CA AB2109 Signed By Brown With New Religious Vaccine Exemption for Families
See the letter here.
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
Just so everyone is aware when I tried to obtained assess to this site a program we have called Web of trust advised me not to access site due to "scam" Alternate reasons. When I viewed, reviews and details, it was all nonsense basically censorship. Other people beliefs to stop others from having a chance for themselves to make a decisions. At first if I did not investigate I would have thought is was a site that was going to hack me.
Posted by: N. Talavera | August 25, 2014 at 12:44 PM
Dear Rob Schneider: I cannot tell you enough how grateful I am that you joined us in this fight. I have been in this fight a long time - over 12 years. We have powerful and aggressive foes; people that want those who are vaccine injured to go away and be quiet, and want those who question vaccine safety to be squashed like bugs. It is rare to find someone to join the fight who wasn't drafted (a loved one killed or injured). It is so much easier to stay out of this fight. It is the rare person who will stick their neck out to do the right thing. To stand up to tyrranical medical dictators who want to strip our rights to shreds is indeed a brave thing to do! THANK YOU SO MUCH! You are intelligent and caring, and you have GUTS! I can't blame other celebrities who privately root for us, but do not take a stand publicly. It is understandable that they do not want the heat. But my GOD, if more people were as brave as you, so many children could be spared the devestation of vaccine injury.
Posted by: Sylvia | October 02, 2012 at 09:59 PM
I doubt whether most religions would require you to put that much trust in the state. Plainly, with vaccination you take on an unquantifiable risk - no religion requires you to believe your government or your doctor absolutely. So, if you believe that you are offering your child up to a false belief system you could quite reasonably claim it is against your religion, almost whatever religion that is. Certainly, religions of "the Book" should find offering your child up to a false belief system repugnant.
"Put not thy trust in princes", eh?
Posted by: John Stone | October 02, 2012 at 01:04 PM
Become a Catholic and refuse to shoot your baby up with aborted dead baby DNA that has yet to be proven safe.
Yes, we are shooting our kids with dead baby! Hellloooooo.
Posted by: Billie | October 02, 2012 at 11:59 AM
Where I live in Canada we don’t need exemptions.
A large yellow envelope was sent home last year via the school from the health unit with consent forms for the grade 9 vaccines. This was for my son whose vaccine injury led to his label of autism. I used black sharpie to write rejected/declined/refused across the forms so there is no mistake about my intentions. On the outside of the yellow envelope (in black sharpie) I asked the health unit how any parent can give informed consent when not only did they not include the package insert but they did not give the brand names of the vaccines being used. I wrote that I had included the package inserts I had printed out and highlighted all the contraindications and adverse effects that were missing from their list of risks which of course were just fever and slight swelling.
My son said that when he turned it into the office, the staff was like “WT?”. But I know they would have read at least the outside of the envelope, which is why I wrote it there. And I wouldn’t have been one bit upset if they read the contents either. wink wink
I don’t know and I don’t care if they rolled their eyes, because now they know there are more adverse effects than just swelling and fever. I got a call from the health unit a few weeks later asking to confirm that I was declining vaccination for my child.
I will do the same this year for my younger son.
My religious reasons however are that God designed a perfect being and did not make mistakes. Vaccination bypasses the design of our first line of defenses in this perfectly designed immune system. Man’s knowledge of the immune system is very incomplete, consequently we cannot know all the effects of vaccination. And speaking as a Christian, Jesus healed a lot of people. He never vaccinated anyone.
Posted by: samaxtics | October 02, 2012 at 11:44 AM
I'm curious as to how this works exactly. Is the doctor legally required to disclosed info from VAERS? Legally required to disclose the lack of liability that doctors & pharma companies have? How about his answers to questions that parents have. If the doctor answers a question using the typical CDC talking points and it is demonstrated afterwards (say after my child suffers a serious side-effect)that the answer was less than honest, is the doctor able to legally be held liable for not giving an honest assessment? If I ask has a study been done comparing children NEVER vaccinated vs those that have been vaccinated is the doctor legally obligated to tell me "No, it hasn't been done" ? Is there now a bigger obligation for the doctor to be on top of all the current data?
It almost seems like California has now put doctors in the position to take the fall. They now have to discuss the benefits of vaccines and there will be many, many parents with questions. It seems like they will no longer be able to skirt the issue with CDC talking points but will have to have conversations about risk/benefits. Unless they plan to kick people out of their practice for simply asking sincere questions - but that doesn't make much sense for them financially in the long run.
I think if I was a doctor in California I wouldn't be very happy about this either.
Posted by: Shelly | October 02, 2012 at 09:55 AM
Thank you for standing up!
Thank you for caring if our country will continue to exist.
