Horrors of vaccination exposed and illustrated: $b Petition to the President to abolish compulsory vaccination in Army and NavyHiggins, Chas. M. (Charles Michael)
History
Horrors of vaccination exposed and illustrated: $b Petition to the President to abolish compulsory vaccination in Army and Navy
Higgins, Chas. M. (Charles Michael)
Vaccination
This second article from the Declaration of Rights is, I think, the
wisest, most important and significant statement in a political, legal
and moral sense that was ever written by human hand or human mind,
because it is the essence of the essential paragraph of the Declaration
and clearly expresses the basis of Democratic Government, Rational
Ethics, and Civic Religion, in one simple clause or sentence! This
basis is simply the inherent and “unalienable” rights of our fellow men
necessary for human life, liberty and happiness, which are naturally
or divinely conferred upon all men, equally, and cannot be ignored or
violated by individuals or governments. And it is obvious that the
honest and general recognition of these rights will at once establish
true justice and righteousness among men and nations, and the disregard
and violation of these rights is now, and ever has been, the cause of
all wrongdoing, war, and other evils between men and nations the world
over.
This simple and potent statement of basic human rights is therefore
equal in ethical and legal force to the bulk of the Decalogue itself
and to the Golden Rule of Humanity, Honesty and Justice in its three
best versions from the world’s greatest moral teachers, Confucius,
Plato and Christ; so that in this simple sentence from the essential
paragraph of our first great national document we have a code of
Democratic Government and of Human Ethics in one sentence, which, as
before suggested, should be taught in all our schools as the basis of
Americanism.
THE GOLDEN RULE AND THE DECLARATION OF RIGHTS COMPARED
It may be worth while to consider here for a moment what is perhaps
the best version of the “Golden Rule,” viz., the version of Plato in
Plato’s Laws, Book XI, Prof. Jowett’s translation, which is in these
words, dated about 360 B.C.:
“Thou shalt not touch that which is mine, if thou canst help,
or remove the least thing which belongs to me without my
consent: and may I, being of sound mind, do to others as I
would that they should do to me.”
This is surely a most righteous ethical code, clear, broad
and simple, and in moral and logical effect it is nearer like our
American Declaration of Rights than any other formula, particularly as
regards the recognition of the sacred personal rights of the individual
which is equivalent to the principle of “unalienable rights” in the
Declaration. The phrase, “Thou shalt not touch that which is mine or
remove the least thing which belongs to me without my consent,” is
certainly a most righteous rule of human honesty, sanctity, justice
and security which surely condemns everything like compulsory medicine
which touches and violates the body with inflicted disease, without
consent of the patient, and removes and destroys the most sacred
possession of the individual, viz., bodily sanctity, health and life.
UNALIENABLE RIGHTS ANALYZED AND DEFINED
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account