News
Featured Image
 Twitter

December 4, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) — Twitter has marked as “potentially sensitive content” a screenshot of Article 6 of the 2005 UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights, which states that “medical intervention is only to be carried out with the prior, free and informed consent of the person concerned.”

A Twitter user posted Article 6 of the document in response to a video clip of U.K. Member of Parliament Desmond Swayne’s impassioned admonition against coerced vaccines. Swayne said that such coercion would “set the seal on the government’s reputation as the most authoritarian since the Commonwealth of the 1650s.”

“And now we discover that a vaccination may be a passport to the acquisition of your civil liberties,” Swayne continued. “And without which you would have all sorts of things that you would be able to do, denied to you. Can I say that that would be absolutely disproportionate to a virus with a mortality rate of verging on 1 percent? It would equally be a terrible precedent to set for other vaccines and medicines.”

Another member of parliament chimed in, “We’ve got to pay attention to implicit coercion, and that is, if the government turns a blind eye to allowing businesses like airlines and restaurants to refuse to let people in unless they’ve had the vaccination, the government’s got to decide whether it’s willing to allow people to discriminate on that basis.”

Swayne replied, “Discrimination. It would be vaccinationism! Which we must of course, resist!”

Dr. Michael Yeadon, former Vice President for Allergy & Respiratory at Pfizer, which is developing a COVID-19 vaccine, quoted this tweet screenshot of Article 6 of the document, saying, “This is inalienable & must not be pushed aside. It will not be.”

Yeadon wrote in an October article, “There is absolutely no need for vaccines to extinguish the pandemic. You do not vaccinate people who aren’t at risk from a disease. You also don’t set about planning to vaccinate millions of fit and healthy people with a vaccine that hasn’t been extensively tested on human subjects.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to government and corporate penalties for refusing COVID-19 vaccine
  Show Petition Text
102962 have signed the petition.
Let's get to 125000!
Thank you for signing this petition!
Add your signature:
  Show Petition Text
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.
Keep me updated via email on this petition and related issues.

                                                                                                                      **Photo credit: Shutterstock.com

Mainstream media sources are promoting offensive suggestions by some doctors that people who refuse a vaccine for COVID-19 should be "punished" by the government and by business - effectively coercing them into taking the vaccine.

  • One group of doctors writing in 'USA Today' suggested that the government impose special taxes (i.e., fines) on people who refuse the vaccination and that business simply refuse to serve them. [see story below]
  • Another doctor writing in an online publication called 'The Conversation' shamelessly suggested that people who refuse a vaccine should be given a psychoactive drug to induce compliance. [see story below]

But, these suggestions are plain political posturing, and have nothing to do with science or with the recent trends of the disease.

And, in case they haven't noticed, we live in a democracy not a medical dictatorship!

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks policy-makers and business people, at all levels, to pledge to respect the rights of those who, in good conscience, decide not to vaccinate themselves or their children.

People should not have to live in fear of governmental or corporate retribution for refusing a vaccine which is being rushed to market by Big Pharma and their fellow-travelers in NGOs, like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.

It would be intolerable and immoral for the government or business to coerce someone, and their family, to take a COVID vaccine against their will to avoid a fine, or just so they can do their weekly grocery shopping.

Medical freedom must be respected in principle and also in practice.

So, it is now time that our policy-makers listen to all voices involved in this vital conversation, and start to represent those who will not tolerate being punished for refusing a vaccine.

Simply put, legislatures must begin to act as legislatures again.

Questions must be asked. Hearings and investigations must be held. And, the legislatures of each state and country must return to the business of representing the people who voted for them, assuming their rightful place as the originator of legislation.

We can no longer accept the dictates of executive branches without question, especially now that, statistically speaking, the initial brunt of the COVID crisis has passed.

Neither can we accept the dictates of doctors who seem detached from reality and from science, and who only seem to be attached to the idea of promoting ideas which contribute to the agrandizement of power and control of political interests, and wealth of those who stand to make a lot of money from the sale of a COVID vaccine.

Please SIGN this urgent petition which asks government and business leaders to pledge to respect the rights of those who refuse a COVID vaccine, and not seek to punish them for doing so.

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Doctors lay out plan to ‘punish’ people who refuse coronavirus vaccine: ‘There is no alternative’' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/doctors-lay-out-plan-to-punish-people-who-refuse-coronavirus-vaccine-there-is-no-alternative

'US professor: ‘Psychoactive pill’ should be covertly administered to ensure lockdown compliance' - https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/us-professor-ensure-lockdown-compliance-by-drugging-dissenters-with-psychoactive-pill

  Hide Petition Text

Social media giants have been notorious for their politically biased “fact-checking” and outright censorship of posts, and even social media users themselves, for sharing information they deem to be incorrect, misleading, or harmful. Big tech has been particularly aggressive towards posts which question vaccines.

In a lawsuit filed against Facebook, Children’s Health Defense recounted that Democratic congressman Adam Schiff “threatened to introduce legislation to remove Facebook’s immunity under Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act unless Facebook implemented algorithms to ‘distinguish’ and suppress ‘vaccine misinformation’ and advertising.”

Facebook announced yesterday that it will “start removing false claims” about COVID-19 vaccines “that have been debunked by public health experts” on Facebook, as well as Instagram, which is part of Facebook.

Earlier this year, Facebook revealed that in March alone, the company “displayed warnings on about 40 million posts related to COVID-19 on Facebook … When people saw those warning labels, 95% of the time they did not go on to view the original content.”

According to Twitter’s Sensitive Media Policy, its “potentially sensitive content” warning label is meant for content which depicts graphic violence, adult content, and hateful imagery.

“Anyone can report potential violations of this policy via our dedicated reporting flows,” according to their policy. “If you don’t mark your media as sensitive, we will do so manually if your content is reported for review.”

RELATED

Forced COVID vaccinations violate UNESCO Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights

Comments

Commenting Guidelines

LifeSiteNews welcomes thoughtful, respectful comments that add useful information or insights. Demeaning, hostile or propagandistic comments, and streams not related to the storyline, will be removed.

LSN commenting is not for frequent personal blogging, on-going debates or theological or other disputes between commenters.

Multiple comments from one person under a story are discouraged (suggested maximum of three). Capitalized sentences or comments will be removed (Internet shouting).

LifeSiteNews gives priority to pro-life, pro-family commenters and reserves the right to edit or remove comments.

Comments under LifeSiteNews stories do not necessarily represent the views of LifeSiteNews.