RE: FORCED VACCINATIONS? The MOST Important Lesson For Humanity Now is to RESPECT & Understand FREE WILL.
I'm a doctor. I don't want to appeal to authority. Is a disclosure of interests.
You clearly stated that the core of you position is about respecting free will. As far as free will goes not being respected you are right. There's evidence to support that is an authoritarian act.
Now here's a problem. That is of inherited contracts. Either one abides by none, absolute anarchy without recognizing the state or one accepts at least the existence of them. Those are the laws, that can be changed at any moment by people but that if accepted entail, for instance, that children are less free than adults.
If so, and one accepts previous contracts, then one is almost forced to accept the forceful penetration of the skin by the agents of the state in this case doctors. There's a scientific rationale from doctors, but this is a freedom problem and not an argument of science.
If one thinks children are equally as free as adults then, that leads to an interesting problem. Because parents have no rights over them. They have no authority over them. So children ought to decide what to do at any moment. If you can't understand them and they can't express their will even changing a diaper is you being an authoritarian.
I also clearly stated that 'The decline of rampant disease began long before the mass popularization of vaccines, due to advances in sanitation, hygiene, and nutrition. This is easily verified, if one has an operational understanding of how to know what is real and what is propaganda'.
There is plenty of information that can lead to an understanding that the scientific basis for the use of vaccines is flimsy at best or just outright fraud.
I abide by no inherited contracts, because there can not possibly be any that deserve respect. I will not be held responsible for the actions of my parents, and, as I am an adult, he cannot take responsibility for my actions. Children are the product of their parents labor. As a result, they are the property of their parents until they reach the age of consent. Children still have individual natural rights, so their parents cannot violate these rights and remain in the moral realm. Children are for a fact less free than adults, because they have no ability to express informed consent.
I do not respect any laws that can be changed at arbitrary whim of the herd. Natural law is the only law that deserves respect, because it remains whether we respect it or not. I accept no previous contracts that I could not read and sign with informed consent. Those who do accept contracts which they never signed with informed consent are called slaves.
Forced penetration of any kind is either tantamount to rape, or attempted murder, take your pick. Any forced medical procedure is even against international convention, if you have any respect for that, I don't, I didn't sign it. It is the very first line of the Nuremberg code. Forced medical procedures are a war crime under the Nuremberg code. So, mandatory vaccination is an act of war against the natural rights of the individual.
This is, indeed, as well as an issue of individual liberty, an argument of the scientific data, because the data does not say what the doctors have been indoctrinated to believe that it says. Many doctors are aware of this, and do not labor under this disinformation. The logical conclusion appears to be that those who promote vaccines are doing so, knowingly or unknowingly, under false pretenses, at the expense of the People's health. The reasoning can be found in the first paragraph of this comment. this is also evidenced by the fact that other diseases, for which there are no vaccines, also declined. There is plenty more than that if what I've stated so far is not enough for a start.
It has been said, "if the theory disagrees with experiment, it's wrong. That simple statement is the key to science. It doesn't matter how beautiful your guess is, it doesn't matter how smart you are, who made the guess, or what his name is. If it disagrees with experiment it's wrong, that's all there is to it". This appears to me to be accurate in it's letter and intent.
The whole last paragraph is rendered irrelevant, and is shown to be an appeal to ridicule, and a straw man argument, by what I've already stated. It was a good try though.
Where did you get the idea that being inherently possessed of individual natural rights implies that children are absolutely free to run riot at a whim? This is clearly not the meaning of individual natural rights.
I have only to disclose my interest in finding the facts and not laboring under the indoctrination forced on me by an incompetent state, or the manipulation of scientifically collected data to an erroneous conclusion. My only appeal is to the facts and the dynamics of the function of the natural world.
Doctors are not scientists. They are an appeal from authority, an appeal to popularity, an appeal to common practice, and stem from the genetic fallacy. Authority is always suspect, because it can never have any but false legitimacy. There is no legitimate authority except the self, within the parameters of natural law. This extends to those who are competent to advocate for themselves as adults possessed of informed consent. The incompetent, whether by stage of development, or by mental impairment, cannot advocate for themselves, as there can be no informed consent.
If you are a naturalist in your laws particularly about children, that's your choice. Is just another type of authoritarianism.
If you believe that, then you may want to look into natural law, natural philosophy, physics, grammar, logic, classical rhetoric, common law, the origins of individual liberty, the actual meaning of 'authoritarianism' and lots more.
I do my best to operate in the realm of facts, not opinions. If someone walks off a cliff, they are subject to gravity, it is not a choice after the last step is taken.
Now you appeal to polymath wisdom. This just got funny.
I did no such thing. I merely suggested learning the tools of thought that every competent adult should have to understand the universe and how it functions. I do not think operational comprehension of the list of subjects recommended is broad enough to be declared the domain of only polymaths. About half of the list used to be taught in grade school. It is not rocket science combined with brain surgery. These are basic tools for understanding.
This is a clear appeal to ridicule.
I, personally, have studied all of these subjects and more. I think most people, if dedicated to learning can understand them all.