Much has been written about the swine flu epidemic and the use of the vaccine. Frankly, there is a lot to be desired on both sides of the argument as to whether to “give it a shot.”

There are two principles that stand out that need to be emphasized: First, mandatory injections are a violation of the First Amendment protection of the right to Freedom of Religion. Second, if a national government healthcare system is established, not only can the First Amendment be violated, but so can the rest of the Constitution as well, not only as a result of domestic policy but also as a consequence of the entangling agreements that we are involved in with the United Nations.

There are several religious denominations in our country that do not believe in medical treatment, at least not to the level that most citizens’ make use of the medical profession. These include Christian Scientists, Seventh Day Adventists, and Jehovah Witnesses. For the government to force the issue of receiving flu shots ― or any other mandated treatment ― forces the recipient of these sects to engage in practices that are contrary to their closely held religious beliefs.

There is always a down side to freedom, because not everyone will use their freedom’s wisely. But, as a society, we do not advocate giving up our freedom just because some individuals make mistakes or are guilty of errors of judgement or because of other consequences. At least, not until recently. There will be people, even children who will suffer due to the policies of certain religious beliefs, perhaps, but we should never advocate taking the right to the freedom of religion away from people due to the negatives, for if we do, where does it stop?

The media will always find the one exception to the rule, the one person who suffered in manifold unfortunate ways, and hold that person and their plight up in the public square and decry the lack of government control that resulted, however, tenuously the connection, in the person’s plight. But policymaking should not be done on the basis of exceptions to rules. In the end, when that happens, more people will suffer than the examples made use of to coerce us into a totalitarian system ― by the thousand-fold.

We are propagandized with images of small children who have not received healthcare as the excuse to make healthcare mandatory. But once we make that policy choice, the next step will be to force religious people to violate other aspects of the belief system that go well beyond medical treatment. We are witnessing this very behavior by government when it comes to homosexuality and other core beliefs of Christian churches. Each little step sold as sanity and compassion now will ultimately become totalitarian tomorrow.

Lest one think that this is far fetched, many Christian leaders and commentators are now barred from the airwaves of the Canadian media due to such policies by the Canadian government, and are increasingly labeled “haters,” and found guilty of “hate crimes.”

A crime is a crime, it does not matter against whom it is perpetrated or by whom it is propagated. Special classes of crime based on political correctness result in special sentences and upset the entire system of justice. For instance, if I hit a man and knock him down because he has made disparaging remarks aimed at my wife, I might get 30 days in jail. If I knock down a homosexual for doing the same to me, I can get years.

It doesn’t work in a free society.

Hate crimes are relative. Their definition depends on who is in power at the moment and their belief system. By contrast, our country was founded on the principle that laws are based on Judeo-Christian beliefs and are eternal since they deal with human nature and the nature of government, not in which direction the winds blow.

A simple thing like whether or not we force vaccines on a group can lead to forcing them to do other things that bureaucrats desire. In the end, it corrodes our entire system of government and leads to its replacement by something different. And that something different will not be freedom.

If we accept a national healthcare system, ultimately the government will run the medical profession as well as the patient. Once that occurs, we will be bound by international agreements coming from the United Nations through treaties and pacts. The World Health Organization will dictate our medical care.

The UNESCO organization will dictate our mental health care and what constitutes mental health. We hear a great deal about the idea that someone who is opposed to homosexuality is being a “homophobe,” as if they need treatment to cure them of such beliefs.

The latter may seem a stretch, yet in communist countries they confine people to mental hospitals simply because they oppose the government and/or its policies. And if you are unaware that the majority of countries in the UN are socialist, you haven’t been paying attention.

The issue is not whether the flu vaccine is harmful, it is whether we are being forced to take it – or propagandized by our tax money to line up and take it. After all, the sects listed above pay taxes as well. Why should their money pay for something they do not believe in? Is this not a violation of the right to worship as one pleases without being forced to pay for something someone else believes?

Medical questions and medical advice should be a private matter and the government needs to step aside. As you think these things through as to how medical questions can be used by the state for state purposes, then you understand why the communist leader Lenin said that socialized medicine is the “keystone in the arch of the socialist state.”

