Declaration
WHEREAS “some people who are fully vaccinated will still get COVID-19…″ [Citation]
WHEREAS “people who get vaccine breakthrough infections can be contagious”… [Citation]
WHEREAS despite many attempts to “fact-check” to the contrary, the COVID-19 virus has not been completely isolated. [Citation]
WHEREAS the PCR test (that has been used to justify much of the response to the outbreak) does not distinguish between COVID-19 and the flu… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS Flu deaths dropped precipitously as COVID-19 deaths have increased, leading many to posit that the flawed PCR test has merely led to a re-categorization of flu deaths… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS the rate of survival for those who get COVID-19, for most demographics, is extraordinarily high, evidenced by the global mortality rate of about 0.2%… [ Citation 1, Citation 2 ]
WHEREAS empirical data demonstrates natural immunity provides a superior defense against COVID-19, compared to vaccine-induced immunity… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS this is not a pandemic of the unvaccinated, as individuals who have been fully vaccinated can still get and transmit COVID-19… [ Citation 1, Citation 2, Citation 3 ]
WHEREAS countries with the highest rate of vaccinations are experiencing significant breakthrough cases… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS evidence indicates the spike protein of SARS-CoV-2 mutated variants have become highly resistant to vaccine-induced antibodies… [ Citation 1, Citation 2 ]
WHEREAS the CDC’s own VAERS system has documented significant risk of adverse reactions to the vaccine – far greater than what has been necessary to shut down other vaccinations… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS the CDC changed their definition of “vaccination” and “vaccine” such that immunity is no longer the end result of the intervention… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS the only FDA approved COVID-19 vaccine, Pfizer’s Comirnaty, is legally distinct from the EUA vaccines that are available today. The approved vaccine is not yet available. That distinction a) protects Pfizer (as all COVID-19 vaccine Pharmaceutical companies) from liability, and b) makes mandates unlawful. This is why employers “follow guidance”… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS employers have not provided employees with information regarding the possible risks (i.e., informed consent), as Moderna and J&J are still in clinical trials–not FDA approved… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS therapeutics, proven effective in other countries, have eliminated justification for vaccine mandates… [ Citation coming ]
WHEREAS Employers must disclose alternative therapies for COVID-19 approved by the CDC… [ Citation coming ]
WHEREAS while an employer is allowed to ask for an employee’s vaccination status, employers and their agents are not entitled to any personal private health information of employees, and employees may decline to provide that information… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964 gives employees the right to an accommodation for objections that they may hold based on sincerely held religious beliefs, and religion is defined by the EEOC as any strongly held beliefs… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS one or more pharmaceutical companies have employed misleading marketing and communication campaigns that deliberately omit certain information in order to remove awareness of a basis for Title VII exemptions… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS There is almost no asymptotic spread. This was confirmed by World Health Organization epidemiologist Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, though she issued a slight “clarification” acknowledging very rare cases. [Citation] [Citation 2] (Kerkhove’s clarification).
WHEREAS employers have not proven that unvaccinated people (including those with naturally acquired immunity) to be a risk to others, nor have they articulated objective metrics by which to support such an assertion…
WHEREAS opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate does not suggest opposition to vaccinations, generally…
WHEREAS there has been no long-term testing on the safety and efficacy of any COVID-19 vaccine. Suggestions that those who received the vaccine have been unharmed by it are both premature and anecdotal…
WHEREAS there is a vast scientific and medical community that does not concur with the conclusions of the agencies that have issued the “guidance” and recommendations that have become the basis for employer’s…
WHEREAS employers have not provided employees with information regarding the possible risks (i.e., informed consent), as Moderna and J&J are still in clinical trials–not FDA approved… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS therapeutics, proven effective in other countries, have eliminated justification for vaccine mandates… [ Citation coming ]
WHEREAS Employers must disclose alternative therapies for COVID-19 approved by the CDC… [ Citation coming ]
WHEREAS while an employer is allowed to ask for an employee’s vaccination status, employers and their agents are not entitled to any personal private health information of employees, and employees may decline to provide that information… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS Title VII of the Civil Right Act of 1964 gives employees the right to an accommodation for objections that they may hold based on sincerely held religious beliefs, and religion is defined by the EEOC as any strongly held beliefs… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS one or more pharmaceutical companies have employed misleading marketing and communication campaigns that deliberately omit certain information in order to remove awareness of a basis for Title VII exemptions… [ Citation ]
WHEREAS There is almost no asymptotic spread. This was confirmed by World Health Organization epidemiologist Dr. Maria Van Kerkhove, though she issued a slight “clarification” acknowledging very rare cases. [Citation] [Citation 2] (Kerkhove’s clarification).
WHEREAS employers have not proven that unvaccinated people (including those with naturally acquired immunity) to be a risk to others, nor have they articulated objective metrics by which to support such an assertion…
WHEREAS opposition to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate does not suggest opposition to vaccinations, generally…
WHEREAS there has been no long-term testing on the safety and efficacy of any COVID-19 vaccine. Suggestions that those who received the vaccine have been unharmed by it are both premature and anecdotal…
WHEREAS there is a vast scientific and medical community that does not concur with the conclusions of the agencies that have issued the “guidance” and recommendations that have become the basis for employer’s…
THEREFORE, the membership of Lions for Liberty:
… Demands the right of employees to object to taking the COVID-19 vaccine, without punitive action, in accordance with established law.
… Demands that, given the revelation that there is almost no asymptomatic spread of COVID, employers immediately cease all testing of the asymptotic, regardless of their vaccination status.
… Demands that employers comply with the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and make accommodations for all employees who notify their employers of their religiously-based concerns and objections, without partiality.
… Demands a rigorous, empirically based, scientific reassessment of current COVID-19 policies that extend beyond the vaccination mandate including masking and testing.
… Denies the assertion that those who do not receive the COVID-19 vaccine, who are asymptomatic, put the general population at any greater risk than the vaccinated who are asymptomatic.
… Demands that there is no discrimination between vaccinated and unvaccinated with regard to testing, masking and other protocols, given the vaccinated can also acquire and transmit COVID-19.
… Affirms, by logic and reason, the rightness and goodness of these demands.
… Asserts that “guidance” issued by government agencies and unelected bureaucrats is not a sound basis for circumventing established law.
… Asserts that forceful coercive tactics and punitive measures aimed at vaccinating employees in light of the above claims, generally only serves to cause greater concern among those who, by conscience, cannot take the COVID-19 vaccine.