Tag: religious-discrimination

  • H 443 Civil Rights Protection Bill Eliminates Vaccination Status Discrimination

    It’s surprising that in 2020 these concepts continue to be such a struggle. The chairman of House Commerce and Human Resources took the vaccine discrimination in the workplace bill, the ‘Medical Consumer Protection Act,’ off the agenda last week. He and the rest of the committee need to hear from the people! We need to express to them just how important this protection is to our medical professionals and others whose bodily autonomy and privacy rights are being violated with the threat of their livelihood being wrongly terminated. This bill will not get a hearing and will die if the people do not get loud about how crucial this is.”

    H 443 is fundamentally a Civil Rights Bill protecting employees’ rights to conscience. H 443 is a bipartisan bill that deserves the support of all legislators and Idahoans, regardless of party or religious affiliation.

    DENIED EMPLOYMENT? FIRED? DIDN’T CONSIDER A JOB DUE TO VACCINE MANDATES FOR THE WORKPLACE?
    THIS BILL IS FOR YOU!

    House Bill 443 It prohibits an employer, who is contracted with the state from discriminating against an employee or an applicant based on their immunization status. 

    If you have been fired, not hired, quit a job, been harassed/coerced or chose not to apply for or accept a job because of your vaccination status, share your story with committee members and your legislators. If you are concerned that the profession you are currently in may start mandating vaccines as a requirement for you to keep your job, share your concern. 

    COMMITTEE MEMBERS:

    EMAIL LIST: jholtzclaw@house.idaho.gov, nanderson@house.idaho.gov , sharris@house.idaho.gov , mkingsley@house.idaho.gov , ssyme@house.idaho.gov , cchristensen@house.idaho.gov , pgiddings@house.idaho.gov , twisniewski@house.idaho.gov , schew@house.idaho.gov , cabernathy@house.idaho.gov , jellis@house.idaho.gov , TRemington@house.idaho.gov


    Rep. James Holtzclaw, Chair
    District 20
    Statehouse (208) 332-1041 (Session Only)
    jholtzclaw@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Neil A. Anderson, Vice Chair
    District 31
    Statehouse (208) 332-1086 (Session Only)
    nanderson@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Steven Harris
    District 21
    Statehouse (208) 332-1043 (Session Only)
    sharris@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Mike Kingsley
    District 6
    Statehouse (208) 332-1133 (Session Only)
    mkingsley@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Scott A. Syme
    District 11
    Statehouse (208) 332-1047 (Session Only)
    ssyme@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Chad Christensen
    District 32
    Statehouse (208) 332-1183 (Session Only)
    cchristensen@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Priscilla Giddings
    District 7
    Statehouse (208) 332-1033 (Session Only)
    pgiddings@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Tony Wisniewski
    District 3
    Statehouse (208) 332-1060 (Session Only)
    twisniewski@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Timothy Remington
    District 2
    Statehouse (208) 332-1070 (Session Only)
    TRemington@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Sue Chew
    District 17
    Statehouse (208) 332-1049 (Session Only)
    schew@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Chris Abernathy
    District 29
    Statehouse (208) 332-1079 (Session Only)
    cabernathy@house.idaho.gov

    Rep. Jake Ellis
    District 15
    Statehouse (208) 332-1176 (Session Only)
    jellis@house.idaho.gov

    TALKING POINTS:


    Individuals choose to opt-out of vaccination for moral objection, reasons of conscience, religious reasons:

    Federal Civil Rights Act of 1964 protects employees from religious discrimination, harassment, and loss of employment. Religious beliefs are defined to include theistic beliefs as well as non-theistic “moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong, which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views”.

    U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission lawsuits have been filed when employees have been fired, or applicants were not hired for refusing the flu vaccine. These lawsuits have resulted in reinstatement, back pay and punitive damages. Some examples are –  St. Vincent Health CenterMemorial HealthcareMission HospitalMemorial Healthcare) However, lawsuits are costly and time-consuming.

    Employees should not have to file a lawsuit in order to have their rights upheld and protected.

