But when it comes to a hastily-made COVID-19 vaccine, one that may very well be made mandatory at some point for practically everyone, we must note that there are new nuances to consider now. We know that hastily-made vaccines in general carry unacceptable risk, with the 1976 swine flu vaccine debacle being the most infamous example. Rushing vaccines to market before they are proven safe and effective is inherently unethical and foolish. Worse still, making such vaccines mandatory, especially when the virus is clearly already on the run and circling the drain as we speak (as natural herd immunity is right around the corner if not already present) is a massive and unnecessary government overreach where the ends do NOT justify the means.
Even if the virus was still completely out of control for the foreseeable future, we have already noted that better treatment of patients while allowing herd immunity to develop naturally would be far more effective and timely than any vaccine, if we ever even get a vaccine that works at all, that is.
Make no mistake, we do NOT oppose the development and marketing of safe and effective vaccines with no funny business. But anything beyond that is a no-go for us, plain and simple.
We absolutely oppose any attempt to create "immunity passports" or "vaccine passports" of any kind as well. That is just far too Orwellian and potentially nefarious for us, especially for a disease whose actual infection fatality rate turns out to be in the same ballpark as seasonal flu. And those who then reply "well, maybe we should make flu shots mandatory for everyone too!" are ironically SOOOO close to actually getting the point. There is, after all, a reason we as a society have chosen not to do so--yet.
And while we support Universal Basic Income (UBI), we do NOT support Australia's plan to cynically use such a thing as a cudgel to economically coerce people to receive such hastily-made vaccines (i.e. no vaccine = no job and no UBI). Not only is that highly unethical, but it is also a gross perversion of the very concept of UBI, which is supposed to be unconditional with no strings attached by definition. And this is in a country that has just recently brought back even more draconian lockdowns to a good chunk of the country, despite very little problem with the virus. It's almost like Australia was never really able to completely shake its history as a penal colony.
And finally, quite frankly, the whole idea of us all having to somehow put up with this inane and insane New Abnormal indefinitely until the vaccine (which may never work or never arrive) is widely available, is itself a form of social and economic coercion. We believe that making civil rights, normal economic activity, and normal social interactions somehow contingent on nearly everyone receiving a vaccine is an unprecedented and unacceptable act of coercion. Fortunately, at least some pundits are gradually walking back that idea, but it remains to be seen whether enough government officials will as well.
By the way, have you seen the ever-insightful author Ellen Brown's latest articles on the topic? She is clearly one of US, basically. And we are indeed honored to have someone like her on essentially the very same wavelength as the TSAP in that regard.
UPDATE: For anyone who brings up the landmark Supreme Court case Jacobson v. Massachusetts (1905) in arguing that mandatory COVID vaccinations are in line with the Constitution, please recall that that case was regarding local vaccination mandates determined by local boards of health for smallpox, which was a far deadlier disease with an infection fatality rate of about 20-30%, about 100 times deadlier than COVID (about 0.2-0.3%). And note that the penalty for not getting vaccinated under the law in question was a mere $5, or about $150 in today's money. Proportionality is important here.