Bearing signs with statements like “Our Bodies Our Choice” and “Vaccine Makers Are Exempt From Liability”, over 400 protesters gathered at the California state capitol building in Sacramento today to protest SB 276.
The draconian law gives the state power to punish doctors who provide medical exemptions for children needed to avoid taking vaccines required to attend public schools.
According to the new law, physicians who issue more than five medical exemptions in a year will have their exemptions reviewed by a government agent, and potentially face penalties with the state medical board.
Many believe the bill will crack down on medical exemptions so that the only way a child can qualify for an exemption from vaccines to attend school is if they experience encephalitis (inflammation of the brain) or anaphylactic shock. Under this interpretation of the law, even if a child has a seizure after taking a vaccine that would not qualify as a reason to be exempt anymore, and a parent with a child already injured by a vaccine would not qualify for an exemption for other children.
Corporate news including NBC has reported the story of this law as a “crack down on fraudulent vaccine exemptions.”
However, The California Globe has reported, “Of the fraudulent exemptions cases that the Medical Board of California has investigated to date, there have been no fraudulent medical exemptions found.”
Protesters blocked the State Capitol before California Governor Gavin Newsom signed SB 276 into law today. Independent journalist Mike Cernovich covered the event and captured video of the protests.
“Nearly every mother I’ve spoken to is not properly described as ‘anti-vaxx,’ as most vaccinated at least one child, leading to what they claim is a vaccine-related injury. ‘Ex-vaxx’ would be a more accurate descriptor,” tweeted Cernovich. “This is a maligned group and some of you should be ashamed of yourselves for how you treat and talk about them.”
“The mothers and fathers want Governor Newsom to represent California for All. This bill is NOT California for all! The government has no place in between a doctor and their patient,” protester Kiely Modiri told LauraLoomer.US. Modiri is protesting because she has been injured by a vaccine and she is concerned her child may no longer qualify for an exemption.
Robert F. Kennedy, Jr., who helped organize the protest, spoke to the gathered parents.
Actor Rob Schneider wrote of the event, “Let history record that it was three California mothers, one of them a grandmother, who were arrested on Sept. 9, 2019, and began nonviolent civil disobedience for the vaccine freedom movement in America. @GavinNewsom veto #sb276.”
“The irony of all this too is that the pharmaceutical industry is the most poorly regarded industry in Americans eyes’ ranking last on a list of 25 industries per a recent Gallup poll BUT the same people who are skeptical of all other area of big pharma think that they are operating from an altruistic standpoint when it comes to vaccines,” Shauna Cernovich told LauraLoomer.US.
Corporations like Merck that have had to pay billion dollar settlements for drugs with deadly effects like Vioxx – effects that Merck admittedly had knowledge of in advance of selling the drug – also sell vaccines that many have reported catastrophic results from using.
In California, every Republican voted against the draconian new vaccine law while every Democrat voted for it.
“And so if your child isn’t up to date on all the vaccines per the CDC schedule then they can’t attend school,” said Shauna Cernovich. “Many parents will be homeschooling their children, so then this will primarily affect lower income families who can’t afford to live off a single salary just so one parent stays home to homeschool. But of course the Democrats don’t really give a shi* about the well-being of impoverished families they just pretend to.”
Many are concerned that adult vaccines may be the next mandate, with insurance companies potentially denying coverage until the insured is “up to date” on shots.
Big Tech has censored critics of poorly manufactured vaccines, with Google removing 140,000 pages related to NaturalNews.com alone. This is just another example of Democrats partnering with Big Tech to effect policy and potentially alter elections.
“As a mother of three small children, and discovering during my first pregnancy that my husband and I had completely different views on vaccines, the freedom to research and discern truths from falsehoods matters a great deal to me,” said Kimberly Edwards, a critic of the new California law. “It’s not as simple as ‘pro-vaccine and anti-vaccine’, which I find incredibly divisive. There are risks and benefits to both, and I think what we will find we all have in common is a desire for vaccines to be properly tested for both safety and effectiveness, and it’s clear that is not the current situation.”
Edwards echoed the concerns of many that the new law violates the doctor-patient relationship and puts whether or not an exemption is valid in the hands of government officials. Many protesters of the new law, like Edwards, are not “anti-vaccine,” but concerned as parents at not being allowed to make a decision on what’s best for their children.
“As I read physicians’ open letters to Governor Gavin Newsom addressing their concerns on sb276 and sb214 because it limits their ability to fulfill the commitment they made as doctors – to first, cause no harm – I become increasingly concerned about what other implications it will have to put the power of medical choices into the hands of government staff instead of the medical experts who have dedicated their lives to this area of expertise,” Edwards told LauraLoomer.US.
Edwards also expressed concern that Big Tech was censoring information from the public.
“This past year, seeing so many posts on social media become mysteriously unavailable and being labeled “misinformation” simply because it doesn’t fit the narrative of that extreme pro-vaccine side, has been incredibly unnerving. The constitution protects our right to free speech, and while I understand that Facebook is a private entity, it was at the prompting of the government that the censorship began. Americans are capable of, and have the right to read and see and hear all the viewpoints to discern what is true and what is false.”
Republican Senator Jeff Stone pleaded for the Senate to consider giving the bill a public hearing, calling the passage of the new law “a mockery of democracy.”
“A relative of mine has twin boys,” wrote a Twitter user in response to Cernovich’s coverage of this story. “After one round of vaccines, one of the boys went unconscious and stopped breathing. But she doesn’t talk about it because people scream at her that she will scare people away from getting vaccinations.”
“I don’t know a ton on the Vax issues but I know that mothers shouldn’t be made to shut up,” wrote prominent conservative Ali Alexander.
A majority of those polled by Cernovich said they would not take vaccines if mandated by the government.
“I am pro-vaccine. I oppose laws mandating vaccines for those children who have a bad reaction to them,” wrote Cernovich. “This seemed to me to be uncontroversial but vaccination fascists have taken over.”
As for Edwards, she created a Facebook event in response to social media censorship of the issue, and she welcomes “anyone to join us as we protest the censorship through a marketing campaign that highlights how freedom of speech matters to everyone. And that suppressing one side of an argument only creates division, fear, and ultimately crumbles the foundation our great nation was built upon.”
Asked what concerns her most about new vaccine mandate laws, Edwards raised the issue of safety. “When I discovered that the government gave Harvard a $1 million grant to improve the current VAERS system to be automated so we could get a real understanding of adverse events, and their findings were that adverse reactions were not the 1-in-a-million chance that the CDC continues to boast, but actually 2.6%, meaning 1 in 38… I was absolutely shocked. Correlation doesn’t equal causation, but at a rate of 1 in 38, it certainly demands further investigation before creating mandates that remove our freedom of choice,” said Edwards.