Share This Episode
The Steve Noble Show Steve Noble Logo

FIGHTING Vaccine Mandates!

The Steve Noble Show / Steve Noble
The Truth Network Radio
August 12, 2021 7:48 pm

FIGHTING Vaccine Mandates!

The Steve Noble Show / Steve Noble

On-Demand Podcasts NEW!

This broadcaster has 607 podcast archives available on-demand.

Broadcaster's Links

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


August 12, 2021 7:48 pm

FIGHTING Vaccine Mandates!

Steve talks with Attorney Tony Biller about rejecting vaccines. What are your legal options? He will tell us!

Donations

Our goal is to apply Biblical Truth and to spread the Good News of the Gospel to as many people as possible through the airwaves as well as digitally. This mission, like others, requires funding. The main funding of the show is from listeners like YOU! So, we prayerfully and humbly ask you to consider making a tax-deductible donation  - www.thestevenobleshow.com/donate

Thank you and God Bless

YOU MIGHT ALSO LIKE
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
Focus on the Family
Jim Daly
Sekulow Radio Show
Jay Sekulow & Jordan Sekulow
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders
What's Right What's Left
Pastor Ernie Sanders

The following program is recorded content created by the Truth Network mobile show where biblical reality meets the everyday issues of why your home, at work, even in politics.

Steve was an ordinary man who believes in an extraordinary God it on a show, there's plenty of grace and lots of true no sacred cows call Steve now 634 true 866-34-TRUTH or check them out online, Steve Noble Joe.com now here's your host Steve Noble okay the question that I thought you were to be doing this now for the last week.

Mr. Tony Beller is here and the radio today that outstanding Christian brother or father or husband 1010 take that all of us. People with markets think you were actually working hard. Then you got Tony his family, but then get an excellent attorney's organ to be talking today and I can open up the phones as well, so I've been priming about this in a couple of little details about this Tony is an attorney is not giving out nor can he legal advice over the phones of your calling, and upon taking your question on Facebook life that's not what he's here for serenity doing what how do we explain that Tony, thanks for being yeah absolutely. Thank you for having measure my family and I like is been a fan of what you been doing to show your teaching and thank you for it for teaching civics. So many of my children. Truly a blessing to be here with you and to be a small part in your inner ministry, but is as far as civilian talking legal advice. First we talk all day long how these mandates work with the different legal options are how the different laws and to relate to each other all that Sino somebody calls up and says I work for XYZ Corporation is my legal issue against some like I can't really give legal advice to individuals we can talk about hypothetical gels in particular if something calls up no don't tell me who your employer is just as they might be my client. Frank's rightness, things get uncomfortable fast. Yes, quite so solid, set it up as a hypothetical, what have say that some companies doing this.

What would the employee do you want to speak in generalities like that, but they'll be also will will go through a lot of this ourselves as to guys that pay a lot of attention to this and empowered by the Holy Spirit than God. But if you want to call in with a hypothetical remember Tony's I can give you any legal advice on the air today, but I want to open up the phones all keep the phones open for the entire hour okay 866-34-TRUTH 87884 talking about vaccine mandates. Maybe your student maybe you have a student maybe you work for a public company, a private company, maybe work for the federal government, maybe work for one case somebody I know Tony that works for a company that does a lot of contracting with the federal government so he's concerned the federal government, which is mandating our corrupt DHHS just came out today, I think, and said the mandate all 25,000 people in the DHHS and in the military is doing the same thing there to mandate that for everybody. So the questions we have are varied but similar were talking about the vaccine mandates today and any legal way that you can fight back, which also includes legally our religious exemptions and how can you do that is leading to work. Plus, the situation is changing rapidly as we are in this season of it being an experimental vaccine, but pretty soon the FDA can give it full approval. I think that does change the legal dimension and arena sort of talk about that as well.