Thank You for fighting for it.
Posted by: Benedetta | October 02, 2012 at 08:02 AM
This is Rob Schneider. Aung San Suu Kyi is the female Nobel Prize Winner from Burma. Recently, she gave some advice for Americans. She said, "America, protect your freedom!" Now Ms. Kyi know a thing or two about freedom. In Burma she had been under house arrest for almost 21 years. She is also the recipient of the highest civilian honor our country has, the Presidential Medal of Freedom.
So when Ms. Kyi says America protect your freedom, she is not saying it lightly. From the Patriot Act, where our Gov't no longer needs a court order to spy on own citizens, to the assassination of Americans abroad without due process, Freedom is under attack.
But by far the most insidious of all Government intrusions is the one happening right now in America by Big Pharma in their collusion with our representatives in Government. Government coercion to force parents to make their children take any invasive medical procedures (vaccination of their children) is something out of an Orwellian nightmare or Nazi Germany. Just remove the word vaccine and replace it with an other medical procedure and you will begin to see how regressive and criminal this is.
Vaccines, unlike any other drug, is a one size fits all nightmare. The Vaccine makers insist ALL VACCINES MUST BE TAKEN BY EVERY ONE IN THE SCHEDULE THAT WE DECIDE! Name one other drug that is given such impunity. Every person is different and their precious immune systems don't react the same way. 49 doses of 14 different Vaccines before the age of 6 is mandated by Doctor convenience and Big Pharma profits not patient wellness or sound scientific reasoning.
Please look up Dr. Palevsky and hear what a real pediatrician, not blinded by ideology or blind faith, but with the ability to reason and think rationally and for himself has to say!
Lastly, Freedom requires eternal vigilance. Big Pharma will try to attack and remove Religeous Exemption next!
Posted by: Rob Schneider | October 02, 2012 at 03:46 AM
I got a bunch of forms to "update" my kid with vaccines, recently. I put reasons down as to why I didn't feel they were necessary (son had his MMR at 2 years and recent research shows before 15 months is possibly ineffective now), titers etc. All I actually had to do was to write 'rejected' on the form and I'm in Canada, too. There was no mention of religious or philosophical exemption- just write rejected. I did notice that they mentioned anyone in the family having had G-B as a reason for pause- it could have been to do with the meningitis vaccine.
Posted by: Jen | October 01, 2012 at 11:18 PM
There WILL be a section on our new exemptions form, allowing for the religious exemption. It'll be up to the State Health Department and the political figure heads to work it out. Legal entities have already spoken to our Governor about this. Governor Brown was warned by several that this was a truly bad bill.
Let's just say - he got the message...
Posted by: Bayareamom | October 01, 2012 at 10:53 PM
At this point, we are working on making sure our high-functioning child understands that his own personal religious beliefs include not vaccinating! But for those who want to know, the Catholic Church is against anything that includes aborted fetal tissue (which many vax do), and the Old Testament is full of prohibitions against injecting anything foreign into the body, up to and including the tattooing of oneself, which begs the question as to how all the gay bashers incite the Old Testament to back up their religious beliefs yet cover themselves with tattooed Bible verses! My point is, learn your Bible and find the verses. I think they will be in Leviticus or Numbers. It's been a long time since I studied that part of the Book, preferring to believe what Jesus taught, that there is only one Commandment, to love one another. Guess that only counts when "one another" is just like each other, huh? Guess we'd better hie ourselves hence back to Church. Sigh.
Posted by: Sue Morgan | October 01, 2012 at 09:47 PM
I'm in Canada, and there is religious exemption here too, seeing as the govt. is not able to question as to which religion you belong, or your beliefs, then who cares what you say? I belong to the religion of NonHurtaChild-ism then. I think its a win, its semantics, bottom line is you can be exempt.
Posted by: Robyn | October 01, 2012 at 09:16 PM
"Can't I call my 'beliefs' my religion?"
You can, but it won't stand you in good stead. It's really of no consequence, as the governor of California has no fiat power to carve out a religious exemption. And he very likely was well aware of this fact.
Posted by: Godfrey Wyl | October 01, 2012 at 09:04 PM
Angie, deeply held beliefs and religious beliefs are the same thing for the purposes of a vaccine waiver. . You should consult NVIC for exactly what to do in your state, but it could be as simple as one notarized document.
Posted by: Valerie | October 01, 2012 at 08:57 PM
Stunning to actually see religion propigated as a means to forgo government. WTH happened to separation of church and state? As a californian I feel this is a monumental step back in the social freedoms that makes this country worth its salt. Science medicine reigns over freedom. WOW. I'm rethinking that move to canada...
