Share This Episode
Chosen Generation Pastor Greg Young Logo

#TrinityHealthFreedomExpo #NoMandtes #NaturalHealthSolutions #Freedom

Chosen Generation / Pastor Greg Young
The Truth Network Radio
October 2, 2021 9:15 am

#TrinityHealthFreedomExpo #NoMandtes #NaturalHealthSolutions #Freedom

Chosen Generation / Pastor Greg Young

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 775 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

Keep up-to-date with this broadcaster on social media and their website.

Chosen host you are a chosen generation, royal priesthood, a holy nation, a peculiar people, you should shoot for the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his marvelous life, which in time past were not a people are now the people of God, which had not obtained mercy, but now have obtained mercy and now chosen generation program. Great to have you everything so much for being here. I get told you last night we got an absolutely awesome awesome program lined up for you today very excited to have you with us and that the kick things off. I'm very excited to welcome here, and this is the first time we get to do this live next to each other, looking each other in the eye, if you will, and it's my sincere pleasure to welcome Jonathan anymore to the program Jonathan welcome to Pastor Greg, great to be with.

It is great to have you with me, sir. Great to have you with me. While this is exciting Trinity health freedom Expo and how I will start off with this how important you think health freedom is in America today is critical we got this vaccine mandate. For example, in big tech suppression of information about anything that calls into question vaccines are that calls and invites people to consider any alternative method of treatment. This is precisely the wrong kind of approach. It's an authoritarian approach that has proven time and again to be the wrong way to deal with a crisis and particularly health crisis. You know, we depend on when when there's a novel virus like this. We depend on innovation. Of course, to steer our way through it and one of the great benefits of living in a free country is a wide-open robust debate in science with the population thoroughly versed in what's going on to come up with solutions. And when you have a one-size-fits-all approach the government mandates and you have censorship of all other approaches and censorship of any criticism of the vaccine approach. Not only have a gross violation of the First Amendment, but you also have a terrible way of running the program because you'd rather have independent scientists researching feverishly for methods to treat it, and full information coming out about those methods and full debate about it so that people could doctors and and patients could integrate into their treatments. The best methods and the best methods will only come to the fore through a robust wide open debate and practice of medicine in attacking this so the health freedom Expo is all about that Julie Klein has been the master of ensuring this or her father was really quite wonderful in opening this whole idea that people need information and they need to be able to freely choose what is in their own health interest and so often. Conventional medicine has failed and there's been no alternative.

And so what we really do need is the opportunity for people to appreciate that there are alternatives that there are innovations out there and and I'm not saying that you know hucksters are people presenting false information should be protected to the contrary, I think they should be prosecuted when it comes to providing people with sound health information and alternatives reasonably communicated to them when they're when they're not proven that's good and we should be all about it and unfortunately in this mandate vaccine environment. We have no opportunity to have that free flow of information which the First Amendment was designed to protect and ensure in our great country. Jonathan, doesn't it also concern us though because when you talk about you know that the idea of of curtailing those that are putting out false information. What about the government's putting out false information will that's right, you know you've got the CDC I mean it it it clearly Thomas Renz has a very viable lawsuit that he's filing that clearly indicates that the CDC has in fact given us false information and they label I mean every single person here at this Expo. That is saying there are God-given natural means by which to stay healthy and to overcome this. They're all considered to be propagandists well that the government creates misinformation. Yes, that is communicates false information to people yes because the government in the end is is a political operative that is to say, the Food and Drug Administration is not a scientific body. It is run by politicians, political appointees who make the ultimate determination, and as we know, for example, with the mandate and with the insistence on the boosters. For example, they lost to FDA employees who are critical because they were objecting to the political mandate inside the government forcing the booster issue when there wasn't enough sound scientific evidence to justify supporting that booster rollout and so you've got this kind of attention where the government comes up with a political answer the oh override science and becomes the new scientific mantra Lysenko is and if you will use the Russian example and its force upon the population. What you don't hear about is the debate underlying it in the criticism of it which you should be given full access to the government's decision on on science is one position. Science does not operate that way.

Sciences is an environment that is a one of robust debate were criticism and cynicism exist somewhere people are are skeptical and where information is challenged. You don't have a one-size-fits-all approach in perpetuity.

