“My Body, My Choice”? http://cafe.nfshost.com/?p=6683

THRONE, ALTAR, LIBERTY

THE CANADIAN RED ENSIGN

The Canadian Red Ensign

SATURDAY, SEPTEMBER 4, 2021

“My Body, My Choice”?

The slogan “my body, my choice” is not a new one.   It has been around for years and, until practically yesterday, everyone who heard it – or read it on a placard – knew who the person saying it –or holding the placard – was and what this person was talking about.    That person was someone who identified as “pro-choice”, the choice in question being the choice of a woman to have an abortion.

Those of us who were on the right side of the abortion debate, the side that generally went by the label “pro-life”, would answer this slogan by pointing out that it was not just the woman’s body that would be affected by the abortion.    The unborn baby inside her would also be affected.    Indeed, its life would be terminated as that is the essential nature of an abortion.    The pro-choice movement has gone to great lengths to disguise the true nature of abortion from itself, and from those women contemplating one.    They use euphemistic language like “reproductive rights”, “reproductive health”, and the like in order to depict abortion as being merely a routine medical procedure.    They object strenuously to efforts by the pro-life movement to shatter this façade and bring the true nature of abortion out into the open by, for example, showing graphic depictions of aborted babies.

It can no longer be assumed, when one hears the slogan “my body, my choice”, that the person speaking is talking about abortion.   Indeed, it is probably safe to say that if you hear that slogan today, the chances are that the person saying it is not talking about abortion at all.    This is because in the last couple of months or so the slogan has been adopted by a different group of people altogether, those who are on the right side of the forced vaccine debate and are bravely standing up to the mob which, scared senseless by two years of media fear porn about the bat flu virus, is supporting governments in their efforts to shove needles into everyone’s arms whether they want them or not.

The mob’s answer to this new use of the slogan, when they bother to respond with anything other than “shut up and do what you are told” is similar to the pro-life movement’s answer to the pro-abortion use of the slogan.   It is not just our bodies, they tell us.   It is our duty to do our part to take the jab in order to protect others from the bat flu and if we don’t do our part the government should force us to do so by making our lives as miserable as possible until we do.

Before showing how and why the pro-life movement was right in its answer to the slogan as used by the pro-abortion movement while the supporters of forced vaccination are wrong in their answer to the slogan, it might be interesting to observe another way in which these two seemingly disparate issues intersect.    Among those of us who are on the side of the angels against forced vaccination there are those who are merely against vaccines being coerced and there are those who have objections to the vaccines qua vaccines.   Those who object to the vaccines qua vaccines could be further divided into those who are against all vaccines on principle and those who have problems with the bat flu vaccines specifically.    The latter include a large number of traditionalist Roman Catholics and Orthodox, evangelical Protestants, and other religious conservatives.    One of the reasons more religious conservatives have objected to the bat flu vaccines is that the mRNA type vaccines (Pfizer-BioNTech, Moderna) are developed from research that used a cell line originally derived from an aborted foetus and the Johnson & Johnson viral vector vaccine used a cell line from a different aborted foetus in its production and manufacturing stage.

Now, let us consider some differences between these scenarios that render the pro-life movement’s response to “my body, my choice” valid, and the pro-forced vaccination mob’s response to the same invalid.

The pro-life movement objects that “my body, my choice” is not a valid defense of abortion because abortion causes the death of someone other than the woman choosing to have an abortion.    This is a strong argument because a) abortion always, in every instance, and indeed, by definition, causes such a death, b) the death is always of a specific someone who is known, to the extent an unnamed person can be known, and c) the death is always intentional on the part of the persons performing and having the abortion.   The opposite of all of this is true in the case of someone who rejects the bat flu vaccines.    Someone not getting a vaccine is never the direct cause of another person’s death.    An unvaccinated person can only transmit the virus to someone else if he himself has the virus.   Even if he does have the virus and does transmit it to someone else that other person is far more likely to survive the virus than to die from it.   This is true even if the other person is in the most-at-risk category.   It would be extremely rare, if it happens at all, that causing another person, let alone a specific other person, to die would be part of the intent in deciding not to be vaccinated.    Therefore, the argument that the pro-life movement uses against “my body, my choice” in the case of abortion, does not hold up as an argument against the same in the case of forced vaccination.

A second important difference is in how the expression “my body, my choice” is used by the two groups.   The pro-choice movement uses it against those who would prohibit women from having an abortion.   The opponents of forced vaccination use it against those who would compel everybody to take an injection.   To compel somebody to do something requires a much stronger justification than to prohibit them from doing something.    This is especially the case when it comes to medical procedures.   A reasonable justification for denying someone a medical procedure that is not urgently needed to save the person’s life from immediate danger is far more conceivable than such a justification for compelling someone to undergo a medical procedure.    In the case of the bat flu vaccines, the clinical trials of which will not be completed for another two years, many of which include mRNA which has never been used in vaccines before, which increase the risk of the heart conditions pericarditis and myocarditis, as well as thrombosis (blood clots) and Bell’s palsy, and which is for a respiratory disease that people who are young and healthy have well over a 99% chance of surviving and even those who are not young and healthy are far more likely to survive than not, the idea that compelling anyone to take these could ever be rationally justified is morally repugnant.

