the Proposed 28th Medical Freedom Amendment

[revelarts]

https://thenhf.com/now-is-the-time-support-the-proposed-28th-medical-freedom-amendment/


... An American editorialist, outraged by the government's intrusive meddlingin health care, angrily contended that restrictions on freedom of medical choicewere the product of an insidious conspiracy among elites both inside and outsidethe government. He argued that state interference in the therapeutic choices ofcitizens represented an unconstitutional violation of the people's most basicrights. The writer ominously declared, "The ... duty demanded on a cargo of teain '76, was of small importance, but . .. the principle it involved . . . turned thewhole harbor of Boston into one . . . teapot." The writer warned the"demagogues" in the legislature "to remember that the blood of that tea party stilllives and runs" in their constituents' veins. He sought the support of "every man... who does not wish to be trampled in the dust and deprived of hisconstitutional liberty."'The column described above was not published in the twenty-first century,but rather appeared in an 1838 issue of the Botanico-Medical Recorder, a journalof alternative medicine. The author was almost certainly Alva Curtis, the leaderof a group of botanical practitioners known as the "Independent Thomsonians." Thomsonianism was a system of cure developed some thirty years earlier by aNew Hampshire farmer and itinerant healer named Samuel Thomson. ....

The Origins of American Health Libertarianism
https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/5899/Grossman1.pdf?sequence=2





Now Is the Time! Support the Proposed 28th Medical Freedom Amendment
December 20, 2022 3 Comments
By Michael LeVesque, NHF Board Member

The proposed 28th Medical Freedom Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is the long-awaited eleventh amendment to the Bill of Rights. The Amendment states the following:

“All people have the Right to secure their Health in the manner they choose. Congress, the President, State Legislatures and Executives, Governmental Agencies, or Departments shall make no law or executive order that impedes the Individual’s rights to informed consent nor right to medical choice nor freedom of medical choice. Nor shall the President, Congress, State Legislatures or Executives, Governmental Agencies, or Departments make any law or executive order that impedes the Individual’s right to medical privacy and freedom without an individual and specific judicial warrant supported by Oath and affirmation of necessary cause to protect Society from Harm describing the Individual’s condition and danger it presents.”

https://thenhf.com/now-is-the-time-support-the-proposed-28th-medical-freedom-amendment/



Yea or Nay?

& why?

[fj1200]

^The pro-choice crowd is going to love that.

[AHZ]

^The pro-choice crowd is going to love that.


but the trans eugenicists won't like being unable to administer gender affirming care, aka sterilization.

[fj1200]

but the trans eugenicists won't like being unable to administer gender affirming care, aka sterilization.

That prohibition isn't in there.

[revelarts]

^The pro-choice crowd is going to love that.

A woman can do whatever she wants to her body.
But not to the children she carries.

[AHZ]

That prohibition isn't in there.
the state forcing medical care on minors without parental consent is covered.

[SassyLady]

I think the part that pisses me off the most is censoring alternative medicine. When my pharmacist shut down ivermectin I realized the extent of the medical tyranny we were being subjected to.

Taking away doctors license to practice because they treated their patients with alternatives to the vaccine is criminal.

[Kathianne]

I think the part that pisses me off the most is censoring alternative medicine. When my pharmacist shut down ivermectin I realized the extent of the medical tyranny we were being subjected to.

Taking away doctors license to practice because they treated their patients with alternatives to the vaccine is criminal.
I totally agree with you on the above. If this was widespread, I'm at a loss why MDs and Pharmacists wouldn't bring class action suits.

[fj1200]

A woman can do whatever she wants to her body.
But not to the children she carries.

That's not the way that they will read it.


the state forcing medical care on minors without parental consent is covered.

The problem isn't the state forcing that "care." Willing and enabling parents are allowing it.

[revelarts]

That's not the way that they will read it.
.

Nothing new there.

Personally I'd add a clause that made it clear that unborn children cannot be subject to drugs or medical procedures that will clearly harm the child.

[Gunny]

https://thenhf.com/now-is-the-time-support-the-proposed-28th-medical-freedom-amendment/

... An American editorialist, outraged by the government's intrusive meddlingin health care, angrily contended that restrictions on freedom of medical choicewere the product of an insidious conspiracy among elites both inside and outsidethe government. He argued that state interference in the therapeutic choices ofcitizens represented an unconstitutional violation of the people's most basicrights. The writer ominously declared, "The ... duty demanded on a cargo of teain '76, was of small importance, but . .. the principle it involved . . . turned thewhole harbor of Boston into one . . . teapot." The writer warned the"demagogues" in the legislature "to remember that the blood of that tea party stilllives and runs" in their constituents' veins. He sought the support of "every man... who does not wish to be trampled in the dust and deprived of hisconstitutional liberty."'The column described above was not published in the twenty-first century,but rather appeared in an 1838 issue of the Botanico-Medical Recorder, a journalof alternative medicine. The author was almost certainly Alva Curtis, the leaderof a group of botanical practitioners known as the "Independent Thomsonians." Thomsonianism was a system of cure developed some thirty years earlier by aNew Hampshire farmer and itinerant healer named Samuel Thomson. ....