    The US Dept. of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) allows employees to decline Hepatitis B VaccinesOSHA and many labor unions also oppose annual influenza vaccination policies that do not include religious and/or personal objection exemptions.


    Individuals choose to opt-out of vaccination for safety concerns & concerns about the effectiveness of the vaccines


    There are many reasons an individual employee may choose to decline a vaccine in addition to sincerely held religious beliefs. There are serious safety concerns and concerns about the effectiveness of the vaccine.

    H 443 should be supported because it will protect employees who decline a vaccine from adverse actions by their employers for both religious and conscientious beliefs.


    These are only suggested points and references. The most important thing to remember is to make your testimony personal. In-person meetings with legislators are best if possible, a phone call – leaving a voice mail if you can’t get through. Make sure your voice is heard!


    Please remember that this is NOT a bill about vaccine safety and efficacy or about childhood vaccine exemptions. H 443 is about protecting workers from discrimination due to vaccination decisions and status.


    We must be our own media. SHARE THIS with friends and family!

    PERSONAL EMAIL. PHONE CALL. TEXT.

    Censorship will be our biggest hurdle in 2020. They have shut down our primary source of communication via social media. The newspapers will not publish editorials that are contrary to the common narrative. We have to be our own media. YOU have the responsibility to let everyone know.

    BE PREPARED – THIS IS POLITICS – THEY DON’T PLAY FAIR.
    They don’t give us notice. They change meetings to reduce the number of people who can comment. They make it difficult. We will press on and hold them accountable to their position as OUR representatives – they are supposed to work for us!


  • Do All Religious Leaders Endorse Abortion Tainted Vaccinations?

    Devout parents who are worried about vaccines object to ingredients containing residual material from pigs or morally reprehensible DNA strands from aborted human fetuses. The New York Times published an article stating, “Top Jewish and Islamic scholars, the Vatican endorse vaccinations.” 

    Religious authorities have ‘meticulously studied how vaccines are developed and what is in them,’” says the New York Times. “and still have ruled that they do not violate Jewish, Islamic or Catholic law” or Christian traditions. (source

    In reality, State governments agencies target religious leaders. They are fed half-truths via packages of media materials on the topic. They are strongly encouraged to sway their parishioners to comply with state-mandated liability-free medical products that violate the body and contradict scriptures. Avoiding persecution by the state, some religious leaders ‘vigorously endorse vaccination’ and often avoid discussions with dissenting parishioners on the topic. Dodging church conflict, they parrot the public health propaganda of ‘safe and effective’ and ‘greater good’ mantra. 

    What of the concerns from members who abhor abortion and reject the notion that injecting their healthy child with a disease mixed with toxins created on the body parts of aborted human beings?

    Here is a recent example attempting to stem the tide of concern of millions of Christians regarding this issue author Joe Carter writes in the Gospel Coalition Article on vaccinations:

    “There are currently no vaccines created by using cells directly taken from the bodies of aborted fetuses. However, there are some vaccines created from cell lines (such as WI-38, MRC-5, HEK-293, PER C6, and WI-26) that were derived from tissue taken from aborted fetuses from the 1960s.”

    You could phrase what Joe Carter stated another way: Aborted baby cell strains are used in vaccine development for vaccines currently on the CDC schedule.

    Updated to include: The fact is the two COVID 19 being distributed under FDA Emergency Authorization are also manufactured using the aborted fetal cell line HEK-293. Moderna in numerous patents in the fundamental design of mRNA technology and in the original vaccine research, development, production, and testing. (see references here)

    Fetal Cells & Vaccines

    The screen shot below is taken from the CDC Vaccine Excipient Summary. This table lists substances acknowledged by the vaccine manufacturer “as being contained in the final formulation of each vaccine.” As you can see below in the chicken pox vaccine example, MRC-5, “human diploid cells, including DNA & protein” is included in the list of ingredients.

