Opinion
Featured Image
Supreme Court justice Neil Gorsuch.Eric Thayer / Getty Images

December 10, 2020 (Children’s Health Defense) — On Nov. 25, in a 5-4 decision, the U.S. Supreme Court granted an application for injunctive relief to the petitioners Roman Catholic Diocese of Brooklyn and Agudath Israel of America. The Supreme Court enjoined New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo from enforcing an executive order restricting houses of worship to 10- and 25-person occupancy limits.

The order reads:

In a red zone, while a synagogue or church may not admit more than 10 persons, businesses categorized as “essential” may admit as many people as they wish. And the list of “essential” businesses includes things such as acupuncture facilities, camp grounds, garages, as well as many whose services are not limited to those that can be regarded as essential, such as all plants manufacturing chemicals and microelectronics and all transportation facilities.

This decision is an about-face from the court’s earlier 2020 South Bay United Pentecostal Church v. Newsom. “Rather than apply a nonbinding and expired concurrence from South Bay, courts must resume applying the [First Amendment] Free Exercise Clause. Today, a majority of the Court makes this plain.”

— Article continues below Petition —
PETITION: No to mask mandates
  Show Petition Text
116078 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.

PETITION UPDATE (8/27/2020)

Thank you for continuing to SIGN and SHARE this petition, which asks policymakers at all levels of government to reverse mandatory mask orders within their borders.

Facebook has restored the share link for this petition, saying that the decision to block it was a 'mistake...'

Please share with your Facebook friends, but we should all take heed of this warning: when an organization or individuals have to beg, plead and cajole just to express objective truths, it may be time to start looking for other social networking platforms.

Facebook needs to treat its users with respect, no matter their political persuasion. Moreover, Facebook needs to treat objective reality and facts with more respect.

One-size-fits-all oppressive government mask mandates must stop!

Healthy adults and children should not be forced - by the state - to wear masks when the risk of infection is low and the benefit of wearing a mask is highly questionable.

________________________________________________________________________________________

PETITION UPDATE (8/25/2020)

Facebook is actively censoring this petition, saying that some people find it 'abusive.'

How anyone could find alternate facts about oppressive mask mandates 'abusive' is incredible...that is, impossible to believe.

This is exactly the kind of censorship which Big Tech is getting a bad reputation for.

The fact that Facebook calls differing opinion and objective reality "abusive" says a lot about Facebook and their agenda to silence reason and logic, not just conservatives and Christians.

But, people are more intelligent than Facebook give them credit for.

And, the more this continues, the more reasonable people will look alternate platforms to share their thoughts and connect with their friends and family. The more that happens, the less revenue Facebook will generate.

All of us have a decision to make, and the time is coming where we might have to tell our Facebook friends that we are moving to another platform.

We are encouraging people to continue SIGNING this petition and SHARING it via other platforms such as Parler and Gab, and to share the link below with your family and friends on Whatsapp, Telegram, Threema and Signal.

Thank you!

________________________________________________________________________________________

One-size-fits-all oppressive government mask mandates must stop!

Healthy adults and children should not be forced - by the state - to wear masks when the risk of infection is low and the benefit of wearing a mask is highly questionable.

Please SIGN this petition which asks policymakers at all levels of government to reverse mandatory mask mandates within their borders

Public health policies should be based on science and logic, not on the type of political posturing and virtue-signaling which led Joe Biden to recently call for a national mask mandate.

And, public health policies certainly shouldn't lead to a situation where more people could become sick.

But, that is exactly what these mandatory mask mandates are doing.

Here are four inconvenient facts about masks:

1) Masks** are largely ineffective at stopping the transmission of viruses.

The vast majority of masks worn by the public are made from material which cannot filter-out viruses because virus particles are too small to catch or obstruct.  Wearing cloth masks to stop a virus is like putting a bee in a bird cage to keep it from flying away.

Wearing a mask for long periods of time ensures that the wearer has a warm and moist receptacle around his or her mouth, on which viruses and bacteria can land and accumulate.

Thus, masks are actually likely to have little effect in stopping the spread of COVID-19 acting as a barrier, but could actually make things worse acting as a receptacle.

2) Mandates which call for masks to be worn outdoors are both absurd and oppressive.

3) There are clearly documented hazards of wearing masks for long periods of time.

4) And, since school is on everyone's mind...

Notwithstanding the above information on the ineffectiveness of most masks against viruses, we don't know if asymptomatic children can even transmit the virus.

But, it was a reported in an article in the July 21, 2020 Uk Times that: "There has been no recorded case of a teacher catching the coronavirus from a pupil anywhere in the world, according to one of the UK government's leading scientific advisers."

And, we also know that children are extremely unlikely to get seriously ill or die from COVID infections. In any case, children cannot possibly be expected to wear a mask properly in a way that would cut transmission.

