Individual Choice and Bodily Autonomy vs. Vaccine Mandates

Government, learning institutions, and some in the private sector are attempting to mandate “vaccines” or deny basic rights based on “vaccination status”. On August 9, 2021, Governor Inslee issued a proclamation, and an amending proclamation mandating “Covid Vaccinations” for state employees and contractors. This proclamation was jointly issued with proclamations from the King County Executive, and the City of Seattle Mayor. Similar proclamations are being made in many political jurisdictions around the U.S. and the world. These proclamations are violations of fundamental natural rights, human rights, and civil rights, and must be strongly opposed. In the case of the current available injections some people may decide to use, the decision must remain an individual right and not a decision forced by government or any other mandator.

Your body is your most precious property, without which, we do not have our life here on this Earth. The Washington State Constitution states under Article I-Declaration of Rights # 3: “PERSONAL RIGHTS. No person shall be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.” The United Nations International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights, Part 1, Article 7, states that “No one shall be subjected to torture or to cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishment. In particular, no one shall be subjected without his free consent to medical or scientific experimentation.” The freedom to make medical decisions for treatment and decisions to undergo or forgo the use of medications is critical to your life, your liberty, and your property, including your body as your property and lifelong investment.

A forcible violation of your bodily integrity is a trespass, is unlawful, and a form of battery. This would hold true with a forced injection such as the injection currently commonly called “the Covid Vaccination”. Your personal decision to use or reject such treatment, does not negate that it is a trespass against each individual when forced.

Informed consent is essential for any medical treatment. It requires that any treatment that you are offered be accompanied by complete information about its effects on the body, particularly the potential adverse effects. All people have the right to free power of choice to consent to, or to refuse a treatment without any element of coercion, penalty, or loss of benefits. When contemplating the points to be considered in informed consent, an individual may wish to consult the Federal and State Constitutions, the Americans with Disabilities Act, and the right to base decision making on Religious Belief.

The right to privacy, including privacy regarding your medical decisions, is an essential natural right. Those who seek to use fear and coercion to try to force you to share information about your personal medical decisions are abusing their power. Coercion, whether in the form of prizes, or threat of enforcement and a loss of your right to earn a living is not a legitimate function of government. Coercion is the intimidation of a person to compel the individual to do some act against his or her will using psychological pressure, physical force, or threats. A mandate to compel an injection intentionally and unlawfully restrains another's freedom to make decisions about his medical treatment and his property in his body.

A call to action with Citizens’ Alliance for Property Rights (CAPR). Make your voice heard more loudly by becoming a member of CAPR (visit https://capr.us/donate/membership) as we work together for greater political impact. We work toward the goal of protecting your right to control your own person in making your medical decisions. We are working to encourage a legislative intervention and correction of the processes that have led to Washington State Governor Inslee’s open- ended emergency declaration and the resulting unconstitutionally based and illegal mandates.

Although it is said mandates through proclamation do not carry the force of law, they do impact individual liberty through the threat of enforcement, resulting in coercion, penalty, and loss of benefits. This must be corrected legislatively or through the courts of law because the refusal to comply with the governor’s mandates carries a heavy enforcement burden few are willing or able to accept.

A special session of the legislature must be called to restore representative governance and end the emergency proclamation. During the special session, Senate Bill 5144 should be passed as a first step to restore medical freedom. You may wish to contact your governor, legislators, and the Department of Health with your opinion on the current vaccination mandate.

• https://www.governor.wa.gov/contact/contact/contacting-governors-office

• https://leg.wa.gov/house/Pages/default.aspx

• https://leg.wa.gov/senate/Pages/default.aspx

• https://www.doh.wa.gov/AboutUs/Leadership

Join CAPR today at www.capr.us , and we’ll keep you updated and provide you strategies for ongoing engagement on these issues, as well as methods for achieving an exemption from the mandates.

Additional Information to Consider as You Make Your Medical Choice, Should Your Decision be Made in Liberty or Mandated by Government or Your Employer?