    The bottom line is that vaccine developers used cells of aborted babies to create the vaccines we use today. They were not passive actors, and according to the manufacturers themselves, certain elements from those aborted babies remain present in the vaccines. (See resources below regarding the aborted human DNA is present in vaccinations given today)

    According to the CDC these vaccines developed from aborted baby cell strains are:

    • Adenovirus
    • DTaP-IPV/Hib (Pentacel)
    • DTaP-IPV (Quadracel)
    • Hep A (Havrix)
    • Hep A (Vaqta)
    • Hep A/Hep B (Twinrix)
    • MMR (MMR-II)
    • MMRV (ProQuad)
    • Rabies (Imovax)
    • Varicella (Varivax)
    • Zoster (Shingles – Zostavax).

    There are no U.S. approved vaccine alternatives which were not developed via abortion for Adenovirus, Chickenpox, Hepatitis A, Measles, Mumps, or Rubella.

    The cell lines from two dead babies whose parents partnered with the vaccine developers are referred to (dehumanizingly) as MRC-5 (we’ll call him Jack – he was a boy) and WI-38 (we’ll call her Jill, she was a girl). Who were they? Both were about 3 and a half months when they were tragically killed in the womb. We are told Jill’s parents had her killed because they already had too many children, and Jack’s mother had him killed for “psychiatric” reasons. Neither child was deemed to be unhealthy in any way. Here is an MMR vaccine insert which lists Jill (Wi-38) under the description.

    These candidates are not selected after the abortion but are meticulously screened prior to. Dr. Stanley Plotkin who developed the Rubella vaccine by using Jill’s cells testifies:

    “This fetus was chosen by Dr. Sven Gard, specifically for this purpose. Both parents are known, and unfortunately for the story, they are married to each other, still alive and well, and living in Stockholm, presumably. The abortion was done because they felt they had too many children. There were no familial diseases in the history of either parent, and no history of cancer specifically in the families.”

    Plotkin further testified that in one study alone 76 aborted babies were similarly used in the preparatory work for a single study he participated in and that he performed medical experiments on orphans, the mentally retarded, and babies whose mothers were in prison.

    Dr Peter McCullough, an Immunologist, wrote the book, The Fetus As Transplant Donor: The Scientific, Social, and Ethical Perspectives, on the methods used in harvesting fetal tissue in Sweden. He writes:

    “They would puncture the sac of a pregnant woman at 14 to 16 weeks, put a clamp on the head of the baby, pull the head down into the neck of the womb, drill a hole into the baby’s head and attach a suction machine to remove the brain cells… At 16 to 21 weeks, they would do prostaglandin abortions where a chemical is injected into the womb causing the woman to go into mini-labor and pass the baby. Fifty percent of the time, the baby would be born alive, but that didn’t stop them. They would simply open up the abdomen of the baby with no anesthesia, and take out the liver and kidneys, etc.”

    Christian Leaders Claim Abortion Tainted Vaccines Morally Acceptable based on Faulty Assumptions

    “The key consideration in whether using currently available vaccines is licit or immoral is whether there is material cooperation with the evil act of abortion. If the abortion was conducted in order to harvest tissues that were to be used for the vaccine, then it would clearly be immoral. But in the case of the vaccines listed above, the abortion was carried out for other reasons and the tissue was acquired post-mortem for the purpose medical research.”

    Dr. McCullough and Dr. Plotkin’s testimony make it clear : It’s not like these researchers would just passively sort through discarded baby parts. They were actively involved in aborting the babies in such a way as to maximize access to “fresh” tissue. 

    Catholic Religious Leaders “wash their hands of guilt” and encourage vaccination for ‘common good’

    The National Catholic Bioethics Center : “Upon use, one should register a complaint with the manufacturer of the products as an acceptable form of conscientious objection,” the statement says. “This signals opposition to the wider, morally reprehensible practice of using the unborn as little more than research material for science.”

    “There is no moral obligation to register such a complaint in order to use these vaccines,” it says, adding that “it should be obvious that vaccine use in these cases does not contribute directly to the practice of abortion since the reasons for having an abortion are not related to vaccine preparation.”

    The above statement the Catholic leaders completely ignore the proof that abortions were performed in a manner to specifically use the innocent unborn as spare parts for the intent purpose of the research and manufacturing vaccination.  

    According to the National Network for Immunization Information (NNii) the reason they used aborted babies is because “human cells are preferred because cells derived from animal organs sometimes may carry animal viruses that could harm people.”

