Vaccine Passports would be unconstitutional, immoral, and unscientific

Many times a day we have heard liberal politicians and politically influenced medical professionals float the idea of requiring that individuals obtain a Coronavirus vaccine before they can participate in normal life again.  Requiring a vaccine passport before someone can eat at a restaurant, fly on an airplane, travel, or engage in any type if activity is fascist in the extreme.  The idea goes against every single ideal the United States of America was founded on.

Any type of vaccine passport imposed by any level or agency of the Federal Government would violate the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment because the right of conscience is integral to that clause of the First Amendment.  

A Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom by Thomas Jefferson was the foundation for the Free Exercise Clause of the First Amendment. As you can see, the right of conscience is a major component of Jefferson’s bill.

We the General Assembly of Virginia do enact, that no man shall be compelled to frequent or support any relig[i]ous Worship place or Ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief, but that all men shall be free to profess, and by argument to maintain their opinions in matters of religion, and that the same shall in no wise diminish, enlarge, or affect their civil capacities.

Several States proposed amendments to the Constitution thet would be incorporated into the Bill of Rights.  From the text of this amendment proposed at the Virginia Ratifying Convention, the right of conscience was at the very heart of  what became the First Amendment.

Twentieth, That religion or the duty which we owe to our Creator, and the manner of discharging it can be directed only by reason and conviction, not by force or violence, and therefore all men have an equal, natural and unalienable right to the free exercise of religion according to the dictates of conscience, and that no particular religious sect or society ought to be favored or established by Law in preference to others.

Here is the text of the First Amendment.

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievance.

This next quote is from transcript of the House of Representatives where they debated the Amendments to the Constitution that would become the Bill of Rights. In this Quote James Madison explains that the right of conscience was onr of the prime motivations for the First Amendment.

Mr. Madison said, he apprehended the meaning of the words to be, that Congress should not establish a religion, and enforce the legal observation of it by law, nor compel men to worship God in any manner contrary to their conscience. Whether the words are necessary or not, he did not mean to say, but they had been required by some of the State Conventions, who seemed to entertain an opinion that under the clause of the Constitution, which gave power to Congress to make all laws necessary and proper to carry into execution the Constitution, and the laws made under it, enabled them to make laws of such a nature as might infringe the rights of conscience and establish a national religion; to prevent these effects he presumed the amendment was intended, and he thought it as well expressed as the nature of the language would admit.

The Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution does not restrain the States in any way.  The Constitutions of all the individual States include a Bill of Rights to protect the rights of the people of that State.  Here are the two clauses of the Massachusetts Bill of Rights that mimic the Free Exercise of Religion Clause of the federal Constitution.  Vaccine passport laws would violate those clauses because they violate the right of conscience of every individual.

Article II.  It is the right as well as the duty of all men in society, publicly, and at stated seasons to worship the Supreme Being, the great Creator and Preserver of the universe. And no subject shall be hurt, molested, or restrained, in his person, liberty, or estate, for worshipping God in the manner and season most agreeable to the dictates of his own conscience; or for his religious profession or sentiments; provided he doth not disturb the public peace, or obstruct others in their religious worship.

Article XVIII.  Section 1. No law shall be passed prohibiting the free exercise of religion.

Vaccine Passport laws would also violate the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment which states:

No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation.

The freedom to move as you wish, leave your house whenever you want, eat at a restaurant whenever you want, and so much more is included in the word liberty.  The only way the federal government can deprive an individual of their liberty is if that individual is found guilty in a court of law by a jury.   Vaccine passports are an obscene violation of that clause.

The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment of the Federal Constitution prohibits the States from depriving the inhabitants of the States of their liberty unless individuals are tried in a court of law and found guilty by a jury.  Vaccine passports would violate that clause of the Constitution.  State Constitutions also include clauses that protect the liberty of every individual inhabiting that State.  They would be violated by vaccine passports.

I  have yet to see any valid scientific rational for vaccine passports.  None at all.   There is nothing preventing individuals from getting vaccinated if they wish to except restrictions based on age made by certain governors.  An unvaccinated individual is absolutely no danger to a vaccinated individual.  If someone wants to take the risk of eating in restaurant or living their life in any way without getting vaccinated it their choice and their right as an individual living in a free country.

Holy Week Thoughts: Holy Thursday A chance to serve Jesus version vs the Deep State Version

On Holy Thursday the first day of the Easter Triduum you might think that in the Catholic church the primary Gospel reading might concerning the Holy Eucharist even that this this is the day in which the Eucharist was inaugurated.

You would be wrong:

This is the Gospel reading on Holy Thursday every year taken directly from the site of the US Conference of Catholic Bishops:

.

Before the feast of Passover, Jesus knew that his hour had come to pass from this world to the Father.
He loved his own in the world and he loved them to the end. The devil had already induced Judas, son of Simon the Iscariot, to hand him over.

So, during supper, fully aware that the Father had put everything into his power and that he had come from God and was returning to God, he rose from supper and took off his outer garments. He took a towel and tied it around his waist. Then he poured water into a basin and began to wash the disciples’ feet and dry them with the towel around his waist.