TrackBack URI for this entry

Comments (13)

Subscribe to this comment's feed

Show/Hide comments

rprew said:

Freedom without choice doesn't exist "...as if they need treatment to cure them of such beliefs. The latter may seem a stretch..." Not a stretch at all. We see a form of this happening all the time with employer mandated "diversity training" or "sensitivity training". It is an attempt to condition us to all the irrational malarkey called "moral relativism". If you "resist" or are in anywise "uncooperative" during this feeble attempt at brainwashing, you are labeled as "not being a team player" or branded as being "insensitive", or perhaps even fired!

report abuse vote down vote up

November 13, 2009
Votes: +3

DDW said:

	Thank you Mr. Thompson and rprew. You are both absolutely correct. Please keep up the truth telling.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 13, 2009
Votes: +3

Pat Henry said:

	Medical angle Great article. And for those who think the only objection is the principle of freedom, see the National Vaccine Information Center, http://www.nvic.org/
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 13, 2009
Votes: +1

T K said:

... Jehovah's Witnesses only refrain from medical practices prohibited in the Bible. This includes the eating and medical use of whole blood or any of it's 4 main parts. Outside of this, each Christian decides for himself what medical procedures he will pursue according to his Bible-trained conscience. This information is widely known, and it has never been a policy or practice to shun the medical community as a whole. This article unfortunately is incorrect in naming Jehovah's Witnesses as abstaining from modern medicine. Please make a correction.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 13, 2009
Votes: +1

Danny Haszard said:

Jehovah's Witnesses blood transfusion confusion YI 1) JW's DO USE many parts aka 'fractions' aka components of blood,so if it's 'sacred' to God why the hypocritical contradiction flip-flop? 2) They USE blood collections that are donated by Red Cross and others but don't donate back,more hypocrisy. 3) The Watchtower promotes and praises bloodless elective surgeries,this is a great advancement indeed.BUT it's no good to me if I am bleeding to death from a car crash and lose much of my blood volume and need EMERGENCY blood transfusion. Remember the Jehovah's Witnesses use thousands and thousands of pints of blood donated by others.They use 60% of the blood volume as broken down "fractions" then go on Bible thumping rants about how dangerous and sinful blood transfusions are. ( JW do allow organ transplants which has more risk than whole blood transfusions so their arguments of disease transmission is bogus)

report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009 | url
Votes: +2

Pauline said:

	Jehovah's Witnesses and medical treatment As has been stated Jehovah's Witnesses have no restriction on any medical treatment apart from that which involves the transfusion of blood. http://www.watchtower.org/e/hb/index.htm?article=article_03.htm
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009 | url
Votes: -1

Raymond B. Mitchell said:

Attorney I agree that forced mandatory vaccines violate the freedom of religion for some people but it does not apply to those who do not want to take an extremely dangerous and horrible medicine called vaccines. Most people know by instinct and logical reasoning that they have a natural right to not be compelled to have some "medicine" forced into them. Natural law (God's laws) say we cannot be forced to take a vaccine against our will. However, the 4th, 5th, and 14th Amendments prohibit forced vaccines also. 4th Amendment- The right of the people TO BE SECURE IN THEIR PERSONS, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, SHALL NOT BE VIOLATED. . . 5th Amd.- No person shall be . . . deprived of life, LIBERTY, or property, without due process of law. 14Amd- No State shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the United States; NOR SHALL ANY STATE DEPRIVE ANY PERSON OF LIFE, LIBERTY, OR PROPERTY, WITHOUT DUE PROCESS OF LAW; nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws. It also violates the 9th and 10th Amendments since nothing in the Constitution authorizes the federal govt to make any laws regarding health care or vaccines. Thus, the issue is reserved to the people or the States.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +0

katbird_27 said:

read the article in its ENTIRETY! and don't jump to conclusions! T K I did NOT get that idea from reading this article! he said that J.W.s don't use health care to the degree that most of the people do. ("There are several religious denominations in our country that do not believe in medical treatment, at least not to the level that most citizens’ make use of the medical profession." note the SECOND part of this sentence) most people WILL accept a blood transfusion. therefore i hope this author does NOT make a correction to this story!

report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +7

emeth from the Netherlands said:

	Get your facts straight JW's do enjoy any medical treatment and seek doctors and specialists when they get ill. The only thing they'll refuse is blood transfusion during operations. Instead of that they prefer bloodless surgery. Kindest regards, Emeth a.k.a Denis , The Netherlands
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: -3

Larry Brown said:

	... Our county sheriff stated that no one in this county would be forced to receive the H1N1 vaccine.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009 | url
Votes: +0

Pat Henry said:

	Reform, but without GOV'T doing it For a great plan about health care reform, but shunning and opposing government involvement, see: http://www.theoakinitiative.org/news.php
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 14, 2009
Votes: +0

Kawika said:

... Vaccinations are mandated for Public School kids - and those homeschool kids that desire to use any part of the system that their parents' support with compulsory tax dollars. And shockingly, look up the story about a young, female Christian immigrating legally to the USA and being told by the State department that she must be vaccinated with the HPV/cerivical cancer shot (Gardasil) or face deportation! She is protesting on religious grounds: she intends to live a sexually moral life and therefore, among other reasons, has no need for this inoculation.

report abuse vote down vote up

November 16, 2009
Votes: +0

Thomas Paine said:

	You're too kind Mr. Thompson Communist governments want to kill their Citizens. Don't trust the World Health Organization to look out for your best interest. They have too much Communist/Fascist inluence.
	report abuse vote down vote up

November 16, 2009
Votes: +0