    Others, in agreement with McCullough, dispute the need for such practices to develop vaccines.

    Either way, if you adopt the CDC vaccination schedule, you can’t avoid abortion tainted vaccinations.

    Above is an excerpt of a 5 part series on Christians and Vaccinations that can be found at NewCityTimes.com

    Vaccine Exemptions Protect Religious Freedom

    RESOURCES: 
    No, Aborted Fetal Cells were Not filtered out of the Final Vaccine:

    part part 1 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZsCAUKUTb20

    part 2 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I5b9xsGZs1E

    part 3: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-UVZSs9vgYQ

    part 4 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=M5y9mYQQmt4

    A portion of the resources from COGforlife.org website (posted her as a redundancy visit their site for the full article) 

    Quoting:

    Importantly, the new data supports NIAID’s approach to a gene-based vaccine for COVID-19 and will also be useful in other vaccine approaches including protein-based vaccines and other nucleic acid or vector-based delivery approaches. NIAID scientists designed the stabilized spike antigen based on previous knowledge obtained from studying other coronavirus spike structures. NIAID and the biotechnology company Moderna, based in Cambridge, Massachusetts, are developing a messenger RNA (mRNA) vaccine, which directs the body’s cells to express the spike in its prefusion conformation to elicit an immune response.

    And the Materials and Methods show the 293 cells.

    https://science.sciencemag.org/content/sci/suppl/2020/02/18/science.abb2507.DC1/abb2507-Wrapp-SM.pdf

    And if that is not enough, Moderna’s use of HEK is not new…previous patents in 2015 show its use as well.  Use the Find function and type in HEK in the search…it’s listed 76 times.

    http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?Sect1=PTO1&Sect2=HITOFF&d=PALL&p=1&u=%2Fnetahtml%2FPTO%2Fsrchnum.htm&r=1&f=G&l=50&s1=8,999,380.PN.&OS=PN/8,999,380&RS=PN/8,999,380

    Also – more here showing how HEK-293 cells are used with the Spike S protein:

    https://www.sinobiological.com/research/virus/human-coronavirus-spike

    https://www.acrobiosystems.com/P3098-2019-nCoV-%28COVID-19%29-S-protein-Full-Length-%28R683A-R685A%29-His-Tag.html

    https://www.biovendor.com/sars-cov-2-2019-ncov-spike-glycoprotein-s1-hek293-recombinant-2?utm_source=bing&utm_medium=organic

    Now, if you still need convincing that Moderna is using HEK-293 cells, this  is straight from their own website:

    https://www.modernatx.com/newsroom/publications

    And from their Publications page, see this link:
    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41541-020-0163-z

    Since it deals with lung infection (which Covid-19 causes) it seems like a pretty good reference to what they are doing.  The use of 293 cells is cited in several places including in the supplementary information.  That is linked here:

    https://static-content.springer.com/esm/art%3A10.1038%2Fs41541-020-0163-z/MediaObjects/41541_2020_163_MOESM1_ESM.pdf

    The very first paragraph shows the use of 293 cells IN THE CONSTRUCTION. The authors of the study are both Merck and Moderna.

    And in July 2020: An mRNA Vaccine against SARS-CoV-2 — Preliminary Report

    NEW ENGLAND JOURNAL OF MEDICINE

    https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483

    Which clearly states they are using the Spike protein which some have tried to deny.

    Under  Vaccine – Quoting:

    The mRNA-1273 vaccine candidate, manufactured by Moderna, encodes the S-2P antigen, consisting of the SARS-CoV-2 glycoprotein with a transmembrane anchor and an intact S1–S2 cleavage site. S-2P is stabilized in its prefusion conformation by two consecutive proline substitutions at amino acid positions 986 and 987, at the top of the central helix in the S2 subunit.8

    And voila – Reference no. 8 at the bottom of the page is none other than:

    Wrapp D, Wang N, Corbett KS, et al. Cryo-EM structure of the 2019-nCoV spike in the prefusion conformation. Science 2020;367:1260-1263.

