A senator believes that we should trust the experts. But how do we know that the senator himself is trustworthy? Is he an expert on vaccines? Is his trust in experts generally applicable to ALL vaccines and all nameless government officials in position today or in the future? If killing a death row inmate requires so much scrutiny, why citizens' explicit agreements can be bypassed?
- ''Are vaccination mandates imposed by legislatures lawful, as they conflict with physicians’/practitioners’ obligation to obtain valid consent for vaccination?''
What gives anyone to right to make decisions over another persons body?
However it appears that doctors were manipulated to comply much the same as people were however they should have known better - if any of them did speak out against the mandated jabs then it was kept out the media.
- ''Are physicians/practitioners indemnified if they fail to obtain valid consent for vaccination?''
They shouldn't be protected, a doctor who ignores their hypocritical oath should perhaps be struck on the register.
In the end it still goes back to the treasonous Scott Morrison government who have deliberately ignored the best interests of the people that they're pretending to have been looking after while bending over backwards and forewards like the rubbery sellouts that they truly are while covertly catering to the multinational corporate agenda which has poisoned killed and reduced the life expectancy and fertility rates of populations right around the world in what can only be described as deliberate global population reduction, excess deaths is the evidence - Genocide by another name.
What I'll term ethical behavior is likely cyclical, as are many other occurrences in life.
The opposite would be unethical behavior, also cyclical.
I put the cycles for much of what I observe (a history rhymes rather than repeats exercise) into 80 -120 year cycles. Four generations-worth of human lifespans, which is enough time for basic learned experience to die off, creating a setup for the rhyming. The experienced people who might have said 'we tried xxx , didn't work out very well' are all gone by the end of the cycle. They just are not around to provide caution and a bit of wisdom.
Four generations is in line with Strauss & Howe. I started watching for the pattern (Fourth Turnings) after reading of their work in the very early 1990's.
Many individuals who use cycles of varying length, depending upon the topic, make some valid, repeatable connections.
I frequently make comment on greed and power. The linked writing is another example of this, particularly the greed side.
I read about a third of the Fourth Turning back in the day, it was certainly a compelling case. Institutions rise and fall. When they are fresh, they are relatively pure, but there's always just a little bacteria in their culture (petri dish) no matter what (human nature). Over time, that bacteria multiplies and divides until there is nothing but corruption. <--- We are here. Let's hope this turns over ASAP.
Take a look at "The Collapse of Complex Societies" Joseph A. Tainter; ISBN 978-0-521-38673-9. Cambridge University Press; 1988
Written by an archaeologist, not really a page-turner. However, loaded with useful information.
He makes his case in the first half, and uses examples in the second half.
I found it a learning experience which also helps with understanding other occurrences in history such as decline of the Bronze Age and also the deforestation of many areas of the Mediterranean, along with the over-extension of the Romans heading North. (they needed wood to run their furnaces).
It was a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling that Jacobson appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
It's from the Supreme Court ruling that we get the infamous "Jacobson" case. It is this case that has been cited to support the power of the State to force a specific type of medical intervention, "vaccination," on Americans.
Jacobson, upon losing his case at the State level and being fined, refused to pay it. He was jailed and ended up paying the fine to be released. After this, he proceeded to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his fine and conviction, as well as reaffirming the power of the State to "mandate" "vaccination" to "prevent the spread" of "contagious" disease.
As Elizabeth has pointed out, there are multiple issues with this case. A big one is informed consent. The other is the use of force for a medical intervention "believed" to stop the spread of disease. What if the medical intervention is called a "vaccine," but does not stop the spread; that is, "transmission?" What if that "vaccine" only (allegedly) keeps the recipient from severe disease?
Then it only meets the definition of a medical treatment. What if it's all B.S. that "vaccines" prevent the spread of disease? Which it is, IMO. What then? Then all "vaccines" become "medical treatments" among many, which a person has the God-given right to choose or decline.
Jacobson allowed for a fine, not exclusion from school or work!
The judges and lawyers are so dense that they think it means it's ok to exclude people from society.
Why? The cult of vaccination.
A senator believes that we should trust the experts. But how do we know that the senator himself is trustworthy? Is he an expert on vaccines? Is his trust in experts generally applicable to ALL vaccines and all nameless government officials in position today or in the future? If killing a death row inmate requires so much scrutiny, why citizens' explicit agreements can be bypassed?
