On August 29, 2011 a communique from the Executive Director of PANI in San Jose, Costa Rica arrived at the Puriscal PANI office, whereby they confided that the laws making vaccines obligatory have been passed and referenced in the body of the text. It is indisputable, but along with this comes their own admission by the selection of their words that the matter involves civil contracts.
1) sala constitutional mediante constitucional 2009- 01963
2) mediante sentencia 2000- 11648
3) mediante sentencia 2007- 836
4) article 55 of the constitution
5) article 19 of the American convention on human rights
6) article 3 of the convention of the rights of the child
PANI concludes that we (the parents) are violating the rights of state property (our children) and that since they believe an entitlement is a right, and that the right must be forcibly pressed upon the recipient, that indeed we the parents are violating that right.
For example: you have the right to remain silent... but what if you choose NOT to remain silent. Are the police going to silence you in order for you to receive your right?
There is a difference between entitlements and rights and we will reiterate that.
Rights exist before government was ever a glint in the collective eye. Entitlements are commercial in nature and exist at the expense of other participants with that regis. We'll get to that as we examine their documents.
For now, we should seriously wonder one thing: Why is it so imperative to get these vaccines over our objection and over our consent? We have the right to religion, does that mean we must be religious? I ask this because the PANI officials make note that we have a religious objection, but they fail to point at what that religion might be. The fact is we are NOT religious, evidenced by the fact that we have never re-lieged (an etymological fact for those who care to do the research.) Of course they also assume we are registered with their regis even after our statements to the contrary dismiss this error of conjecture.
Israelites do not practice religion. We practice law. We are well within all of the laws and not in offense of any of their codes as we have not given that authority away.
It is true this protection is unavailable to 99.99% (maybe more) of the population, but that is because they gave their consent under article 13.3. In a nut shell, they do not want to take the responsibility of rearing their children and bearing all costs. That decision to limit liability is done via registration in 13.3 and relieves the costs of schooling and health, but also removes the parents ability to make any decisions regarding any codes involving children such as the type of schooling and health care.
For the most part, people love that. Government gives stuff for free. Amazing.
For those who do know how to count and are not subject to this Marxist drivel, they will know one maxim of all commercial law, 'There is no free lunch.'
Government cannot, never has and never will produce anything. Simply put, government is an artifice, a club or association by which we must register to receive its limited liability larceny based gifts. The club is made up of men who can no more force you to register for club benefits that are not congruent with scriptural law than you can be forced to eat at McDonalds.
Costa Rica's 2011 budget boasted that 55% of all expenditures would be met with raising new taxes and 45% would be met with further borrowing and long term international loans. Who better to charge your 'free' entitlements than those without a voice. The unborn. Anyone participating outright theft from the unborn will have to answer. The public school is the only place we could learn how to give credibility to larceny. Well, I cannot be forced to steal using limited liability government schemes. That biblical prohibition cannot be converted to civil crime against PANI or some ministry lest they provide the contract we are in breach of, since they are private NGO. The only way they can have a grievance with us is via contract directly or indirectly implied.
By the way, anyone who does know us knows that we do not tell others what to do or how to live. We respectfully live around people who practice what ever they believe.
However, no one can be forced to steal under the obtuse guise of a right. No one can be forced to remain silent. That is exactly what has been elucidated on documents concealed from us as we shall examine next.