Posted by: s | October 01, 2012 at 08:21 PM
With the vaccine consult, the AAP doctor should clearly state that their office takes "no damn responsibility or concern" on what happens to your toddler after the vaccines are given.
They should also clearly state that your infant or toddler is giving up their right to the 7th Amendment of the Constitution.
They also often lose the ability to speak for themselves... Amendment 2.
Posted by: cmo | October 01, 2012 at 08:18 PM
Can anyone haul my behind into court for using a “religious exemption” when I’m not an official member of any religious group? Which religions say not to vaccinate? Are there any that specifically say that, or is it left up to individual’s interpretation of their religious dogma? Does anyone know where I stand legally? Who has the legal right to start a religion? Can’t I call my "beliefs" my religion? If not, which religion do I need to join, not to save my soul, but to possibly save my children from harm and still get them into school? Anyone want to start a religion with me? I have a plethora of reasons why I'm not vaccinating my youngest… having nothing to do with any religious apparitions. Do I have to have some sort of hallucination first, to make my religion official? Honestly, how do we deal with this nonsense? I'm honestly asking for ideas…. It seems so un-American to have to join a religion, so I can raise my own children. I’ve never taken anything to court, (or started a religion hahaha)but this might be my fight, if I’ve no other way.
Posted by: Angie | October 01, 2012 at 07:50 PM
As long as they don't grill them on their religious beliefs (which is illegal under DOE rules in most states so check parents!) there is hope here using a religious vaccine exemption.
I can just hear those Offit worshippers and California residents Shannon De Roches Rosa, Liz Ditz, Jenny Alice and others having a temper tantrum because they want every kid vaccinated with every thing under the sun. I thank God every day these pathetic poeple do not live in my state!
Posted by: vickie | October 01, 2012 at 05:35 PM
I say a victory is a victory. I assumed the worst would happen, so I am ecstatically surprised at the outcome. I don't have philosophical exemption in my state, so I went the religious route. Yay religious waivers!!!
Posted by: Valerie | October 01, 2012 at 04:36 PM
I can't consider this a partial victory, especially with the direction of legislation in other states:
Gov. Brown either believes he fixed a problematic element of this disingenuous legislation and is consoled with his nonbinding directive, or he doesn't believe that, but he wants voters to.
This is how all of our constitutional protections are being stripped away to the advantage of the corporate minority, a claim of "protecting" the majority, often with some assuaging element to help people swallow the stripping of rights from some, or all of us. The NVICP is a perfect example, set up to "protect" the majority from the fate of having "no vaccines" with the consoling prospect that the new "no fault" vaccine "court" would make it "easier" for the "few" injured to get compensation. It's now a no fault, less compensation system, with no checks, no balance, and no consolation as we're increasingly surrounded by chronically unwell and disabled children, none of which is likely to even come up in these fiat education sessions with fiat experts.
Posted by: Jeannette Bishop | October 01, 2012 at 03:02 PM
To those in California who will have to "live" with Gov Brown's decision:
If doctors are now required to FULLY INFORM PARENTS on vaccinations .. will they be required to ....
a) produce and have parents sign copies of the actual vaccine manufacturer's inserts that warn of potential adverse reactions following vaccination?
b) inform parents what adverse reactions are considered normal and what are not .. such as .. fevers that exceed expectations following vaccination, inexplicable changes in daily behavior .. such as .. excessive diarrhea, loss of appetite, inconsolable crying tantrums, unusual sleepless nights, etc. etc.?
c) provide .. and .. parents sign .. written instructions .. indicating they KNOW who to report an adverse reaction to and HOW to file it .. most importantly .. explaining the time limitations for reporting adverse reactions begins on the day of vaccination extending three years out ..
Gee .. maybe doctors truly dedicated to FULLY INFORMING PARENTS the "benefits of vaccines DO NOT ALWAYS OUTWEIGH THE RISKS" .. will prove to be a good idea.
Unfortunately, the cynic in me suggests otherwise.
Posted by: Bob Moffitt | October 01, 2012 at 02:19 PM
I've written an email to Governor Brown to thank him for his solution, saying it was a choice worthy of King Solomon himself, to placate (not) Big Pharma and its minions while also allowing an out for parents unwilling to damage their children with vaccines. I hope he gets a lot of positive feedback to fortify him to withstand the abuse he's sure to get from the enemy.
Posted by: cia parker | October 01, 2012 at 02:17 PM
This is a good thing and it seems like something Gov. Brown had to do.
Posted by: megan | October 01, 2012 at 01:30 PM
I also hate to be the bearer of bad news, but the reason our school bureaucrats here in California do not outright inform parents of their right to the use of the exemption is because they are not LEGALLY required to do so.