The Origins of American Health Libertarianism
https://openyls.law.yale.edu/bitstream/handle/20.500.13051/5899/Grossman1.pdf?sequence=2




Now Is the Time! Support the Proposed 28th Medical Freedom Amendment
December 20, 2022 3 Comments
By Michael LeVesque, NHF Board Member

The proposed 28th Medical Freedom Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is the long-awaited eleventh amendment to the Bill of Rights. The Amendment states the following:

“All people have the Right to secure their Health in the manner they choose. Congress, the President, State Legislatures and Executives, Governmental Agencies, or Departments shall make no law or executive order that impedes the Individual’s rights to informed consent nor right to medical choice nor freedom of medical choice. Nor shall the President, Congress, State Legislatures or Executives, Governmental Agencies, or Departments make any law or executive order that impedes the Individual’s right to medical privacy and freedom without an individual and specific judicial warrant supported by Oath and affirmation of necessary cause to protect Society from Harm describing the Individual’s condition and danger it presents.”

https://thenhf.com/now-is-the-time-support-the-proposed-28th-medical-freedom-amendment/



Yea or Nay?

& why?Isn't there a problem with needing to declare freedom from something government imposed that is unconstitutional to begin with? Compounding legislation, as usual :rolleyes:

If however it is the only form of relief from unconstitutional rule, I'd be be for it.

[AHZ]

I totally agree with you on the above. If this was widespread, I'm at a loss why MDs and Pharmacists wouldn't bring class action suits.


because big pharma controls the entire health care industry.

[Kathianne]

because big pharma controls the entire health care industry.
Which has what to do with the legal system? Spare me 'everything is corrupt,' we need to get rid of it all. 'I am really for the Constitution, we just need to suspend it, to bring about what I want. I'm so different than the far left.'

[AHZ]

Which has what to do with the legal system? Spare me 'everything is corrupt,' we need to get rid of it all. 'I am really for the Constitution, we just need to suspend it, to bring about what I want. I'm so different than the far left.'


there's a law now in california where doctors cannot disagree with big pharma decrees.

everything is basically corrupt.

you nailed it.

nobody's talking about suspending the constitution. well, except for you.

[fj1200]

Nothing new there.

Personally I'd add a clause that made it clear that unborn children cannot be subject to drugs or medical procedures that will clearly harm the child.

Since you're already advocating something that will never pass, go for broke.


Isn't there a problem with needing to declare freedom from something government imposed that is unconstitutional to begin with? Compounding legislation, as usual :rolleyes:

If however it is the only form of relief from unconstitutional rule, I'd be be for it.

Excellent point. These are legislative issues IMO and any constitutional amending would be misread by those who wish to misread. Equal Rights Amendment all over again.

[revelarts]

Since you're already advocating something that will never pass, go for broke.


And Roe vs Wade will never be overturned?

How about maybe helping
or just standing aside why others work please.

[AHZ]

And Roe vs Wade will never be overturned?

How about maybe helping
or just standing aside why others work please.


and epstein killed himself.

and authority figures never lie.

[revelarts]

Isn't there a problem with needing to declare freedom from something government imposed that is unconstitutional to begin with? Compounding legislation, as usual :rolleyes:

If however it is the only form of relief from unconstitutional rule, I'd be be for it.

sooo yeah.
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents."
James Madison

When the FDA, the AMA, DofAG and congress are all influenced by big pharma.
And have by drips and drabs over the past 100 years taken bites out of our constitutional rights without push back. Seems to me there are at least 5 ways to deal with it.

•legislative & executive repeals of a lots of specific regs.
•lower &or supreme court nullification of a lot specific regs
•State's nullification of or state constitutional amendments that nullify fed medical regs (like the state marijuana laws)
•Solid block of individuals and biz that simply IGNORE the laws & regs.
•A national amendment that clears the field nullifying the whole table of unconstitutional BS.


Any amendment ... like the 2nd amendment... would have to defended well in court ...regularly.
there are no guarantees or perfect solutions.
the biggest hurdle are our corrupt legislators and the revolving door big pharma Federal bureaucrats

Well no guarantees other than DOING NOTHING guarantees we will have LESS AND LESS medical freedom.
And the gov't using medical issues as a wedge to take away freedom willy nilly.