But if you have a call today. 866-34-TRUTH eight 784 is the number 866-34-TRUTH 87884 or 866 34 truth and make sure our sound and everything is going well in their Josh but Tony, how do we begin this because I think a lot of people like unconstitutional as unconstitutional were throwing around a lot of bluster were speaking out of our emotions and our frustration. But how can the law help us understand what's actually going on. Yet the great question is a lot of there's a lot of principles that hold through to all those different circumstances that you brought visitors a thousand different ways this can impact families and you mentioned the federal government mandating that all of its employees or leasehold DHHS on mandating that all of its employees. I believe if it isn't official federal contractors are getting same push you on a contract with United States government is going to be in compliance with these vaccine policies so the federal government has a pretty big impact on the general economy and business, with certain principles hold through to all. All of the circumstances that you risen in the big one when you hurl them with us as unconstitutional people. Private actors or government entities can't compel me to do something in particular with my body and to some extent that's true in our generation since the Warren court.

The courts have recognized the they called it.

There's nothing written in the Constitution, as you well know you teach, conduct, you should probably quote large portions of it. There's nothing in there that says you have a right of personal autonomy as opposed the federal government others. The 10th amendment is rights reserved to the individual that's gotten almost absolutely no airplay in the courts of the past 200 years or over 200 years, but started in the Warren court of the 1960s the court started recognizing these rights of personal autonomy and they didn't read it into any particular clause.

The rich the 14th amendment of the Constitution is applied to the states, as it would look at all these rights we see a lot of rights to individual rights, individual autonomy and and we look at the penumbras and the emanations is exactly the quote we discern in their right to the first usage of this is Griswold versus Connecticut right to have control yes interconnected and put restrictions on birth control and birth control grew into the Roby view weighed a decision birth control included the right to have an abortion. That line of of progeny with what we refer to as privacy rights emanating from the 14th amendment has continued to this day, but the court has only restricted this right of personal autonomy to individual rights against state governments or maybe municipalities largely pertaining to sex.

The extent to which parties have tried to push the right outside of sexual relations. The court just hasn't tolerated or has hasn't accepted up of the most I think of the biggest bellwether was in the 1990s when people try to extend this this case precedent to the right to physician-assisted suicide talk would individual autonomy, the right to decide whether and how to end your life in the course and when I can extend this precedent that far and in no case has that right. Been extended to medical care or other forms of bodily autonomy. So there is no constitutional right under the federal Constitution right to to refuse medical care and the majority of state constitutions have no right where any refuge can be found some state constitutions have written into the privacy rights and I think Florida has privacy rights. Some people think of that limited success. There pushing back against medical mandates, but North Carolina has has no such thing in the constitutions was a general rule, not only is there no right to refuse a vaccine mandate.

There's a long line of precedents dating back over 100 years and this is not the first time that people have been told share the government that you have to get a vaccine were talking about now is the music got answered.

Save this for after the break. Yeah but this goes way back to the long, long history of of these type of issues so people are probably pretty depressed at this point thinking there's no recourse so will get ended that I would Mr. Tony Biller as a great attorney Christian brother in visage.laws website is law firm envisage that law Ian VI. SAGE will put that link up here in a minute will be right back with Tony Miller talk about the mandate back and Steve Noble to Steve Noble shall hearing Tony Biller today a Christian and an attorney talking about what's going on with the vaccine mandates counties with envisage law envisage.law Ian VI. SAGE.law practice in 124 years.

Sounds funny to me practicing law were always trying to perfect as you know, the law is always changing. So Rosa try to catch up with it or change it ourselves. I said yes and questions. Tony cannot give you specific legal advice that when you call in and Greg and the pull your first when you call in, share your question, like a hypothetical. If I was working at a airline industry I work in the airline industry and this what they're saying, what's the deal of the line that you have any rights to any pushback. What's with the law say and so will keep a general Tony going to check himself anyway. But if you have questions. Try to try to be it as like a hypothetical right and don't mention your employer's name. Don't do that could cause some problems in Stoney's out there in the legal profession and in you don't know who you may be representing Ari engagement so we have to be careful about that. 866-34-TRUTH 8784 is the number these questions about the vaccine mandate from a legal perspective, what the does the law say what kind of rights do you or do you not have under the law 866-34-TRUTH 87884 or 866-34-TRUTH. We lost Gregory to keep her in a second, but I just generally do. We have many rights Tony prospectus you actually doing and need to interpret portrayed to darken the doom and gloom scenario, but as a general rule that the state as well recognize the state has the right to compel vaccinations has been upheld for over 100 years, but there are exceptions and exceptions are important in at least some of them are very well trod this this scenario, though with an experimental drug is unique. I think this is the first but so far the challenges in that regard, we get to that later that the things that are recognized and so far every program every entity that is compelling. Vaccination is recognizing the two well trod exceptions to be able to compel medical treatment you've Artie mentioned him its religious and medical.

