If We Don’t Stand Up For The Unvaxxed Now, We Wouldn’t Have Stood Up For Jews In The 1930s

I’m not telling you whether I’ve had the jab or not, because it doesn’t matter. What I am telling you is that a woman in Denver is about to die because the medical establishment won’t let her have a surgery, simply and only because she hasn’t had their shot. Bearing in mind that Denver hospitals have seen thousands of COVID patients over nearly two years, this isn’t defensible… it’s willfully causing a death.

The unvaxxed – people making a personal medical decision – are the subjects of executive orders from the President of the United States, among many other rulers. They are to be fired from their jobs, or their employers will face heavy fines. And many have been fired.

The unvaxxed are forbidden, by the executive orders of local potentates, from entering private businesses.

The unvaxxed are being called “stupid,” on CNN and other “respected” news outlets. These same people are calling for them to be shamed, and worse. Many of their listeners are pleased if an anti-vaxx advocate gets sick and dies; some will even gloat over it. Many have expressed their wishes for such deaths.

The unvaxxed have been silenced by Google, Facebook and Twitter, losing the ability to speak their minds in the public square. Civil libertarians have gone silent in the face of this open, flagrant and massive censorship.

Outrage against the unvaxxed has been stoked relentlessly, by the most powerful outlets and services that exist, or have ever existed. Millions of otherwise normal people have become so committed to “not letting the other side win,” that they wish pain and suffering on the unvaxxed.

All of this and more, simply because the unvaxxed have made a personal medical choice, and have stuck with it.

The powerful of almost every type are openly persecuting the unvaxxed. That means that you and I must defend them.

If you’re afraid, suck it up and take whatever blows you must. If you fear people will call you a hypocrite, toughen up and let them.

Whether or not you agree with the choices made by the unvaxxed, you must defend them as fellow human beings.

If the unvaxxed aren’t allowed to make their own choices, then all the righteous stories we told ourselves about tolerance, free speech, my body my choice and the glories of democracy were simply self-flattering bullshit. This is the moment when those stories live or die.

The unvaxxed are being publicly shamed, hated, derided, fired from their jobs, denied medical care and more. The most powerful people in the world are driving it all, furiously. If this isn’t a persecution, neither were the inquisitions.

This is the time when all good people must stand up for the persecuted. If we won’t do it now, we wouldn’t have done it in the 1930s.


Paul Rosenberg


18 thoughts on “If We Don’t Stand Up For The Unvaxxed Now, We Wouldn’t Have Stood Up For Jews In The 1930s”

  1. Thank you Paul for saying it. My wife and I are fighting for life and freedom for our son, who is in the Air National Guard. It is about freedom and Gods gift of free will to choose.
    Paul M

  2. Thank You, Paul!

    It’s time to shut this entire country down if these dictators keep persecuting those whose personal health choices are just that: PERSONAL CHOICE. I totally support medical personnel, airline pilots, Amtrak employees, school employees and many others whose livelihood is threatened by these medical frauds, bureaucrats and gutless politicians. If we allow this to continue it will just get worse.

  3. Well said Paul!
    I normally wouldn’t reference my web site on someone else’s site but you may want to see my open letter on my page.

  4. Thanks Paul.

    I heartily agree with these sentiments, especially the first sentence: “I’m not telling you whether I’ve had the jab or not, because it doesn’t matter.”

    Tucker Carlson says similar things, in his own stylish way:

    And this is the best legal advice I have found so far for ‘within-the-lines’ options:

    PS. I forwarded your last missive about Righteousness to my kids. Rule breaking needs role models.

  5. I struggle with this one though. I believe the doctors have the right to not perform surgery on whomever they choose to not perform surgery on. If they think its a risk to them, what right does the patient have to insist it should be done due to her choices?
    Freedom has to go all the different ways.

    In many ways this appears to be an administrative decision made by the hospital vs the doctor and so the doctor, should also have the right to do surgery in another facility that might allow it. I don’t believe the patient has the right to major medical services from people with those talents.
    I would love to hear your thoughts on that.

