Pfizer CEO Admits 2 Doses of Pfzier Vaxxine Offers Little to Any Protection, yet Mandates Continue and Now Injecting 5–11 Year Olds
By Normal Party Australia
My letter to the Standing Committee on Health and Community Wellbeing (ACT) 12.01.2022
Dear Committee members,
I am a philosopher of ethics and an expert on vaccine mandates. I have recently published in the BMJ on this topic: https://jme.bmj.com/content/early/2021/02/25/medethics-2020-107026. I was approached by residents of ACT, asking for help in formulating a submission to the Inquiry into Public Health Amendment Bill 2021 (No 2).
I want to bring to your attention the following ethical and, by implication, legal issues associated with vaccine mandates being imposed on certain classes of people:
1. Vaccine mandates imply that all humans are born in a defective, inherently harmful state that must be biotechnologically augmented to allow their unrestricted participation in society, and this constitutes discrimination on the basis of healthy, innate characteristics of the human race.
2. Medical consent must be free – not coerced – in order to be valid. Any discrimination against the unvaccinated is economic or social opportunity coercion, precluding the possibility of valid medical consent. The right to free, uncoerced medical consent is not negotiable, because without it we have no rights at all; every other right can be subverted by medical coercion.
3. Covid vaccines are known to occasionally cause deaths of healthy people. When an employee is required to receive Covid vaccination as a condition of employment, that employee is economically coerced to participate in an activity where some percentage of employees are expected to die ‘in the course of employment’ as a direct result of the mandated activity. This goes against the fundamental principles of medical ethics and workplace safety. It may be objected that Covid-19 also kills people, but these two categories of deaths are not ethically equivalent. Infection with SARS-CoV-2 is not mandated, whereas deaths resulting from mandatory vaccination are mandated deaths, a legalised killing of some people for the prospective benefit of the majority. Critically, any discrimination against the unvaccinated (or a privileged treatment of the vaccinated) amounts to a violation of the right to life, because a small percentage of the targeted people are expected to die as a result of this coercive treatment.
I believe we agree that the right to life must not be violated, in which case the proposed Bill is inconsistent with our shared moral commitments.
Regards,
Michael Kowalik