The right to religious autonomy and some right of conscience in this country very well established corsets of the First Amendment or Bill of Rights and the courts have done a fairly good job fairly good job over the decades of upholding that right to include in the medical context and that that is true here. In fact, the only cases to win and what is very new in the eyes of law issue and that is the Cove 19 fax right vaccination compulsory vaccination programs a few places have pushed back and initially refused to recognize or grant religious exemptions and in those rare instances, the federal courts have stepped in and overruled that you have to you have to do now all that time to get to the scholar Keith gone and from High Point and Keith, thanks for calling it a bio if you guys have legal questions and again just general questions about the law with respect to a vaccine mandates your employer's school. Whatever the case may be made if you maybe it's a child or grandchild. Give us a call 866-34-TRUTH 87884 is the number 866-34-TRUTH 87884 or 866-34-TRUTH keep in High Point has a question and I bring up something that Tony you and I mentioned briefly the other day the Nuremberg code keep going ahead and wondered about that on or about last year that I went online and looked would read articles click Ukraine procedural body or drug and it was signed by all the Allied made part of the international all night and that's Tony handle that petite. I know a lot of people and sending messages about the same thing. So let's get Tony's input on that. The key, thanks much for calling so Nuremberg code is only back in a 1947 cell in your talk, but you can't force people, especially with an experimental thinking forced to do something against their will.

So does that even apply because the cynic in me knows that our US Supreme Court must use international law occasionally in the early it when it goes against them. They probably won't.

But what what we do with this. In this case. A lot of people think he Nuremberg code and you can't force me to take an experiment medic Smith is a major and minor issue of major issues, which you touched on. You don't have a private cause of action against anybody under the Nuremberg code is an international treaty was no private cause of action. No legal body. To my knowledge in United States has codified it or otherwise create a private cause of action that said its principles of principle is I recall is not that you have a you have a right under international law to refuse medical treatment. I believe it was a little more nuanced than that. I believe this was in response to the Nazi experimentation, prisoners of war, and particularly Jewish individuals, and that was you. You cannot use individuals for medical research against their will and will people here more commonly in the field of ethics is the idea of informed consent informed consents in the medical context include the experimental medical context is you have a right to know what you're getting. How efficacious it is. What are the benefits are so sweet and what are the risks enrolled or are there alternative in and that's a more I think of more known way of looking at those full disclosure of what's going on.

We try to do the same thing in the pro-life movement.

We got a give up of full disclosure to these women that are interested in getting an abortion. Here's what happened.

You can get an ultrasound is what can happen. Here's the rest of the space we all the informed consent sustained and so when it would typically when when you get a medical treatment or if you go to the go to the drugstore and you you your prescription you get, typically of a lengthy printout with it for your doctor supposed to give it to you about was was don't read with rumor and the treasurer declined even to receive it well right now if you were to get the vaccination straight from the factory.

There is no four-minute. There is no information. If you ask your doctor what are the risks associated with this. He should kinda give you a blank look. Because it has not been provided to him and it hasn't been provided chunks is not required to be provided to because of its experimental status. Not exactly. Yes, yes, that sounds really bad to so under the emergency use authorization. You generally can't mass prescribed something that hasn't been approved by the FDA for medical purposes and of course that's what they're doing here and so there are exceptions in the case of emergencies and dispatch the relevant laws emergency use authorization. Pres. Trump talked about a lot and they vaccinations. This is really designed to protect vaccine manufacturers against potential liability and it gives complete immunity for any harm that comes out of that comes out of these experimental vaccinations. Another thing is and where think that the caller is is spot on about something Nuremberg emergency use authorization statute when you read it and when you read the enabling regulation specifically contemplates informed consent. It's everything is in the context of the patient making the decision whether to accept this treatment and so when these compulsory vaccinations were rolled out one of the first lawsuits brought against that. I believe it was in Southern Methodist University was precisely unless you cannot compel somebody to take a vaccine that is is is being produced pursuant to the emergency use authorization act because that presumes a voluntary experimental use and by definition is compulsory.

Programs are not voluntary what happened with that case, Pres. Reagan appointed the Republican judge that you have no standing under the merit of emergency use authorization taxes bring that claim. Sorry.

