Current Minnesota law generally requires K-12 students to receive a standard vaccination schedule, but allows an exemption when parents object on conscientious grounds. A recently introduced bill would revoke the parental choice exemption from current law.
- MN Rev. St. 120A.22 Subd. 5 requires: “Every child between seven and 17 years of age must receive instruction unless the child has graduated.”
- MN Rev. St. 121A.15 Subd. 1 requires: “Except as provided in subdivisions 3, 4, and 10, no person over two months old may be allowed to enroll or remain enrolled in any elementary or secondary school or child care facility in this state until the person has submitted to the administrator or other person having general control and supervision of the school or child care facility, one of the following statements [verifying vaccination compliance].”
- MN Rev. St. 121A.15, Subd. 3(d) allows the following exemption from compulsory vaccination (emphasis added): “If a notarized statement signed by the minor child's parent or guardian or by the emancipated person is submitted to the administrator or other person having general control and supervision of the school or child care facility stating that the person has not been immunized as prescribed in subdivision 1 because of the conscientiously held beliefs of the parent or guardian of the minor child or of the emancipated person, the immunizations specified in the statement shall not be required. This statement must also be forwarded to the commissioner of the Department of Health.”
- MN Rev. St. 121A.15 Subd. 9(a) applies the preceding requirement and exemption to private schools and home schools as much as to public schools, by defining “elementary or secondary school” as “includ[ing] any public school, nonpublic school, church, or religious organization, or home school in which a child is provided instruction in compliance with sections 120A.22 and 120A.24.”
- SF 1520, as introduced on February 21, 2019, would amend current law by striking MN Rev. St. 121A.15, Subd. 3(d)—the section quoted above that currently protects a parent’s right to conscientiously object.
- In view of the other sections of current law quoted above, this revocation of parental rights obviously intends to apply to children ages 7 through 17, regardless of whether they are enrolled in public, private, or home schools.
Call to Action
- There are at least 16 good reasons why a parent might conscientiously object to mandatory vaccination—including reasons supported by peer-reviewed medical research as well as reasons recognized by federal court rulings that have awarded monetary damages to families who suffered vaccine-induced injuries.
Share Your Concerns
- Contact members of the committee(s) identified under “Stay Informed” (above) by clinking the link(s) above.
- Contact legislators from your own district, using this handy directory.
- Borrow some talking points from the 16 good reasons why parental choice makes sense for vaccine policy, or follow the research links in that article in order to discover additional talking points.
- Tell your friends through social media: “I am not anti-vaccine; rather, I am pro-freedom. I oppose vaccination mandates, while remaining open to individuals’ choices of whether to vaccinate themselves and their children.”
I am not anti-vaccine; rather, I am pro-freedom. I oppose vaccination mandates, while remaining open to individuals’ choices of whether to vaccinate themselves and their children. I support the ideas of training one’s immune system and of building one’s immunity. The science and history of inoculation and immunization theory is fascinating, but beyond the scope of this post. Here, I will simply cover my reasons against government coerced, mandatory vaccination. Please keep in mind, I am not a medical professional and what I write should not be considered medical advice. Do your own research, make your own choices, and consult your medical experts, as needed.
Mandatory vaccination should be opposed for three main reasons: 1) it strips a person of liberty, 2) it is established on unethical foundations, and 3) there are good reasons to question the safety of vaccines. (To read the full report, click here.)
I. Liberty: Mandatory Vaccination Strips a Person of Liberty
A. Mandatory Vaccination Is a Human Rights Violation.
B. Mandatory Vaccination Is an Affront to the Constitutional Rights of Religion and Conscience.
C. Mandatory Vaccination Disregards Biomedical Individuality.
D. Mandatory Vaccination Victimizes the Poor.
E. Mandatory Vaccination Opposes the Right to Privacy and Equal Access to Education.
F. Mandatory Vaccination Uses Coercion Rather Than Education.
G. Mandatory Vaccination Restricts Parental Responsibility.
H. Mandatory Vaccination Refuses to Learn from Thousands of Years of History.
II. Ethics: Mandatory Vaccination Is Established on Unethical Foundations.
A. Pharmaceutical Companies Are Exempt from Liability for Damage from Their Products.
B. America’s Vaccination Paradigm Is Rife with Conflicts of Interest.
C. Doctors and Vaccine Companies Do Not Provide True Informed Consent.
III. Safety: The Safety of Vaccines Is Questionable.
A. Vaccines Contain Controversial Ingredients.
B. Vaccine Testing Procedures Are Questionable.
C. The Federal Claims Court Admits Thousands of Vaccine Injuries.
D. Other Countries Are Rejecting Mandatory Vaccination.
E. Mandatory Vaccinations Are Not Necessary for “Herd” Immunity.
To read the full report, click here.