There are still a lot of unknowns about COVID-19, but we have grown in our understanding of this disease since the beginning of the crisis.

The knowledge we have gained should allow government and health authorities to make more nuanced policies than the current one-size-fits-all mask mandates.

Where are the legislative hearings in county commissions, and state, provincial or federal legislatures before these drastic actions are mandated? Where are the open and transparent debates among experts that provide our representatives with the necessary information to make good policy decisions?

The real pandemic is the panic and the resulting tyranny that is being caused by dictatorial governors, corporate media and the monopolistic Big Tech.

The truth is that COVID-19 is like a bad cold for most people; this is not ebola or the plague.

Of course, the very elderly and those with serious health conditions should take precautions or be quarantined, but the rest of society should begin the long process of returning to normality.

The frenzy to force everyone to wear a mask, at all times, has gone beyond all comprehension, and goes against science and logic.

Please SIGN this petition which asks policymakers at all levels of government to reverse any mandatory mask order within the borders of their county, state, province, or country.

Thank you!

FOR MORE INFORMATION:

'Explosion in mandatory masking isn’t driven by science, but fear', PART I - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/explosion-in-mandatory-masking-isnt-driven-by-science-but-fear

'Explosion in mandatory masking isn’t driven by science, but fear', PART II - https://www.lifesitenews.com/blogs/explosion-in-mandatory-masking-isnt-driven-by-science-but-fear-part-ii

OSHA Document on Surgical Masks and Respirators stating that surgical masks do NOT prevent airborne particles (e.g. viruses) from being inhaled - https://www.osha.gov/Publications/OSHA3219.pdf

'PETER HITCHENS: Face masks turn us into voiceless submissives - and it’s not science forcing us to wear them, it’s politics' - https://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-8537489/PETER-HITCHENS-Face-masks-turn-voiceless-submissives.html

**Here, we are referring to the masks worn by the vast majority of the public, not to specialist masks or respirator-type masks.

***Photo Credit: Shutterstock.com

  Hide Petition Text

Justice Gorsuch’s concurrence:

The applicants have clearly established their entitlement to relief pending appellate review. They have shown that their First Amendment claims are likely to prevail, that denying them relief would lead to irreparable injury, and that granting relief would not harm the public interest.

Justice Gorsuch finally knocked Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905), the landmark Supreme Court decision authorizing broad emergency powers, off its perch.

Justice Gorsuch wrote:

Mr. Jacobson claimed that he possessed an implied “substantive due process” right to “bodily integrity” that emanated from the Fourteenth Amendment and allowed him to avoid not only the vaccine but also the $5 fine (about $140 today) and the need to show he qualified for an exemption.

The Supreme Court disagreed, and over the past 115 years, this case was precedent for hundreds of cases that followed. Until this Supreme Court ruling, Jacobson appeared to put us on a predestined path towards house arrest, aka isolation and quarantine, followed by mandatory vaccination for participation in society.

The Jacobson Court took judicial notice of common beliefs and elevated them to facts.

While we do not decide and cannot decide that vaccination is a preventative of smallpox, we take judicial notice of the fact that this is a common belief of the people of the State … What everybody knows the court must know …  (Justice Harlan)

Under this standard, the court in 1905 could have instructed the jury that any common belief was a true fact.

Since 1905, Jacobson v. Massachusetts has justified everything from mandatory school vaccination to lockdowns to even forced sterilization in Buck v. Bell (1927).

Justice Gorsuch finds that Jacobson is not a rubber stamp:

Here, by contrast, the State has effectively sought to ban all traditional forms of worship in affected “zones” whenever the Governor decrees and for as long as he chooses. Nothing in Jacobson purported to address, let alone approve, such serious and long-lasting intrusions into settled constitutional rights.

In fact, Jacobson explained that the challenged law survived only because it did not “contravene the Constitution of the United States” or “infringe any right granted or secured  by that instrument.”

Mandatory vaccination combined with lockdowns is the two-headed dragon. I commend Justice Gorsuch for once again standing up for constitutional liberties:

Why have some mistaken this court’s modest decision in Jacobson for a towering authority that overshadows the constitution during a pandemic? In the end, I can only surmise that much of the answer lies in a particular judicial impulse to stay out of the way in times of crisis. But if that impulse may be understandable or even admirable in other  circumstances, we may not shelter in place when the Constitution is under attack. Things never go well when we do.

Justice Gorsuch sees the Constitution as a sleeping giant: “Even if the Constitution has taken a holiday during this pandemic, it cannot become a sabbatical.”

The views and opinions expressed in this article are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of Children's Health Defense.

© December 8, 2020 Children’s Health Defense, Inc. This work is reproduced and distributed with the permission of Children’s Health Defense, Inc. Want to learn more from Children’s Health Defense? Sign up for free news and updates from Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. and the Children’s Health Defense.

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.