Is anybody else done that because that the problem is I don't get to Roger's question on Facebook why the promise or to run out of time. I Roger and Roger were to handle this.

We come back and work in a large private university that's requiring the vaccination but offering religious and medical exemptions. However, we are forced to test weekly and where mass can this be seen as discrimination in the lives of the lock is now are separating out people and treating you differently based on something and that's an interesting angle is that discrimination were talking Tony Beller, an attorney and a Christian brother and friend). Our time wisely. Tony Miller is here attorney at law envisaged.laws the website, Ian VIF, e.g. he also brother in Christ, Fran, and so this is somebody you can trust. Otherwise, he would be in the room. Okay, that's just the deal and so were trying to get some help understanding about exemptions and how can we fight back against the medical mandates coming off now with the vaccine. So we had one gentleman on Facebook lives like okay this is the end of this the place I work there, allowing for exemptions, but they're saying applicant tested weekly and then you have to wear a mask in his question, what is that some form of discrimination because it is, then you get a lawsuit will yes and no. Yes, it is a form of discrimination know you don't necessarily have a lawsuit against being discriminated against is a bit of a cliché, but we discriminate all the time and in many, many decisions discrimination. Despite having a bad reputation is something people do all the time we we discriminate and what intersections we drive through dependent on what the color of the light sure that this is the kind of fancy word for making decisions and eliminating some options would go back to the basic point of this caller because I don't want to get. I don't were sandlot on the rope important basic point to be lost. You have rights. If you assert them. So this caller jumped or the very important part. He's already up ahead of the game. He sounds like he has filed his religious exemption. If you have a religious exemption is very important in these programs to express it in writing and have a wreck and talk about what that looks like you and and and same with same with medical soap. I make my religious objection they say okay, fine. But this is the program that you now have to abide by the question is is it a reasonable accommodation really the question is, could you convince the court that it's not a race right right in the competition. I think you have a hard time walking into any court sent listener real surround is given vaccinations. I'm not because I have either medical or a religious exemption which they're recognizing what they want me to mirror, where mass can stick a Q-tip deep up my sinuses once a week or so to bed. Yet the reality of yet I three had that SG have to do that many get to a caller of vital if you want to call in and asked only a question about the legal side make it hypothetical. Don't mention what business your whether a university was doubly specific.

Okay 866-34-TRUTH 87884 is the number 866-34-TRUTH 87884 or 866-34-TRUTH, is go to Michael's: Michael, thanks for calling. Go right ahead of boiled water with what worked for a while like to work need to file that it becomes a company that have a right to dismiss me rather than religious exemption. That's it. That's the question you have.

You have a right to work and have a right to terminate, but you can't terminate for reasons that are against public policy. Yet public policy or established law. So you see this in working together sees not a Roman Catholic but sees Roman Catholic, I decided to look Roman Catholic, I find out he goes to mass I fire in the next day while is a general rules as employer. I have a right to fire Steve for any reason, but I can't fire him for reasons against public policy and the laws of this country prohibit firing somebody for religious discrimination. So in your case you file your religious exemption and they turn on fire you if they fired you because you asserted your religious objections and yes your your rights would have been violated that make sense but any other they would be covered regardless whether or not I would agree with it or what you as a practical matter what you run into is if one when the employer is going to terminate somebody you and that there of a protected class. In this case, you've made a religious objection that you could say is not popular you want to make sure you have documented the nondiscriminatory reason why you're terminating this person and employers usually don't do a good job that it makes him hesitant fire people.

So if you got your last five job reviews send gusher awfully need to improve or to fire you and then you make a religious objection on the fire you employers probably going to be in pretty solid territory.

But if your last review should include your last review in January like a Michael's the best guy in the world will area and I fire you if you make a religious objection while they're going to have a hard time about our case there Michael, great question. And thanks so much for Colin and I appreciate it and that that's like I want to go that the thumbnails on Facebook light asked the question about can you make your can you hold your employer liable if all of a sudden you have adverse reactions to the vaccine that they made you take a great question. Upliftment of love that question. That's where my mind first went when this came out. We know that a certain percentage of people that take these vaccines have side effects like very large percentage of people have side effects and we know a small percentage of people in very serious side effects to these to these vaccines. And when you cause somebody to foreseeably get harmed in that harm comes about. You can be held liable very basic general rule of law with a big exception in this case that emergency use authorization bill that I mention gives complete immunity not just to the manufacturers of the of the vaccines, but to everyone for any resulting harm sheets and not only does it give complete immunity for any downstream harm caused to the user. There's complete immunity for failure to advise people of the harm failure to inform failure to give informed consent and anomalies are complete immunity from liability is the only statutory regime ever lifestages that says this.

