MELBOURNE (LifeSiteNews) — Perhaps the biggest disappointment in the COVID-19 crisis is the failure of Australia’s courts and judicial bodies to provide checks and balances on the politicians and bureaucrats who have aggressively robbed citizens of many of their basic rights. So far, no judges have shown any commitment to protecting those rights despite many attempts at litigation. There is little sign any will in the future.
I have felt this disappointment personally with my incitement changes. I am in and out of court regularly defending my innocence. However, in the broader community, this has been felt widely through the lack of support for individuals to make their own medical choices in order to be employed,
It was initially thought that the Fair Work Commission, whose role is to protect workers’ rights, would act to curb the vaccine mandates which blackmail workers into getting either jabbed or losing their jobs. Hopes were raised last September when the deputy president of the Commission, Lyndall Dean, said in a case about flu vaccines that vaccination mandates are “medical apartheid and segregation.” She described it as “the antithesis of our democratic way of life and everything we value”, something that many of us Australians once thought, but no longer do. Dean extensively cited Federal law and judicial precedent to support her argument.
The response was swift and brutal. Dean was barred from hearing workplace vaccination matters and excluded from full bench work until she “completed training”. The message was clear to any other Commissioners thinking of standing up for the law. Do so, and you will lose your job.
Dean had expressed support for a social media post arguing public health measures implemented by the Australian government during the pandemic are akin to “Chinese-style totalitarian social control.” As if to prove the point, the manner of her silencing would have done any mid-level bureaucrat in the Chinese Communist Party, charged with re-educating dissidents, proud. Commission General Manager Murray Furlong said Dean would “attend training on responsibilities and standards of professional conduct expected of a member of the commission.” He added: “She will be excluded from all and any further full bench work at least until she’s completed that training … she has disqualified herself on the grounds of bias from adjudicating disputes relating to workplace vaccinations in future.”
By all accounts, Bishop Daniel Fernández Torres' diocese of Arecibo in Puerto Rico is flourishing because of his adherence to the perennial teachings of the Church.
But, without any formal proceedings, Bishop Fernández Torres has been summarily 'relieved' of his episcopal duties allegedly because he championed conscience rights in the face of a Church vaccine mandate in Puerto Rico.
Please SIGN this urgent petition to Pope Francis urging him to reinstate Bishop Fernández Torres now.
To be clear, COVID-19 is a serious disease, oftentimes with debilitating consequences, or worse, for those who contract it.
However, all coronavirus vaccines currently authorized for use in the U.S. and Puerto Rico have been tested on or produced with cell lines of aborted babies. And, the vaccines have been linked to serious side effects, while none has yet completed long-term testing.
Given the complexity of this issue, the Church has determined that getting vaccinated is a matter of personal discernment which each individual must make after informing his or her conscience.
As such, the Church teaches that there is no moral obligation to be vaccinated. Indeed, the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), the Church's teaching authority where faith and moral are concerned, issued a statement to that effect in December, 2020.
Specifically, the CDF's, “Note on the Morality of Using Some Anti-COVID-19 Vaccines,” of December 17, 2020, n. 5 states: “At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary.”
Therefore, it would appear that for simply restating the current teaching of the CDF and for opposing his brother bishops in Puerto Rico on this seminal matter of conscientious objection, Rome is now attempting to "cancel" Bishop Fernández Torres.
This is wrong, unfair and discriminatory!
And, Bishop Fernández Torres is hardly the first bishop to defend Church teaching on conscientious objection on the issue of mandatory vaccination. Both the Colorado and South Dakota bishops' conferences released similar statements, and like Bishop Fernández Torres, they also offered to validate religious exemptions for member of their flock who asked to be exempted from vaccination.
Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to Pope Francis urging him to reinstate Bishop Fernández Torres.
For his part, Bishop Fernández Torres, 57, a staunch defender of life and family, protested his removal as "totally unjust" in a statement released Wednesday (3/9/2022).
