Transcript of the above video:

As the title of this video suggests, we are discussing so called Vaccine passports, vaccine mandates. I have gone ahead and made a video where we discuss in detail the fact that Thailand has rescinded so-called vaccine mandates for those looking to visit Thailand, those looking to travel into Thailand. There is no longer a requirement that those folks have the vaccine in order to come in. That's not really the thrust of this video. This video is very much an opinion piece, it's my personal opinion or my opinions as are all these opinions for that matter, and anytime I say it is my opinion for that matter.

I have got real issues on a very fundamental level beyond legality and honestly I think, you go look up the Nuremberg Codes, you go look up many of the laws regarding informed consent, the big one that has just been nagging at my brain has been the fact that Medical Privacy. Medical Privacy was always considered on par with Doctor - Patient privilege, excuse me Attorney - Client confidentiality, Doctor - Patient privilege was always viewed on par with that. I remember my first literal day of Law School, the at the time sitting Judge that ended up being our Ethics Professor, talking about why legal privilege exists, that people have to feel comfortable; they have to feel able to fully disclose their situation to their Attorney, to their Doctor and even to some extent to their Priest, that is a Priest - Penitent privilege under certain circumstances. There is even a source's privilege for journalists and things. We're not even going to get into that, it's a very different thing but in the case of privilege involving, and medical secrecy, it's there so that people can fully communicate with their doctor, with their lawyer. Let's leave lawyers aside because we're talking doctors now, it's there for that purpose, to be able to gain unfettered advice from their physician and to get the real information about what's going on with a person's own body. Medical Privacy is really, really important and I don't think people think it all the way through. Think about it. If you have to worry that everyone and their dog is going to know your medical condition by going to a doctor, are you really going to really want to go to a doctor unless it's an absolutely like "yeah, I'm hit by a bus and I'm bleeding out!" Yes they are going to take me to the Emergency Room, I'm going to see a doctor. But I mean are you going to want to go see a doctor to discuss intimate things like sexually transmitted diseases or the fact that I may have a disease that will kill me and I don't want people to know that because they will treat me different. There are myriad things I can just think of off the top of my head why I want Medical Privacy and I don't understand why because somebody wants to get onto a plane and go somewhere they automatically forfeit that right, I don't believe that that is correct.

On a deeper level than even that though, the thing that really, really unnerves me about the notion of a Vaccine Mandate is at the end of the day how can a society really call itself free if it makes people do things to their own body? I just don't, and yeah I understand, and I love that in the discussions I have had on this with people who disagree with me it goes to a very creepy place very quickly because I will say look I mean to me that is the bright line rule is my big issue with masks. If people can say what you have to wear, we are in a real problem. You really need to be looking close at your Government if it starts telling you what to wear. We are beyond looking close at what the Government is doing when they tell you what to put in to your body. To my mind, and I think this is a basic human right; I am not even going to get into the legal arguments under the US Constitution, this is a much more broad video, I can do one on that and go through the myriad ways it violates that particular document but this is basic human rights stuff. I mean you can't and this is beyond legality. There are moral and ethical implications, I thought of that being the title of this video, it is beyond even that. It is just purely moral at the end of the day. At the end of the day, you have to look at this for what it is. I get it, if there's an existential threat to people, yeah okay if the black plague was ravaging through, and the black plague is a little different because you get that from rats, but if it was contagious somehow and there was a vaccine, well pretty strong argument on that. Smallpox is a great example. In fact I had a lot of people, even lawyers and amateur want to be lawyers, whatever on social media years back before I frankly left most of social media in a personal capacity because it was overwhelming how insane and absurd and surreal the world had become, especially in a social media context but I remember talking to people back then, a couple years back saying: "well there's a Supreme Court case that says that it is okay." Well I went and looked that up, it actually said it's okay to "find" people, it didn't say you can make him take it, that was the original case. And, this was really compelling to my mind - it was a small pox issue as I recall. If I'm not mistaken it was something that yeah there is existential threat issues to a community. Smallpox can ravage through it. Now people survived it and let's also be clear in an American context, there's no asterisks at the bottom of the Bill of Rights that says: "Except in cases of pandemics or public health", again I am not going to go too deep into that but one of the founders, one of the big founders, George Washington himself, had had smallpox and never felt the need to restrict all the rights and freedoms in that document because of smallpox. So even smallpox. I think it is hard for me to get my mind around the notion that rights are just abrogated because disease exists. That's my only point in bringing this up sort of from an American context. But just from an international just a broad-based, general context, I am sorry but I cannot morally get my mind around the notion that a person or an organization or the state itself can just unilaterally and quite honestly rather arbitrarily and capriciously and this is across the board, I'm not pointing out any one state or Government or anything, I mean the whole thing in my mind globally has been applied arbitrarily and capriciously which is the basis under many US Laws for throwing out a law and saying "No, this isn’t legal, it is arbitrary and capricious". 

Long story short is that is how I have seen this dealt with across the board. Thailand is, I am not pointing fingers at Thailand by any stretch of the imagination, multiple countries pulled this kind of stuff and in my mind it's wrong there too. At the end of the day you cannot force people without a really compelling reason and I am sorry, sitting here in January of 2023, I ain't seeing any reasons. I just don't see where they're at. We know what this thing is, we have been dealing with it for 3 years. No it does not have a fatality rate that comes anywhere near the levels that I think it would be necessary, not necessary, but it would be even reasonable to presume that these kind of mandates are warranted. We are beyond that now I think. At least with this given disease, we are beyond that. So the point I am trying to make in this video, I guess I am just trying to get my own thinking across a little bit. A lot of people have asked me about this since I put out the first video on this: "what do you think personally, like on a personal level?" Well that's what I think. I think on a moral level barring literally an existential threat, I don't see where any Government, anybody gets to tell you what you put in to your body for any reason frankly, in any context. I just don't see it. Again barring a major existential threat which just simply isn't here, I just don't see where you get the justification for that under any circumstances.