Health: Matters of Choice … Or Not
It looks like several groups of Canadian physicians are taking to the courts in order to protect their right to object to certain treatments or practices.
The groups include the following:
- Christian Medical and Dental Society of Canada
- Canadian Federation of Catholic Physicians’ Societies
- Canadian Physicians for Life
Religious bias against issues like homosexuality, race, ethnicity, abortion, mental health, addiction, medically assisted death and even contraception may all be affected by this court decision.
Meanwhile, the vaccinazis in Ontario have declared that parents who oppose injection of unknown chemicals and toxins into the blood streams of their children are essentially ‘under educated’ in matters of health and wellness and will have to ensure indoctrination seminars from the Ministry of Health.
On May 30, 2017, the Ontario Legislature voted on Bill 87, the Protecting Patients Act, 2017 and passed it into Law. Votes were, 92 Yes, 1 No. The only MPP who voted against Bill 87 was independent MPP Jack McLaren. The Act also received Royal Assent the same day.
Schedule 1 of the Protecting Patients Act amends the Immunization of School Pupils Act (ISPA) as follows:
- To require parents to complete an immunization education session before filing a statement of conscience or religious belief.
- To expand the categories of persons who may provide statements regarding the administration of immunizing agents.
- To require those who administer immunizing agents to provide information to the local medical officer of health.
The irony and hypocrisy is rich.
Certain doctors can abstain from what they’re sworn to protect – the health of their patients – but I can’t protect the health of my child.
I’ll be watching the former case to see how things ‘evolve’ (a concept foreign to the folks in the aforementioned groups that most likely believe that evolution is a myth). In particular, if they win, I believe that those who are trying to protect their own health from vaccinazis have a similar case on the grounds that certain health practices offend our bodies. And our health care budgets.