"My Body My Choice." Mandatory Vaccination Policy Vs. Abortion Rights

You may not agree with someone who believes abortion is "not good" and you may not agree with someone who believes mandatory vaccination policy is necessary, and that's OK. But it is quite hypocritical to yell out "my body my choice" in support of abortion rights while at the same time condemn those who are fighting for freedom of choice regarding mandatory vaccination policies around the world.

Taking a side on certain topics that have become heavily politicized can be scary. Either you're made out to be a fool by legacy media and big government, or you're on the "correct" side. Whatever side you choose, one perspective seems to be sowed into the fabric of society and all its institutions. These days, simply being on the "wrong side" of a perfectly questionable idea can threaten your livelihood. We saw this with COVID-19 vaccination policy.

Perspectives on these issues are also usually guided by what "side" of the political spectrum you're on - conservatives believe 'this' and progressives believe 'that.' Legacy media will often follow in this direction as well, with large swaths of legacy media, academia and Big Tech being left leaning, one interpretation of an idea will usually wield control over the narrative.

When it comes to vaccines, abortion, and gender issues, these are all examples of topics that carry with them heavy amounts of propaganda. This propaganda helps sway the perception of people and our thoughts, beliefs and feelings about topics. This is typically because people at all levels are just trying to convince others their side is right, as opposed to embracing the fact that people have different views.

How much time do we really spend going within, taking time and getting in touch with how we really feel about something? How much time do we take to examine information and evidence that challenges what we believe?

"My body, my choice" is a slogan commonly used by proponents of reproductive rights. It has now been adopted by those who do not agree with any type of mandatory vaccination policy.

Lisa Ikemoto, a law professor at the University of California-Davis Feminist Research Institute expressed the opinion that this is "a really savvy co-option of reproductive rights and the movement's framing of the issue" and that it "strengthens the meaning of choice in the anti-vaccine space and detracts from the meaning of that world in the reproductive rights space."

Ikemoto claims that framing the decision to vaccinate as a personal one obscures its public health consequences. This is because, as she mistakenly says in the case of COVID-19 vaccines, "vaccines are used to protect not just one person, but a community of people by stopping the spread of a disease to those who can't protect themselves."

In this statement, she is assuming that COVID-19 vaccines stop people from getting infections, and thus lessen the chance of people passing on the virus to others. This is incorrect, it's firmly established in scientific literature that COVID-19 vaccines do not stop the transmission of the virus. Despite this fact, politicians still referred to COVID-19 as a "'pandemic of the unvaccinated."

We've seen this with multiple vaccines, like the annual flu vaccine for example. These are commonly referred to as "leaky vaccines." This crumbles the argument made by Ikemoto. There are many vaccines that have their criticisms, but have never really had their fair share of transparency and open discussion. This was a problem well before COVID-19, and remains a problem now.

Why would people not want to be vaccinated by a COVID shot? In some cases they may be assuming more risk from vaccination compared to the virus itself. Not to mention unvaccinated people aged 49 and under see almost no risk reduction compared to those vaccinated in the same age groups.

These facts have largely been left out of mainstream discussion, leaving people like Ikemoto with a very incomplete understanding of why people believe what they believe about COVID vaccines.

These facts have led many large institutions and governments to repeal their mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy, but it has already done its damage. An unfathomable amount of people lost their jobs, ability to attend university or college, and travel as a result of mandatory COVID-19 vaccination policy. Lives were changed - and not necessarily for the better.

Abortion rights made a lot of noise this year when in June, the United States Supreme Court ended the federal constitutional right to abortion. Now, individual states have the right to decide whether or not to ban and in other cases limit abortion.

At the end of the day, institutions and the state want control over the human body in various ways. Whether it be what founder of the World Economic Forum Klaus Schwab calls the "fourth industrial revolution" which involves merging various technologies with the human body, or simply determining what people are and are not allowed to do with their body.

In my opinion, everybody should have the right to chose what they do with their own body, not the state, especially when it in no way shape or form puts another person in harms way. Having the state control what one can or cannot do with their own body puts humanity further down the path of tyranny and authoritarianism.

Tyranny and authoritarianism exists today on a wide spectrum. Many Western countries are at one end of the spectrum, while other countries at another. In the West for example, we may lose our jobs, face extreme condemnation, loose access to our funds, and lose our ability to express beliefs, evidence and opinions online, but we are not murdered or put in jail for attempting to use our voice in most cases.

Abortion has similar consequences to a the human body, as does mandatory vaccination policy. Health concerns related to abortion include heavy bleeding, damage to the womb, or sepsis happens to about 1 out of 1,000 women who get an abortion. When it comes to COVID-19 vaccines, a historical record number of serious adverse reactions, like death and permanent disabilities, have been reported to vaccine surveillance systems around the world. That being said, people do not argue the health effects of abortion, they argue that not having an abortion damaged their life in many ways. There are monetary concerns, career concerns, issues regarding rape, ancestral rape and more.

When it comes to vaccine injures, news recently broke about a lawsuit that forced the CDC to release the first set of data from its v-safe program. V-safe is a smartphone-based program created by CDC specifically for Covid-9 vaccines. It allows users to register and provide health check-ins after receiving a Covid-19 vaccine. 

Out of the approximate 10 million v-safe users, 782,913 individuals, or over 7.7% of v-safe users, had a health event requiring medical attention, emergency room intervention, and/or hospitalization. Another 25% of v-safe users had an event that required them to miss school or work and/or prevented normal activities. 

There are reasons why multiple countries like Sweden, Norway, and Denmark for example don't give these vaccines to certain age groups.

https://twitter.com/DrAseemMalhotra/status/1578523138044104704

The topic of vaccine injuries is a complicated one. But science showing the mechanisms into how these injuries may be occurring is quite abundant, and many people simply chose to weigh the risks of COVID with the risk of vaccination and make their own decisions.

When it comes to abortion, leaving right or wrong out of the question, I do believe abortion at any stage meets the definition of taking a life. I do however believe humans, individually, should be able to make their own choices when it comes to their own body. I will leave "right" and "wrong" out of the question, but again, the state doesn't seem to be the entity reasonably capable of defining what is "right" or "wrong" in these circumstances. They continue to divide people with differing beliefs who have lost the ability to understand each other.

At what point in time the fetus becomes aware is another discussion. One could make the case for awareness occurring quite late in a pregnancy, while another could present evidence of intelligence and awareness even at the cellular level, before the development of the fetus even begins to take shape.

This is exactly why the freedom of one to chose what they do with their own body has been a fundamental right for so long. When the state gets involved in such matters is when problems seem to amplify exponentially. The politicization of so many topics is destroying our ability to come together and even speak with each other. It's creating a divide among people that seems to be growing by the day.

Image Source: WikiMedia Commons