If you've got some more ideas for dealing with it great.
the more the better.

[AHZ]

sooo yeah.
"It is proper to take alarm at the first experiment on our liberties.The freeman of America did not wait till usurped power had strengthened itself by exercise, and entangled the question in precedents."
James Madison

When the FDA, the AMA, DofAG and congress are all influenced by big pharma.
And have by drips and drabs over the past 100 years taken bites out of our constitutional rights without push back. Seems to me there are at least 5 ways to deal with it.

•legislative & executive repeals of a lots of specific regs.
•lower &or supreme court nullification of a lot specific regs
•State's nullification of or state constitutional amendments that nullify fed medical regs (like the state marijuana laws)
•Solid block of individuals and biz that simply IGNORE the laws & reg.
•A national amendment that clears the field nullifying the whole table of unconstitutional BS.


Any amendment ... like the 2nd amendment... would have to defended well in court ...regularly.
there are no guarantees or perfect solutions.

Well no guarantees other than DOING NOTHING guarantees we will have LESS AND LESS medical freedom.
And the gov't using medical issues as a wedge to take away freedom willy nilly.


but trump said inject bleach!

botthz siydhs!

[revelarts]

but trump said inject bleach!
botthz siydhs!
Not sure where that's coming from on this.

But since you bring it up,
thing is there are folks on 'both sides' -Left & Right- that could get behind this.
at least on a grass roots level.
Most of the Natural/Herbal Med crowd comes from the left hippie and pro psychedelic legalization folks.
And because of Covid many people on the right are taking 2nd 3rd and 4th looks at vaccines and looking at the Amish, 7th day adventist, homeschool families and other conservative health leaning groups. And are open to more options.
A lot of people are sick of big pharama & AMA expensive - one size fits all - our way or the highway- 'treatments' that keep you just well enough to take more of their meds.

[AHZ]

Not sure where that's coming from on this.

But since you bring it up,
thing is there are folks on 'both sides' -Left & Right- that could get behind this.
at least on a grass roots level.
Most of the Natural/Herbal Med crowd comes from the left hippie and pro psychedelic legalization folks.
And because of Covid many people on the right are taking 2nd 3rd and 4th looks at vaccines and looking at the Amish, 7th day adventist and other conservative health leaning groups.
A lot of people are sick of big pharama & AMA expense one size fits all - our way or the highway- 'treatments' that keep you just well enough to take more of their meds.


also on both sides are gatekeepers trying to villainize the truth tellers on their sides, by pretending to be above it all by shouting "both sides".

it's a self referential ever expanding loop of dumb that will lock up all memory. abend.

[revelarts]

also on both sides are gatekeepers trying to villainize the truth tellers on their sides, by pretending to be above it all by shouting "both sides".
it's a self referential ever expanding loop of dumb that will lock up all memory. abend.

yes there are gatekeepers & cranks
Keep telling the truth.... in love.

'You won't ever get to your destination if you stop to throw rocks at every dog that barks at you.'
Churchill parapharse

[AHZ]

yes there are gatekeepers & cranks
Keep telling the truth.... in love.

'You won't ever get to your destination if you stop to throw rocks at every dog that barks at you.'
Churchill parapharse
but you have to deal with every dog trying to castrate your children and and inject you with poison.

evil sometimes gets to a level to where it can no longer be ignored.

then the silent majority wiggles it's toe and the world changes.

[fj1200]

And Roe vs Wade will never be overturned?

How about maybe helping
or just standing aside why others work please.

There's a difference with a "right" being interpreted into the existing constituional framework, and ultimately overturned, and then there's injecting a perceived health care "right" directly into the Constitution. You asked Yay? Nay? Why? I'm just answering your question.

[fj1200]

also on both sides are gatekeepers trying to villainize the truth tellers on their sides, by pretending to be above it all by shouting "both sides".

it's a self referential ever expanding loop of dumb that will lock up all memory. abend.

Is it your contention that your side got everything right and that the other side got everything wrong?

[AHZ]

Is it your contention that your side got everything right and that the other side got everything wrong?


yes.

[fj1200]

yes.

That is a consistent answer. You're wrong, but you're consistent.

[AHZ]

That is a consistent answer. You're wrong, but you're consistent.


my side is just me.

[fj1200]

my side is just me.

My comment stands.


That is a consistent answer. You're wrong, but you're consistent.

[SassyLady]

I totally agree with you on the above. If this was widespread, I'm at a loss why MDs and Pharmacists wouldn't bring class action suits.

There will be.