The bishop, who led his diocese for nearly 12 years, noted that Pope Francis’ apostolic delegate to Puerto Rico verbally requested that he resign, but said that he refused to do so, as he "did not want to become an accomplice of a totally unjust action."
"No process has been made against me," Bishop Fernández Torres wrote, "nor have I been formally accused of anything, and simply one day the apostolic delegate verbally communicated to me that Rome was asking me to resign."
“A successor of the apostles is now being replaced without even undertaking what would be a due canonical process to remove a parish priest,” the bishop added.
“I was informed that I had committed no crime but that I supposedly ‘had not been obedient to the pope nor had I been in sufficient communion with my brother bishops of Puerto Rico,’” he said. “It was suggested to me that if I resigned from the diocese I would remain at the service of the Church in case at some time I was needed in some other position; an offer that in fact proves my innocence.”
Please SIGN and SHARE this urgent petition to Pope Francis urging him to reinstate Bishop Fernández Torres. Thank you!
FOR MORE INFORMATION:
'Pope Francis abruptly removes faithful bishop who opposed COVID vaccine mandates' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/pope-francis-abruptly-removes-faithful-bishop-who-opposed-covid-vaccine-mandates/
'Puerto Rico bishop supports conscience objections to COVID vaccines, allows priests to sign exemptions' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/puerto-rico-bishop-supports-conscience-objections-to-covid-vaccines-allows-priests-to-sign-exemptions/
**Photo Credit: Diocese of Arecibo
Coroners are now joining in the deception. A Tasmanian father of four collapsed and died last year because of the side effects of the AstraZeneca COVID-19 vaccine (a similar technology to the Johnson & Johnson inoculations). According to newspaper reports, Ian William Reed, 44, suffered from an intra-cerebral haemorrhage, a type of stroke involving a blood vessel rupturing and bleeding inside the brain and abnormal blood clotting.
Coroner Simon Cooper found that Reed died from an immunological response to vaccination. Then, when asked by Reed’s wife whether there had been adequate information about the vaccine’s risks and side effects, he made the outrageous comment that he was “satisfied that at the relevant time there was sufficient information available as to the potential side effects.”
That is the exact opposite of the truth. Since the middle of last year there has been nothing but blanket advertising and pronouncements from politicians and bureaucrats claiming that the vaccines are safe and effective. It was obvious at the time that the government could not possibly have known such a thing and were lying when they said they did. There was not even enough short-term data to demonstrate they were safe and effective, let alone medium and long term indications.
Their lies are now being exposed. The fact that booster shots are required after three to six months – they are being mandated for some workers around the country – shows that they are not effective for very long, if at all. Governments are no longer pretending that they stop transmission or infection, so the argument that getting jabbed is a way to protect the whole community has been exposed as false.
It is also becoming clear that they are not safe, and that this should have been known all along. Pfizer has been forced to release its clinical data – the company tried to hide it for 75 years, but at least one US judge still remembers what the law is – and the evidence is damning. Tellingly, Pfizer chief executive Albert Bourla is backpedalling on the decision to use an untried experimental gene therapy, mRNA, saying he found the strategy “counterintuitive”. There seems little doubt that the evidence of harm will continue to accumulate.
This is what Cooper should have said: “The government not only failed to warn people about the potential side effects of the vaccines, they insisted that they were completely safe when they could not have known this because even short term data was not available. They did not tell Australians that the jabs were only provisionally approved. They did not tell Australians that the gene therapy technology had either never been used or only rarely used. They did not tell Australians that the inoculations do not meet the Federal government’s own definition of what a vaccine is. They did not tell millions of Australians that they were participating in an experimental drug trial. They blackmailed Australians into choosing between their jobs and the jab, and viciously attacked anyone who disagreed. The government has criminally misled the people.”
This will not happen because it would require moral clarity and courage. Neither has been evident in Australia’s judicial bodies.