He came to Simon Peter, who said to him, 
“Master, are you going to wash my feet?”
Jesus answered and said to him,
“What I am doing, you do not understand now, but you will understand later.”
Peter said to him, “You will never wash my feet.”
Jesus answered him, “Unless I wash you, you will have no inheritance with me.”
Simon Peter said to him, 
“Master, then not only my feet, but my hands and head as well.”
Jesus said to him, “Whoever has bathed has no need except to have his feet washed, for he is clean all over; so you are clean, but not all.”
For he knew who would betray him;
for this reason, he said, “Not all of you are clean.”

So when he had washed their feet 
and put his garments back on and reclined at table again, 
he said to them, “Do you realize what I have done for you?
You call me ‘teacher’ and ‘master,’  and rightly so, for indeed I am.
If I, therefore, the master and teacher, have washed your feet, 
you ought to wash one another’s feet.
I have given you a model to follow, 
so that as I have done for you, you should also do.”

John 13 1-15

Notice that the focus of this entire gospel is the idea that it is the job of the disciples to serve. They are the princes of the church but their primary duty is to serve the people who they shall bring to the fold.

One may debate how successful they and their successors have been in this regard but there is no question that the primary job of the clergy from your local parish priest to the Bishop to the Cardinals and to the Holy Father is to be of service to the people to guide them to that narrow path of salvation.

In government this is much the same, particularly in a republic there is the idea that those in office are there to serve the people and not only those but them who are working in government bureaucracy. It is no accident that such people are called “Civil Servants”.

This is one of the reason why Donald Trump was such an effective president because the office actually cost him lots in terms of money and reputation yet the people did better socially and economically under him. As the book of Proverbs says:

By justice a king gives stability to the land; but he who imposes heavy taxes ruins it.

Proverbs 29:4

It’s is also why the deep state of the Bureaucracy and those who seek wealth power and prestige from office opposed him so. We have an administration that seems more concerned with the interested than with even the real people who voted for him or the state of the cities where Biden voters live. And you know what Proverbs talks about that too:

When the wicked prevail, crime increases; but their downfall the just will behold.

Proverbs 29:16

And that’s not even discussing the revolving door of wealth whose return is the main reason why the deep state wanted Trump out.

If one wants to get the idea of how this revolving door works I can’t think of a better example than this exchange from the Christmas Special of Yes Minister which became the pilot for the series “Yes Prime Minister” where the power Cabinet secretary Sir Arnold is talking to Sir Humphrey in a private meeting noting that he has decided to retire and is now considering who will be his successor:

Sir Arnold: You see, in this job, the problem isn’t really finding the answers it’s finding the questions. We need the man who can find the key question.

Sir Humphrey: By the way, Arnold, to change the subject completely, what will you be doing when you retire?

Sir Arnold: Ah, very good question! Very good question.

Sir Humphrey: It’s just that there might be jobs you could pick up, Er, ways you could serve the country, which your successor whoever he might be could put your way, er, persuade you to undertake!

Sir Arnold: Well I had been giving it some thought. Well as you know I’ll be chairman of the Banque Occidentale and there’ll be directorships of IBM and BP and that sort of thing. But I was thinking…

Sir Humphrey: Yes?
Sir Arnold: Well the Chairmanship of the Opera House trust will be coming up next year
Sir Humphrey: Chairman of Covent Garden…

Sir Arnold: And the chancellorship of Oxford.

Sir Humphrey: um hm
Sir Arnold: And then the deputy chairmanship of the Bank of England would be a…
Sir Humphrey: …A challenge?

Sir Arnold: A challenge, exactly. And head of the Security Commission. And the presidency of The Anglo-Caribbean Association would give one…
Sir Humphrey: …a chance to be of service.
Sir Arnold: Precisely! Especially during the winter months.
Sir Humphrey: Well I’m sure that any successor worth his salt could arrange these Arnold.
Sir Arnold: You think so? That’s very reassuring, very reassuring.

As you might guess Sir Humphrey gets the job. Later on in the show the sitting Prime minister also announces his retirement and at lunch Sir Arnold and Sir Humphrey are having lunch and the subject comes up that the two candidates within the party are both problematic as they might interfere by actually wanting to run the government:

Sir Arnold: So, will the new PM be our eminent Chancellor or our distinguished Foreign Secretary?

Sir Humphrey: Well, that’s what I wanted to talk to you about. Which do you think it should be?

Sir Arnold: Difficult. Like asking which lunatic should run the asylum.

Sir Humphrey: The Trouble is, they’re both interventionists they both have foolish notions of running the county themselves if they became Prime Minister.

Sir Arnold: Have we any allies?
Sir Humphrey: Quite a few, the Chief Whip particularly. And He’s worried that who gets the job will antagonize the other’s supporters and split the party.

Sir Arnold: So we’re looking for a compromise candidate.
Sir Humphrey: Hmm. Malleable.
Sir Arnold: Flexible.

Sir Humphrey: Likeable.
Sir Arnold: No firm opinions.

Sir Humphrey: No bright ideas.
Sir Arnold: Not intellectually committed.

Sir Humphrey: Without the strength of purpose to change anything.
Sir Arnold: Someone who can be manipulated, professionally guided.
Sir Humphrey: And leave the business of government in the hands of the experts.

At the end of that exchange they look at each other both thinking of the main character of the series: (Jim Hacker the minister of the department of administrative affairs and laugh uncontrollably) before deciding that’s it’s possible.

As I’ve given up Youtube for Lent I can’t imbed the video but I challenge you to find that scene online, watch it and not immediately seeing them thinking of Joe Biden as their man for the White House at that moment.