- ''Are vaccination mandates imposed by legislatures lawful, as they conflict with physicians’/practitioners’ obligation to obtain valid consent for vaccination?''
What gives anyone to right to make decisions over another persons body?
However it appears that doctors were manipulated to comply much the same as people were however they should have known better - if any of them did speak out against the mandated jabs then it was kept out the media.
- ''Are physicians/practitioners indemnified if they fail to obtain valid consent for vaccination?''
They shouldn't be protected, a doctor who ignores their hypocritical oath should perhaps be struck on the register.
In the end it still goes back to the treasonous Scott Morrison government who have deliberately ignored the best interests of the people that they're pretending to have been looking after while bending over backwards and forewards like the rubbery sellouts that they truly are while covertly catering to the multinational corporate agenda which has poisoned killed and reduced the life expectancy and fertility rates of populations right around the world in what can only be described as deliberate global population reduction, excess deaths is the evidence - Genocide by another name.
$ 5 dollars in 1905 equates to $179 in 2025
Is that a Freudian slip Finn? 'hypocritical oath'... 😉
There are times when it would be nice to post pictures
http://www.thefrustratedteacher.com/2009/08/wednesday-bonus-cartoon-fun-dont-fuck.html
Ms. Hart, this article is for you: https://chemtrails.substack.com/p/exposed-the-virus-scam-untold-history
I'd say have fun but...........you won't. You will likely learn some insane things you didn't know about the history of the vaccine fraud though.
Thanks for the link TriTorch.
Unfortunately, there are so many insane things!
Certainly an interesting read.
What I'll term ethical behavior is likely cyclical, as are many other occurrences in life.
The opposite would be unethical behavior, also cyclical.
I put the cycles for much of what I observe (a history rhymes rather than repeats exercise) into 80 -120 year cycles. Four generations-worth of human lifespans, which is enough time for basic learned experience to die off, creating a setup for the rhyming. The experienced people who might have said 'we tried xxx , didn't work out very well' are all gone by the end of the cycle. They just are not around to provide caution and a bit of wisdom.
Four generations is in line with Strauss & Howe. I started watching for the pattern (Fourth Turnings) after reading of their work in the very early 1990's.
Many individuals who use cycles of varying length, depending upon the topic, make some valid, repeatable connections.
I frequently make comment on greed and power. The linked writing is another example of this, particularly the greed side.
Thank you for the link.
Interesting!
I read about a third of the Fourth Turning back in the day, it was certainly a compelling case. Institutions rise and fall. When they are fresh, they are relatively pure, but there's always just a little bacteria in their culture (petri dish) no matter what (human nature). Over time, that bacteria multiplies and divides until there is nothing but corruption. <--- We are here. Let's hope this turns over ASAP.
Take a look at "The Collapse of Complex Societies" Joseph A. Tainter; ISBN 978-0-521-38673-9. Cambridge University Press; 1988
Written by an archaeologist, not really a page-turner. However, loaded with useful information.
He makes his case in the first half, and uses examples in the second half.
I found it a learning experience which also helps with understanding other occurrences in history such as decline of the Bronze Age and also the deforestation of many areas of the Mediterranean, along with the over-extension of the Romans heading North. (they needed wood to run their furnaces).
Fascinating material, imo.
Since you've already done some research, was there an appeal of the case?
This was a Supreme Court decision so no appeal
I missed that, thought it was a state case. TY
It was a Massachusetts Supreme Judicial Court ruling that Jacobson appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court.
It's from the Supreme Court ruling that we get the infamous "Jacobson" case. It is this case that has been cited to support the power of the State to force a specific type of medical intervention, "vaccination," on Americans.
Jacobson, upon losing his case at the State level and being fined, refused to pay it. He was jailed and ended up paying the fine to be released. After this, he proceeded to appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court.
The U.S. Supreme Court upheld his fine and conviction, as well as reaffirming the power of the State to "mandate" "vaccination" to "prevent the spread" of "contagious" disease.
As Elizabeth has pointed out, there are multiple issues with this case. A big one is informed consent. The other is the use of force for a medical intervention "believed" to stop the spread of disease. What if the medical intervention is called a "vaccine," but does not stop the spread; that is, "transmission?" What if that "vaccine" only (allegedly) keeps the recipient from severe disease?
Then it only meets the definition of a medical treatment. What if it's all B.S. that "vaccines" prevent the spread of disease? Which it is, IMO. What then? Then all "vaccines" become "medical treatments" among many, which a person has the God-given right to choose or decline.