    1. Yes, the docs have free will too. That’s not the problem here (they’ve already treated armies of COVID cases, and it’s the admins who are refusing treatment), but it’s a valid point.

      As for other facilities, there may not be another nearby, as this is a transplant, not something every hospital can do. What I’d love to see is some person/group with means setting this woman up docs and a hospital willing to help her somewhere else.

    2. They would still be a risk with vaccine- why not a test? Or how about if you have symptoms stay home?

  6. Docs job is to doctor they signed an oath. If they don’t want to doctor – being creative, using all the available treatments and resources, and saving lives what good are they to us? If they are now fearful of covid then the docs have not been researching and paying attention to the early treatments and preventions. Sad they would do this to another human being.

    1. No argument, but just to clarify, I don’t think it’s the docs’ choice in this case, but the admins’.

      Still, a whole lot of docs have been morally MIA.

  7. Jesus said

    “In this world you will have trouble”

    But that’s ok
    “He’s gone ahead to prepare a place for us”

  8. False analogy. Being Jewish wasn’t preventable and didn’t spread to other people.

    It’s also not a “personal choice” when it affects other people directly.

    I’m being the Devil’s advocate here, because if we sit in an echo chamber and don’t have our shit together with good arguments , we’re going to lose everything.

    1. Who says analogies have to be math-formula precise? Analogies are resemblances that make a point.

  9. You all seem to be missing the point. The refusal to do a transplant on a non-vaccinated person is a medical decision as it is well documented that those receiving the anti-rejection drugs required for transplant patients make them much more susceptible to COVID-19. Why perform a very intense procedure on someone who will likely die from COVID-19 after the surgery. It’s better to devote their efforts to save others who will benefit long term.

    The news reports explain the details:
    “For transplant patients who contract COVID-19, the mortality rate ranges from about 20% to more than 30%,” UCHealth said in a statement to CBS Denver. “This shows the extreme risk that COVID-19 poses to transplant recipients after their surgeries.”
    Patients are often required to receive other vaccinations, such hepatitis B and MMR, before surgery, UCHealth says. The hospital says such requirements increase the likelihood of a successful transplant.

    As for people to have the right to make personal decisions, they do, and nobody is stopping them from making those personal decisions. I support their right to do so. But like the adventurer who decides to climb a mountain and dies doing it, there are consequences. And I don’t want the climber to fall on me. What the governments are doing is trying to protect society at large from the impact of those who will not be vaccinated by making the consequences of their decisions immediate. If you want to interface with people as part of your job or just as you live your life, there are consequences and the governments are protecting those who cannot be vaccinated, (children under 12) from those who could spread the virus.
    Once everyone who wants to be vaccinated has been, including children, then yes open everything up. Then those who are protected by the vaccines will not have to worry if their neighbour isn’t. Until then, the unvaccinated by choice must be prevented from infecting those who are not.

    1. Laying aside that it seems to be the admins forbidding the surgery rather than the docs, your objection is cogent. Thank you.

      That said, the argument stalls if we consider the well-attested fact that vaccinated people still get and carry Covid. Added to that, it seems that the vaxxed spread Covid significantly better than the unvaxxed. If you plug even one of those facts in, the argument no longer works.

      And, FWIW, many of us no longer take “news reports” at face value.

      You may have the last word if you wish.

      1. I don’t see any reports that vaccinated people spread COVID-19 better than unvaccinated. Perhaps you’re misinterpreting reports comparing the transmission of the Delta variant in vaxxed people to the original COVID-19 in the unvaxxed. The report I saw said: “A person who was fully vaccinated and then had a ‘breakthrough’ Delta infection was almost twice as likely to pass on the virus as someone who was infected with Alpha.” But it doesn’t say if they were passing it to a vaccinated or unvaccinated person. Of course so far it appears that the vaccines do prevent death as a consequence of getting the virus in about 100% of people under the age 50 who don’t have other severe medical conditions. To me, that’s a good reason to be vaccinated.

Comments are closed.