. Heck, they may even be healthier for not taking the injections. We may finally get to see what a generation of vaccine vs no vaccines children look like with respect to all of the purported negative side effects. The people calling those who prefer not to vaccinate ignorant/stupid/cause of transmission should have nothing to worry about as they will be immune to it. So why have hate toward people that want medical choice freedom, they aren’t telling others what they have to inject….

https://www.coffeeandcovid.com/p/battle-cry-of-freedom-thursday-september

The biomedical authoritarians went crazier than sprayed roaches. You’d think that Florida planned to ban vaccines instead of mandates. ...

Until yesterday, no other state government has been brave enough to tackle the left’s most sacred of sacraments, its pinnacle public health ‘achievement,’ and its most rewarding profit center: vaccine coercion. ...

They hid the premise, but I won’t. Boiled down to its essence, the hidden utilitarian premise in the pro-vaccine argument is: it is morally permissible to kill one person if you can save two.

Because they shroud that premise, the pro-vaccine folks get to shift the argument away from the thorny issue of morality and plunge headlong into a bottomless black hole of jargon-rich scientific debate. In other words, they want to trick us into arguing about the numbers— about whether vaccine injuries are actually rare.

They want us to say, “you guys are fudging the facts about how dangerous these jabs are, either alone or when taken together.” Don’t take the bait.

The prevalence of jab injuries is a fair and important debate. But it is an unwinnable argument. Resolving it involves deliberately hard-to-get data, vast amounts of propaganda, built-in biases, bewildering risk-reward ratios, impenetrable statistics, and fathomless expert opinions on all sides. Thanks to their obfuscation skills, that smoggy scientific argument could last another hundred years, during which time they’ll just roll out new medical technologies and claim to have “fixed” any problems that can finally be proven.

But yesterday, Dr. Ladapo didn’t blink. He didn’t take the bait. Instead, he correctly challenged their underlying premise.

💉 Let’s consider Dr. Ladapo’s actual argument. Here’s what he said:

JOSEPH LADAPO: "Every last vaccine is wrong and drips with disdain and slavery! Who am I, or anyone else, to tell you what you should put in your body? Who am I to tell you what your child should put in their body? I don't have that right. Your body is a gift from God. What you put into your body is because of your relationship with your body and God. Pretty much every state has mandates, but it's wrong.”

Dr. Ladapo ripped out the hidden utilitarian premise and held it up to the light. He leapt right over the scientific jargon and even the legality of mandates, and grabbed the issue of morality by the necktie. In essence, Ladapo argued it is ‘wrong’ —immoral— to coerce a human being into taking an injected substance that they don’t want. ...

In other words, this isn’t a scientific question at all. It’s not even a legal question. It’s a basic question of right and wrong. In philosophical terms, it’s the difference between deontological (rights-based) versus utilitarian (numbers-based) world views.

Deontologically, some things are just wrong regardless of the numbers. Just like owning people, forcing injections on them —as if you did own them— violates an absolute right.

Utilitarians argue that some people are too dumb or incapable of caring for themselves, like cows, antivaxxers, or black Africans. Thus, masters are needed to ensure a proper social order. And the ‘rightness’ of a coercive act depends only on maximizing society’s outcomes. Minority autonomy (freedom) may legitimately be sacrificed for the greater good of society.

The splendid rhetorical force behind Ladapo’s moral argument was its framing the issue in terms of slavery. People aren’t herds of cows. Mandates and slavery both rely on the unspoken premise that individuals are instruments of society rather than sovereign beings.

Today’s mandate crowd just swaps the plantation for “public health.” ...

Consider the humble cow, Bessie. Farmers can vaccinate their cows as much as they want— since cows are property. (That’s where the term “herd immunity” comes from, by the way. It was a veterinary idiom.) Vaccinating cows isn’t right or wrong, it’s a morally neutral commercial decision about safeguarding the farmer’s investment.

Similarly, George Washington could vaccinate his herds of humans if he wanted, and the slaves had no say. He could hang cowbells on them. That choice was also morally neutral— so long as slavery was morally neutral.

So George Washington never actually resolved the moral dilemma. He sidestepped it. He could vaccinate his slaves the same way he vaccinated his cows, because his premise was that both were his property. Lincoln fought a Civil War to end that premise; the mandate crowd wants to resurrect it in the form of syringes instead of shackles.

When the government mandates vaccines to protect the communal herd, the assumption is clear: the state owns us. The state is just protecting its herd. Since cows are dumb (and they fart too much), they need owners (masters) to care for them and keep them out of trouble. We don’t let cows decide what shots to take or refuse.

Always remember: pro-vaxxers don’t want to debate morality, because they’ll lose. And they know it. Which is why we should jam the immorality of coerced medical treatments right down their sickening throats. (See also, e.g., the Nuremberg Code.) ...

Florida lawmakers, get ready: Pharma and its allies are about to unleash the biggest lobbying blitz you’ve ever seen— money, media, “experts,” hysteria, protests, crisis actors, and false flags. Don’t take the bait. This fight isn’t about medicine, it’s about mandates. Vaccines will remain available. Parents who want them can still get them. Nobody’s banning vaccines.

What’s at stake is whether the state recognizes children as citizens with inalienable rights, or as livestock in a managed herd. Hold the moral line: frame every question, every hearing, every floor debate around right versus wrong, and coercion versus freedom. If you let them drag you into arguing about “science,” you’ve already lost.

It’s irrelevant whether vaccines save lives. Either way, it’s wrong to force them on people.

@"C Boy"