So we see that “my body, my choice” is weak and invalid with regards to abortion but is strong and valid with regards to forced vaccination (vaccine mandates, vaccine passports, etc.)    The only reason there is a mob supporting and calling for the latter today, is because people and businesses have been terrorized by the media and their governments and subjected to hellish lockdowns and restrictions for almost two years, are sick of it, would agree to almost anything to be rid of it, and so they jumped aboard the forced vaccination bandwagon when the public health mandarins said that we need vaccine mandates and vaccine passports to avoid another lockdown.   The public health mandarins are lying, however, as they have been lying since day one of the bat flu pandemic.  All that is needed for us to avoid another lockdown is for governments to start respecting our constitutional rights and freedoms and the constitutional limits on their own power.     They will only do this if we insist upon it.   Letting them get away with forced vaccination is not a step towards the return of freedom, but towards greater tyranny. — GERRY T. 19FREEDOMMRNATYRANNYVACCINES

We Must Protest Always: A Zinger of a Letter on Vaccines

December 9, 2020

ATTN: Female employee at the City of Hamilton Municipal By-Law office who answered the phone at approx. 4:15 PM on November 6, 2020, Re: Covid-19 By-Law enforcement

Hello,

The purpose of this letter is to address our phone conversation which took place on November 6, 2020. Regrettably, I failed to ask your name; so egregious was the dialogue received.

Unfortunately, yes it has taken me over a month to be able to address this matter; as I am very busy with working at 2 concurrent jobs + have had numerous other important responsibilities and deadlines to meet.

Specifically, my phone call to you at the aforementioned day and time is regarding my inquiry which was pertaining to my local gym imposing a draconian rule that ‘all people should be masked at all times inside our facility’, which is in direct contravention to the exemption stipulated within the City of Hamilton by-law: “A person who is actively engaged in an athletic or fitness activity” https://www.hamilton.ca/coronavirus/face-coverings-and-masks-by-law.

During our phone conversation, you flatly, rudely dismissed my concern: “Join another gym or jog around the block” was your ‘advice’, rather than addressing the harmful, unnecessary requirement being imposed upon members of this gym. You also dismissed the physical consequences mentioned to you as a direct result of my trying to adhere to the gym’s ‘fully masked at ALL times’ imposition. You did not care that the gym failed to consider warnings issued by the WHO with respect to the engagement of physical activity while masked; please refer to the enclosed information. (You can also freely access many other sources of similar health warnings).

Compared to Covid-19, members of that gym are far more likely to experience considerable damage to their health while being deprived of oxygen, repeatedly inhaling their own carbon dioxide, and the breath vapours + bacteria forming on their face covering during physical activity; especially during cardiovascular exercise. I felt unwell with a very hoarse throat, dizziness and lightheadedness for days after trying to adhere to the vicious, relentless demands of the gym’s staff that my mouth & nose be completely covered 100% of the time no matter what while working out at the facility on the evening of November 5, 2020. But evidently, someone’s (or perhaps just ‘my’) physical suffering is of no consequence to you.

You felt it appropriate to keep dismissing my legitimate concerns and the empirical references mentioned to you.

I then expressed concerns regarding the likelihood of upcoming mandatory vaccinations for Covid-19 (the recovery rate from Covid-10 is approx. 99.3%, so why would a vaccine even be necessary or moreover, mandatory?), and explained how vaccines have always caused me serious reactions from which I continue to suffer, and thus I am unable to receive any further vaccines of any kind, ever again…. because the next one would likely kill me.

Your response to this was… in a condescending, petulant, sarcastic tone of voice… “I like to obey the law. I alllllways OBEY the lawwww. What if there was a smallpox epidemic?

Would you still refuse to get a vaccine?”

So in essence, you implied that my being unable to receive vaccines ever again (without experiencing further damage & harm) is tantamount to committing an illegal or even criminal act.

The zero compassion, zero humanity, extremely Communist mentality you demonstrated is not only deeply shameful, but is also acutely terrifying.

As an FYI: The Pfizer Covid vaccine ingredients have been disclosed publicly as of today. They are posted on the Health Canada website. I have read about each of the ingredients. One is a polyvinyl acetal resin (normally used in the plastics industry), and is patented by MONSANTO… the GMO pesticide company. If that weren’t bad enough: One of the other ingredients is potassium chloride…. which is one of the active ingredients in LETHAL INJECTIONS to STOP THE HEART. No need to take ‘my’ word about this. Look it up.

Incidentally, my ex-husband was an MD. He turned against most mainstream medicine after learning first hand of the serious hazards from vaccines and many pharmaceutical drugs.

Furthermore, I can count myself among the segment of the population which is knowingly vaccine-damaged. Vaccines have always caused me a variety of serious reactions, and have easily reduced my natural lifespan by a few decades. It was only after my first year of regular, intense gym workouts and following a strict diet of low-carbohydrates + whole foods that my recovery from vaccine damage began. It has been improving ever since. (Unfortunately, my being overweight with disproportionate fat accumulations & very easy weight gain is still an ongoing yet unrelated problem to this particular matter).

You ended our phone conversation by accusing me of “making the discussion very bizarre”.

Whoever you are, you possess the compassion, insights, and logic of a glacier.

Hopefully the aforementioned + enclosed information ‘might’ supply you with what you may consider to be worthwhile food for thought.

Sincerely,

R. Whyte.

Law-abiding, tax-paying, hard-working, born & raised Canadian citizen + resident of Hamilton, Ontario.