    In addition, both the Protocol https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483/suppl_file/nejmoa2022483_protocol.pdf

    and Supplemental Information https://www.nejm.org/doi/suppl/10.1056/NEJMoa2022483/suppl_file/nejmoa2022483_appendix.pdf  linked at the bottom of the NEJM article show the use of HEK-293.

    Also the article dated August 2020, clearly shows the use of the HEK293 as well for the mRNA-1273 vaccine.

    https://www.nature.com/articles/s41586-020-2622-0

    Just a sampling –  page 9 of the Nature article:

  • What Happened To The Immunization Exemption Bill?

    Vaccine Exemption Bill 1050 Summary: The Health Department’s mandated immunization exemption form falls outside the scope of law. The law requires a simple statement from parents advising schools they are taking their legally acceptable religious or philosophical exemption to vaccine mandates. The health department form intends to ‘educate’ parents of the risk of childhood diseases and force parents to explain their religious reasons for taking an exemption, neither of these actions are required by statute. The Senate Health Committee agreed with HFI, but politics kept the bill from being heard and voted upon. Its time to bring it to a court of law and have a judge hold the state departments accountable for their actions. If you family faced discrimination when enrolling a child into school or daycare please contact HFI @ IamExemption@healthfreedomidaho.com

     

    Idaho’s vaccine exemption form for school attendance. The Idaho Health Department would like parents to believe that Idaho has a no shots no school policy. However, Idaho statues allows vaccine exemptions for daycare and schools. A parent who chooses to avoid some or all of the 68 CDC recommended vaccines for their school aged child, is legally allowed to enroll the child in school (or daycare). Currently, parents are forced to sign IDHW’s mandatory form that demands parents state that their child is more likely to contract a “vaccine preventable disease with specific complication” and that it is negligent for willfully denying your son/daughter the life-saving protection that vaccines offer” in order to enroll their children into school.


    A parent choosing to take the legal exemption because of religious reasons is required (by the Health Department’s form) to acknowledge ‘card carrying membership’ to a ‘qualified religious organization’ that opposes vaccines and the parent is then required to list their religious objections.

    The Health Department has stepped significantly outside the law that clearly states a parent need only supply a written statement to the schools that they object vaccines on a religious or philosophical ground without need to clarify or excuse their parental choice.

    Leslie Manookian and executive director Miste Karlfeldt spoke with Chairman Lee Heider several times over the summer about this very issue. He whole heartedly agreed that The Health Department has severely overstepped it bounds. He agreed to carry a bill for us to clarify within the statute that a form provided by the Dept of Health and Welfare did not need to be filled out in order to enroll our children in school.

    Health Freedom Idaho went knocking on Legislator’s doors to discuss this situation and we had much support in the Senate Health and Welfare Committee. Sen. Fred Martin did his homework by calling the schools. They verified that they were in fact requiring this form and Sen Martin agreed that was outside of the statute.

     Our bill, SB 1050, never had a hearing.

     Dick Armstrong (Director of Health and Welfare) spent much time with the legislators explaining why he requires this form. He stated that he uses it to educate the public and feels that it is his duty to do so. Of course, we believe that is up to the parent to educate themselves while using all of the recourses available to them. The shenanigans that took place to keep this bill from being heard were appalling and included Governor Butch Otter telling Sen Lee Heider not to hear the bill. Sen Heider decided to drawer the bill that he had once promised to carry. The people were neither heard nor represented on this issue. Parents are faced with another year of trying to enroll their children in school without incriminating themselves on the form mandated by the Dept of Health and Welfare. Some have decided to homeschool but not everyone has that option. Many are having to sign this form under duress just to allow their child access to their promised education.

    Health Freedom Idaho is determined to PRESS ON and since the legislature refuses to require departments of the State to comply with Idaho code we will ask the courts to do so! If you have submitted your written statement in compliance with the law to the school and been denied CONTACT Health Freedom Idaho at IamExempt@healthfreedomidaho.com Make sure to document your schools denial of your exemption including date, time, individuals contacted and their response (in writing). We will take this information to the courts and ask a judge to review the Health Department’s practice of requiring a mandatory form that falls outside the scope of statute.