The statute encourages sanctioning anybody for bringing claims for harm. It's the only statue I've rarely ever written into with that of people bring these claims they should be sanctioned in this law is completely preemptive of all other state law is a matter of federal law preempt all state law that might touch on the same issues as a bogus nine minutes. It was passed by President Bush accident and the argument legally.

No legally it's I think she's going to go to Pat Condon from Asheboro. Pat lost Pat area view icon and that's only question I don't need you to call and this is your opportunity to mine, I got up and had questions that we can lower a Tony but if you want to specific to what you're dealing with vaccinations give us call 866-34-TRUTH yes or so that the call that said Hayes.

Is it can my employer requirement where mass get swabbed we can think as a general rule, you have say yes no there there is an important principle in at least when you're dealing with public entities about any government entities, public contractors and acting under compulsion of a government entity not so true for private actors but for public entities. If you work for public university public hospital. Their policies have to pass or pass a rational review and that's a very easy thing to pass.

It's not whether I grew that the could a rational person come to the same conclusion and in some cases I think a case could be made that requiring somebody to swab every week is not rational. Yet, in the only case that immediately comes to my mind is vertical.

If you got a natural immunity built up as anyone. My question so so far the entities have refused to go down that road of fake you to come forward with proof of vaccination or you come forward with proof that you've been diagnosed with covert and anytime.

Past three months pass Xmas past year and right now the studies are coming over so and I believe the best resistance to symptomatic covert are people that previously had covert doing. I believe much better than people that received the vaccination, but thus far, none of the programs I'm aware of have you recognize that is, it is a checkbox natural immunity not mentioned student at a local community college and medical program, and they're basically saying get Baxter get out, no X, no exemptions, not a medical exemption and not a religious exemption. That's just flat out illegal Zachary.

I believe it's that that that would not be of help in court now talk about the medical exemption because that's when the doctor says based on your existing conditions. I would not recommend this vaccine for you, so your your report private doctor that tells you this is a good idea for you. You get that note written up and you take it to your employer, you take it to the school you take it to university. The federal government, you take it to the state government. Can you take that anywhere, and they by law have to exempt you yet. Good question. I don't I don't know exactly what quote by law looks like.

In this context, particularly where you typically would need.

When the doctor writes us he shouldn't do this because something really bad could happen, but we do it anyway. Something really bad happens and so you get your pantsuit off because you cause disarmament were said just a few minutes ago. There is no liability for the resulting RAM so I don't know exactly how that was a very practical outcome of why you listen to medical advice because you don't listen to it. You could really end up having to literally pay so and in the case of emergency use authorization immunity from him from that harm. I don't know how it will play out. So I think you have to rely on the court saying in this context.

This was unreasonable. You come to you so and has a heart condition and medical doctor says that I believe this mRNA vaccine and the spike protein will exacerbate this heart condition will be medical risk. I think in that context, the court would be very inclined to listen to it thus far. I'm not aware of any entity in North Carolina that has rejected the legitimate religious objection or medical objection. Thus far, thus far, but here's a little trick on that you're only going to get a court to help you if you file suit to complain about it.

Somebody's got to start filing so you're going to court to help you if you first put in the quest.