An injection used for the prevention of COVID has not been approved and licensed by the FDA, and it is an investigational or experimental treatment that may or may not work as described or anticipated. The burden of proof that any injection will serve to prevent a disease must be met by the person mandating an injection, that proof must be clear, convincing evidence that a medical treatment or injection substantially reduces transmission of a disease that will result in severe bodily harm in a manner that cannot be met through another method or means. When existing legal and reasonable alternatives are available, and proven therapeutic treatment exists and is available, a mandate cannot be enforced. This holds true even if the FDA were to approve and license any of the current injections, as the 3.5-month testing, trial, and data gathering fall far short of the typical 6–12-year pre-approval and licensing phase for finalization of the process for the FDA. It is understood recent studies have demonstrated the injections do not prevent an individual from passing Covid to others via “viral load”, and so do not protect others, but rather protect the injected individual from Covid or severe Covid, and that the efficacy of the injections seem to be 4 to 5 months, when an additional injection would be needed. This undermines the proclaimed impetus behind a vaccine mandate. Making individual choice the correct approach to injections.

An experimental or investigational treatment must not be forced or mandated, rather knowing voluntary informed consent must be met by the treated individual, or that individual’s legal guardian.

Safety and efficacy of the “vaccines” has not been demonstrated. A substantial risk/benefit analysis has not been produced but must be presented that provides provable information that a product is safe for use and effective in use. An injection must provably provide less risk to an individual taking an injection than to another individual purported to be protected by your taking of the injection. The risk to others must be substantial in that the likelihood of an individual contracting the disease is proven to be a high percentage of individuals within the entire population and that in fact those contracting the disease have an overall high degree of substantial bodily harm rather than illness.

Given the high rate of occurrence of adverse effects, and the wide range of types of adverse effects that have been reported to date, as well as the potential for vaccine-driven disease enhancement, there is a need for a better understanding of the benefits and risks of mass vaccination. Some individuals bear a higher risk in accepting and using an injection than do others, a blanket vaccine mandate for all individuals does not benefit the population. These concepts have not been analyzed and provided for in a risk/benefit analysis.

Data from “vaccine” makers, and the FDA does not exist to prove or assess the efficacy of the injections to prevent the disease, or that those receiving the vaccine will not transmit the disease. Comparative data available for the pre- “vaccine” to the post “vaccine” population, show there is a greater rate of transmission compared to the rate a year ago. Data from August 15th of last year with no injections available show the 7-day average of Covid infections was 428, compared to August 15th of 2021 when injections are available, the 7-day average of Covid infection rate is 1,673. When taken into context with a 50 to 70 percent “vaccination” rate, data does not confirm the efficacy of the injections. The number of deaths reported to the Vaccine Averse Reporting System (VAERS) as of August 11, 2021, of those receiving the “vaccine” injections are 12,000. The lack of thorough testing in animals prior to clinical trials, and authorization based on safety data generated during trials that lasted less than 3.5 months means that insufficient data are available to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the “vaccines.”

[1] Trespass - To commit an unlawful injury to the person, property, or rights of another, with actual or implied force or violence. To infringe on the privacy, time, or attention of another. To commit an offense or a sin; transgress or err. (Adapted from The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, 5th Edition).

{2] The Ninth and Fourteenth Amendments of the Federal Constitution affirm the right of an individual to make their own medical decisions based on informed consent. Washington v. Harper, 494 U.S. 210, 229 (1990), Cruzan v. Dir., Mo. Dept. of Public Health, 497 U.S. 261, 278 (1990), Washington v. Glucksberg, 521 U.S. 702, 722 n.17 (1997), Vacco v. Quill, 521 U.S. 793, 807 (1997).

[3] John Locke Natural Rights to Life, Liberty, and Property - Foundation for Economic Education (fee.org)

For your convenience, links have been included in this article and are not meant to promote any medical theory or protocol but rather to promote research and the gathering of information for persons who have an interest in doing so. This post is CAPR’s attempt to educate and inform and is not medical or legal advice. As always, individuals should use their own best interest and judgement when making decisions.

References

Washington v Glucksberg https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/521/702/

http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/

https://www.fda.gov/drugs/types-applications/investigational-new-drug-ind-application

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/21/360bbb-3

https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanmic/article/PIIS2666-5247(21)00069-0/fulltext

https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/34216472/

https://constitution.congress.gov/constitution/

https://leg.wa.gov/CodeReviser/Pages/WAConstitution.aspx

https://nclalegal.org/2021/08/george-mason-univ-caves-to-nclas-lawsuit-over-vaccine-mandate-grants-prof-medical-exemption/

https://nclalegal.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/08/Zywicki-Complaint-All-Attachments.pdf

https://forunitedsolutions.org/religious-exemptions