You’re invited! Join LifeSite in celebrating 25 years of pro-life and pro-family reporting at our anniversary Gala August 17th in Naples, Florida. Tickets and sponsorships can be purchased by clicking here.
SUDBURY, Ontario (LifeSiteNews) – A Catholic nurse in Ontario won in arbitration against her employer, Public Health Sudbury, who placed her on unpaid leave for not taking the COVID vaccine.
The woman, who remains anonymous, and her representatives argued that to dismiss her from employment for not taking the jab was tantamount to discrimination because of religion, which is forbidden under the Ontario Human Rights Code.
She had informed her employer when the vaccine mandate came into effect last fall that she would not partake in the program due to her objection to any vaccine derived from or manufactured with aborted fetal cell tissue.
The nurse attends the Traditional Latin Mass (TLM) in the area, and expressed that from her perspective, she could not in good conscience take the jab.
Public Health Sudbury legal representatives tried to use recent statements from the Pope and the Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith against her, citing statements that were pro-COVID jab such as when Pope Francis suggested it was a “moral obligation” to be vaccinated.
The representatives for Public Health Sudbury also cited the December 2020 statement from the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith (CDF), which stated that it is “morally acceptable to receive COVID-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process.” This statement from Rome was made under the pretext – admitted by the document itself – that the CDF believed that COVID constituted “a grave danger” that represented an “uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent.”
The WHO Pandemic Treaty looks set to be one of the biggest power-grabs in living memory, with unelected globalists seeking the power to declare pandemics, and then control your country's response.
But it's not too late to do something about it.
SIGN and SHARE this special petition telling Director General Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus that the WHO will never usurp your nation's sovereignty.
The past two years have been rife with infringements on personal liberties and civil rights by national governments, but now the World Health Organization is seeking to appropriate those same abusive powers to itself at a global level.
194 member states representing 99% of the world's population are expected to sign pandemic treaties with the WHO that would allow Tedros, or any future Director General, to dictate exactly how your nation would respond to a new disease outbreak which they consider a pandemic.
This attack on national sovereignty will come as no surprise to those who for years have listened to elites like Klaus Schwab and Bill Gates discussing their vision for the centralization of power into globalist organizations like the World Economic Forum (WEF), the WHO and the rest of the United Nations.
SIGN this petition against the WHO's Pandemic Treaty, before it's too late.
Ludicrously, 20 world leaders calling for the treaty, including Tedros, Boris Johnson and Emmanuel Macron, compared the post-Covid world to the post-WWII period, saying similar co-operation is now needed to "dispel the temptations of isolationism and nationalism, and to address the challenges that could only be achieved together in the spirit of solidarity and co-operation - namely peace, prosperity, health and security."
Australian PM Scott Morrison is the latest leader to express support for a “pandemic treaty”.
The stated intention of the WHO is to “kickstart a global process to draft and negotiate a convention, agreement or other international instrument under the Constitution of the World Health Organization to strengthen pandemic prevention, preparedness and response.”
The wheels are already in motion, with the Biden administration officially proposing the initial steps towards handing global pandemic control to the WHO.
Biden's representatives have submitted amendments to the WHO's International Health Regulations (IHR), which would give the Director General the right to declare health emergencies in any nation, even when disputed by the country in question.
These amendments, which would be legally binding under international law, will be voted on by the World Health Assembly (the governing body of the WHO) at a special convention running from May 22-28 and set the stage for a fully-fledged pandemic treaty to be passed.
SIGN and SHARE the petition telling the WHO that you won't accept any pandemic treaty
The ball has been rolling since the last World Health Assembly meeting in December, where the United States launched negotiations "on a new international health instrument on pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response," a U.S. statement read.
"This momentous step represents our collective responsibility to work together to advance health security and to make the global health system stronger and more responsive.
"We look forward to broad and deep negotiations using a whole-of-society and whole-of-government approach that will strengthen the international legal framework for public health/pandemic prevention, preparedness, and response and enable us to address issues of equity, accountability, and multisectoral collaboration evident in the COVID-19 pandemic.
"We know it will take all of us working together across governments, private sector, philanthropy, academia, and civil society to make rapid progress towards a long-term solution for these complex problems," the U.S. statement added.
SIGN the petition today to show the WHO that you won't accept this attack on national sovereignty.
These are precarious times in which freedom and self-determination must be defended from those who would ride rough-shod over your civil rights.
We do not want to go back to global lockdowns, vaccine mandates and propoganda.
Sign the petition - speak up now!
For More Information:
Pandemic Treaty is a backdoor to global governance - LifeSiteNews
Dr. Robert Malone on the WHO's power-grab - LifeSiteNews
**Photo: YouTube Screenshot**
However, since the jabs have been rolled out, it has been observed the world over that even in countries with almost complete vaccine uptake, the jabs offer little to no protection regarding the spread of the virus.
Robert Herman, the arbitrator in the case, did not consider the effectiveness of the jab in his ruling, but rather stuck to the issue of religious conscience rights guaranteed in Ontario.
He understood that the Catholic hierarchy has pushed the jab on Catholics. However, this was not relevant to how the law ought to be interpreted, in his opinion.
He ruled, “There can be multiple reasons for objecting to getting vaccinated, but as long as one of the reasons is sincerely and legitimately based upon one’s creed, as subjectively interpreted and applied, an applicant would be entitled to an exception under the (human rights code) and the vaccine policy itself.”
“Once the grievor learned about the fetal cell line connection with the vaccines, even if that connection is factually and objectively quite remote, if the grievor sincerely believes that her faith does not allow her to get vaccinated, that would be sufficient grounds for granting her request for an exemption,” he added.
The ruling was the first in Canada to offer legal clarity on how religious exemptions to vaccinations ought to be justified.
Currently, it is not clear if she will be reinstated or given back pay, as her union is still advocating on her behalf with the recent ruling having taken place.