Okay yeah I want the medical I want the I want the religious objection. You can clean all day long, but if you don't put in your request for a ways or employer. However to your employer and articulated well so you have like you said, have your doctor sign off on it. Provide the medical substantiation and no document document documents every step of the way. Trust no one except the Lord Jesus Christ. Secondly, the dealer talking to Tony Beller envisage law envisaged outlaws law firm that he's part of and I were to keep asking similar questions. A vaccine mandate that questions about to turn the corner pretty quickly. FA's can get his full approval. Does that change the game. What is a religious exemption for us Christians. What do we rely on and on talk about can you make a claim because you have natural immunity like I do is I had already will be right back to Mac and Steve Noble to Steve Noble still here today with Tony Miller from envisage law envisaged outlaws i.e. NBI SAGE also Christian brother and a friend talking about what our courses of action and try to push back against all these vaccine mandate in the religious exemption that was coming up all the time so Dr. Sagan have a doctor that tells you this, I'm telling you this is a bad idea. You should I'm recommending that you do not get the vaccine. You have to document that you have to take that to your employer you to follow.your eyes and cross your tease and get everything documented because then if they still refuse that just like this one community college I mentioned said no exemptions and in look like that on any legal standing to do that so that's one issue. What about religious exemptions. What is even look like the most important thing I would. I would recommend to your listeners in regard to making a religious objection is, it has to be there religious objection, and for that, that doesn't mean it has to match their churches, statements, and for Roman Catholic and you know that the popes know that the end of the day you you can take this. It doesn't violate a Catholic's conscience or need not, you're not bound by any of the law doesn't require you to adhere to a mainstream religious viewer. The views of the leader of the lawless areas. It has to be yours sincerely held religious click strata. It's your right of conscience, and so I caution people against going online.

Hey, that sounds really good on the sign. My name is because there are some programs, particularly if you're more influential decision-makers in your organization that are requiring individuals to comment look the supervisor in the eye and explain the religious exemption. It better be from your heart and your head, it has to be yours know the one thing I can sensing a lot of these almost every one of them has focused on our right to life issues that the three major vaccinations in the United States.

The Pfizer modernity J&J. They either used of fetal tissue of cell lines in the development of the drug or the testing of the drug and so every religious objection that I have seen knives in the vaccine that they give okay so I like what I put in the what they put in the syringe and stick in your arm does not contain fetal tissue. So if somebody told you that that's bogus. Okay, don't believe it, just as you want to believe it only believe it if it's true, but it was used in the development or the testing in these fetal tissues and then you can make a good ethical gay thing that I don't have anything to do with any product that came as a result of the instruction of a child in utero. And that's important because they can reject a religious objection that's falsely promised an absurd example because I refuse to take these vaccinations because I believe they were developed by alien technology and that's against my religion right well which are based directly on the technology. So you just if it's factually misplaced the lead and I don't want to put anything to my body that contains fetal abort the cells of aborted babies okay that's fine.

Your object, your rejection, your objection is overruled is rejected because were not putting that into you as is and Steve explained there's another line of objections I've seen in that is Steve probably site the first put the body my body is the tomcat lighting or have a Lord right and I'd I don't want to put in. I've seen a couple different flavors of this in the one that I think is a little more troubling is I don't want to put something into my body that changes the natural genetics is that which mRNA vaccine they say you're changing my genetic code which was determined by God out of heaven, and you can't do that and I'm not saying that doesn't sound wise to me. If that's if that's at the end of the religious objection putting the problem with that is the MR the way this is supposed to work in a reasonably doesn't work this way is the vaccine causes your body does adjust to the way your body processes.

The mRNA sequence lead. There's a short period with the cells that are injected around the injected area produce a spike protein, but those are eventually vacated out of the cell and disposed of by your body. So, it's tempting not rearranging your genome units not rearranging permanently rearing question for Michelle and Facebook live cup 11 on this one for solid even have to give details you need to say I a religious problem with this. I think you do. II think you have to substantiated up though. Be honest, I have not delved down at all the president to say if you can just rely on is the simple assertion I believe you have to articulate the basis and another one that's being thrown around a lot met and Michelle mentioned that I get this one all the times HEPA. Yes, I'll just pick up a violation vaccinated. You can ask me that question so it depends on who you are so depends on who's answering it so the vast majority of you effect all of you can be asked that by your medical provider that the hippo laws apply to covered entities and the cover personal health information was no doubt that your your healthcare history and your vaccination histories personal health information, but the vast majority of entities out there are not covered entities under HIPAA. Hippo restricts medical insurance companies and medical providers on to whom they distribute your medical information. It doesn't give you a right to refuse to answer questions about your medical conditions now come back to that Americas or other laws so your employer asking you you're not a hip entity out if your employer turns around and asks your medical doctor and he answers what he's violated HIPAA but if they ask you that's that's not a violation for now. If they ask you take vaccine. No why I've medical objection. That's fine.