That's only made possible by government mandated by government censorship.

So we have to get away from the censorship environment we have to appreciate that under our Constitution, the First Amendment is made the choice for us and that is each person is sovereign. Each person gets to decide for him or herself what information he or she will place credence in in determining what's best in their health interest. Likewise, each person gets to choose what medical advisor should be that person's advisor and what that that person is. The advisor needs to be free to communicate his or her professional opinion as to what is the best approach and if this were an environment it was open like that you would see far more reliance on things that have been shown to have efficacy like Iver Maxton or hydroxychloroquine or monoclonal antibodies or other treatment approaches. Instead of that, just this knee-jerk reliance on vaccine eat. We believe even get Democratic politicians who are saying that those who are unvaccinated to end up in the hospital really shouldn't be given any treatment because they they they made the wrong choices should fall the government's requirement of or in lockstep with what is required.

That's not that that's fascism. That's not the way this country is designed, we are designed to respect individual freedom of choice. You have a right to make what others might think is a mistake you ever right to hold an opinion that others consider to be of wrong opinions ever right to espouse views that others think are erroneous. You have a right to believe for your family and yourself that you should say, for example, the Amish and live in Amish lifestyle which is contrary to the those who would advocate full introduction into this woke environment. I mean, people have a right to conduct their own affairs, so long as they don't violate the equal rights of others. If we don't preserve that Jeffersonian principal right was to find liberty at the founding, then we aren't Americans because that's at the root of what it means to be an American does not. Also, because you you you bring up you know that the drug issue and and what is approved and what is acceptable and so on and so forth.

Doesn't that also Jonathan speak to to the issue of the administrative state that you talk about significantly in your book how there's this rogue entity that is unmonitored by Congress unmonitored by the American people literally out there doing their own bidding. They have their own kangaroo courts they they just respect the Constitution, they accept bribes. We know that now because Mark Zuckerberg gave him 4.9 billion extra dollars so that they would look the other way at all of his violations that he's doing under the FTC. Jonathan is out of control. It is out of control its mushrooms since the new Deal.

This is not a the direction towards authoritarianism is not something that is new with the administrative state. It actually was the reason for its creation. As I explained in the authoritarians.

What happened was after the Civil War when this ideology of Hegel's collectivism had taken root in defense of the institution of slavery, it was not abolished when the 13th amendment was adopted, it lived on and it became the popular intellectual justification for overcoming the limits of the Constitution places on power and to replace the Constitution of Liberty with an authoritarian regime and this is not an academic argument. This is a historical fact.

After the Civil War the leading academics in all of the institutions, universities in this country. Just about flock to Germany to the historic schools historical schools in Germany where Hegel's philosophy was taught right and they were educated to believe first the John Locke's second treatise on government was rubbish because it started with the presumption that individuals had rights from God, not from the state and they argued that that was bunk that rights were creation of man. Collective rights were the only legitimate rights that individual rights did not exist, that the state created rights in the state could take them away and that the problem that we have was inefficiency in government and lack of power and so what they argued was the and they are asked, they taught this to these American academics. The United States Constitution, the Declaration of Independence were rubbish because they were based on false principles that the only true principles were those of collective rights and those of service to the state and that the state needed to be run by experts and that if experts were allowed to run government and to dictate how people would run their lives. It would ensure that a common good was attained, and so they argued for this these academics accepted the argument by and large, came back like you, Woodrow Wilson, for example, is a second-generation after this taught by those who were taught in Germany who subscribe to this view, and was educated in this and and accepted it hook line and sinker as did these academics by and large, so that they replaced in the University respect for classical liberalism and individual rights and they replaced it with collectivism and and Woodrow Wilson drank deeply of this and actually made outrageous statements in his own part, private writings, but rejecting the Declaration of Independence principles. For example, of the second paragraph of the declaration so you it's a real problem and that's the origin of what and and all and I wanted to get a step further because I there's several people that are talking about that long kind of didn't take it far enough relative to understanding the amount of importance that should have been placed on God giving us those rights, the creator God giving us those rights and the reason therefore why the founding fathers would lay down their lives right because they understood what it was. The liver there fine for back with more after this

Get The Truth Mobile App and Listen to your Favorite Station Anytime