However, when a well educated and informed parent inquires about the exemption, the school authorities MUST then LEGALLY provide that parent with the appropriate information.
If school authorities do not provide a parent with appropriate and correct exemption information, they are breaking California State law.
This is maddening, I know Laura, bit the ONLY way this can be challenged is through the legislative process.
Let's call a spade a shovel here. The powers that be do not want to inform California parents about our exemption rights because they believe that our right to use our exemptions will endanger the 'health' of the vaccinated students. They truly believe this, for they have been just as conditioned into this mindset as most anyone else. (I know - I've spoken to many of them when I was the CA NVIC State Director. This is a 'religion' to them.)
I cannot tell you how many times I had school nurses flat out tell me that they KNEW the law and they KNEW they were not obligated to inform parents of this right - so they didn't.
Remember learning that years and years ago, many, many uninformed and ignorant people truly believed the Earth was flat. It took YEARS for that paradigm shift to occur; they even imprisoned Galileo because of his belief that the Earth was not flat. People who have certain belief systems cling to those systems as if their world will crumble if/when they may be proven wrong in that belief (just as with this false vaccine belief system).
There were so many utterly false belief systems that have historically bitten the dust over the years in human history - vaccination, I will assure you, WILL be one of those systems. BUT IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME...
Perhaps the cloud with the silver lining with all of this is that this issue is quite literally being forced from underneath the rug and expanded into an open forum where true legitimate dialogue may take place.
I only wish that those celebs here in California (and there are many of them), that continually spout their political views in other arenas, would have spoken out about this AB 2109 issue. I'm quite certain there are many of them who also have legitimate concerns regarding vaccines, but did not want to publicly speak out, due to fears of reprisal from their industry (and adoring public fans). I'm just extremely grateful Rob Schneider came out swinging on this issue. His status as a celebrity really helped sway attention to this issue. There was a real media blackout about AB 2109, with the exception perhaps of a few local Sacramento TV stations who spoke out about this.
So God Bless Rob Schneider (and all the others who fought so hard against this Bill). Time will tell how this will all play out, when AB 2109 becomes law on January 1, 2014.
Posted by: Bayareamom | October 01, 2012 at 12:56 PM
See the response to this law from the NVIC:
October 01, 2012 07:55 AM Eastern Daylight Time
National Vaccine Information Center (NVIC) Says CA Governor Brown Fails to Veto Vaccine Bill but Affirms Personal and Religious Exemptions
Posted by: Anne McElroy Dachel | October 01, 2012 at 12:23 PM
Yes, I think we've won, and I think Governor Brown was wise to understand that he needed to both placate Big Pharma's minions and the parents concerned with their children's welfare, huge numbers of whom are convinced (correctly) that vaccines are much more of a threat to their health than the vaccine-preventable diseases. There are many states, my own for one, that permit religious exemptions but not philosophical ones, but they are essentially the same, since there have been many court rulings that the religious belief can be based on personal religious beliefs, not as part of a particular denomination's beliefs.
I have never been questioned about my religious exemption taken in 2006 (and I actually sincerely believe that God is not in favor of permanently damaging children with vaccines). I have not had to refile. Once I got a letter three years ago saying there was a child in my daughter's class with a confirmed case of pertussis, and I should take her to the doctor for a prophylactic course of antibiotics, but I just wrote that she had had pertussis (at 8 and 9 months old, after having had the ineffective, dangerous DTaP at 2, 4, and 6 months old), and I was not worried about her getting it again.
Posted by: cia parker | October 01, 2012 at 11:55 AM
Although religious exemptions are still allowed by California, it is still a loss of rights for its citizen's, and since they took away that right, it should be reasonable enough to assume that the vaccine court should be abolished,and all rights returned to local courts, since Big Pharma funded state laws continue to change in their favor. I am sure that one of the arguments by Big Pharma was when the court was being established that we had all these rights to deny vaccines for our children, which included philosophical, medical(without visiting the doctor)and religious which is what they are really after now. Now those rights are gone and the vaccine court needs to be gone as well.
Posted by: Victor Pavlovic | October 01, 2012 at 10:26 AM
Posted by: Anne McElroy Dachel | October 01, 2012 at 10:05 AM
Adding the religious exemption is good, but will the Health Department Religious Police now subject parents to biblical literacy tests, grill them about their dogma, etc? The devil is in the details.
Posted by: La Playa | October 01, 2012 at 09:44 AM
For all practical purposes, doesn't this preserve the status quo? The bill makes parents claiming a philosophical objection jump through hoops, but those parents can avoid those obstacles simply by claiming a religious exemption. In effect, haven't we won?
Posted by: JerseyGuy | October 01, 2012 at 09:01 AM