Why do you have medical objection not fine was not fine because the chances are if you have a medical condition.

You have an underlying disability. That's a protected class and they're not supposed to delve into protected class of disability that's specific to the taking of this potential. This vaccine why mean it.

It's disability all your body, your system right they can't take that they shouldn't ask you the nature of your medical condition that would that would be a violation okay so natural immunity to move real quick so I had Kobe do you have culvert I natural immunity is that it can I use that so that a lot of medical people come for bird concern at work in the program are medical doctors and this is when the comes of the most often affect covert or some fellow my office. Very senior medical practitioner faculty twice he's read literature. He knows natural immunity is much better than anything he gets of affections. He doesn't worry about the side effects. So far nobody is recognizing that and so the fellow said earlier will is my getting swabbed every week reasonable. If you've previously had covert. I think there is a reasonable argument exits can prevail in a court but is a reasonable art as this is a ridiculous requirement when I can demonstrate I have natural immunity already built up. I am safer than the people that have the vaccine and you're not swabbing them every week. In fact, there was a law professor in DC within the last few days who files a lawsuit precisely on this issue and he called medical objection here for doctors assigned declarations in support send this guy is more safe in the people to get the vaccinations is so heat filed on the medical objection saying of natural immunity so successful see in the context ask people asking what about healthcare workers and the really matters whether healthcare workers working at school you work in the government you work in a private business.

This the same issues across the board right I think so doesn't really matter when we are okay FAA that FAF is getting a full approval to all three vaccines in the coming weeks.

Does that change the whole game. I don't think it does at all because remember what that does is that removes the issue of its an unapproved drug. It's experimental, but the challenges thus far. Based on the fact it's an experimental drug have not have not worked, that the the objection for religious or medical beliefs will still be there whether a drug is experimental or not. In fact the matter is now there are compulsory vaccination programs in place in most of these hospitals. For example, I think most of the major medical establishments in North Carolina think throughout the rest of the country, at least are positions that interact with patients require older individuals to get flu vaccines right we never program about the rest your ghost people really do care and hate your kids that have NMR bubbled up abundantly something and all those programs to my knowledge, you can nobody specialize in this area along with the less you might. To my knowledge that all those programs had exemptions for religious reasons and health reasons.

Yet in the end. Some people feel about those objections and request for exemptions and to my knowledge the major medical establishments in North Carolina and presume around the United States under those you and I expect that South can play out here is a great question.

I want to go to Greg really likes Colin and I are not said what about the cost of a lawsuit. So can you turn around and file against your employer or whoever you're fighting to dinner if you win a turnaround go after court costs go after your legal fees so it depends if if the are if there discriminating against you because of your religious convictions and that are that's upheld and I believe because of a physical disability that was a little bit less clear to me but if you are discriminated against based on your religious objection and that religious right was upheld than the civil rights laws that create a private cause of action against your private employer do allow for fees that you got a great question. What about a company that's requiring their employees to test each week the companies providing the test. However, they're asking us to waive our privacy rights to obtain the test results might liberty to refuse my waiver of my privacy rights and offer to get my own covert test and provide them with results that are saying give us access to your results when honestly believe you see that's that's a whole hippo thing or the employer knows they cannot go to the employer or they can go to medical providers medical writer can't provide it to him, unless the employee consent unless you sign off on it you can get my my wife and get all my medical record. But I had to get permission for that letter is so can the employer hire you for not giving direct access. I think you could limit the permission to just posttest I don't answer to that. I don't so that's that's great :-) what an interesting and had his agenda was not anything like you said this is all kind of new. Anyway, we were going to figure this out is is hate. Listen we have to start suing people we have to do we have to take issue and you have to step up to the plate and I would challenge all of us to maybe think about it more like the founding fathers and consider our posterity and others, perhaps even more so than we consider ourselves. I read that notion somewhere in some book that's been around for a while, Tony… Again, this is developing this if you if you have time I would love to have you back think you always have to drag yourself intercepted by phone but I thought this way not envisage.lies the website EMP I SAGE Dunlop can people contacted self phone number on their email of one of her works better than the email you too many emails but it helps. Please let us know. I put the link up on Facebook live as well. Tony, thanks for being here this is the nobleness T-Mobile shall, God willing will talk again real soon and like my dad always used to say ever for another program powered by the Truth Network


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