Connect with us

COVID-19

Fraser Valley churches challenge Dr. Bonnie Henry as dishonest and discriminatory in court

Published

6 minute read

Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry

From the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms

These churches submitted an accommodation request to gather for in-person worship services, but their request received no response for several weeks. At the same time, however, Dr. Henry had been responding within one or two days to accommodation requests from Orthodox synagogues, granting them permission to meet in-person.

The Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms announces that Fraser Valley churches are arguing, in a 10-day hearing in Chilliwack, BC, that BC Provincial Health Officer Dr. Bonnie Henry granted preferential treatment to some faith groups over others when considering requests to be exempted from her total ban on all in-person worship services. The churches argue that their prosecution for violating public health orders is an abuse of process and ought to be stayed. Lawyers for the churches will present evidence that Dr. Henry acted dishonestly and in bad faith while banning in-person worship services in 2020 and 2021, granting immediate exemptions to Jewish synagogues while ignoring exemption requests from Muslims and Christians. The hearing will at the Chilliwack Law Courts, will conclude on Thursday, June 27.

In November 2020, Dr. Henry banned in-person worship services while allowing bars, restaurants, gyms, and salons to remain open for in-person services.

Along with several other churches in the Fraser Valley, the Free Reformed Church in Chilliwack, BC, re-opened its doors in 2020 and 2021 while simultaneously complying with health orders regarding face masks, hand washing, social distancing, etc. In January 2021, the Free Reformed Church, along with two other churches, filed a constitutional challenge to the prohibition on in-person worship services. After filing the challenge, these churches submitted an accommodation request to gather for in-person worship services, but their request received no response for several weeks. At the same time, however, Dr. Henry had been responding within one or two days to accommodation requests from Orthodox synagogues, granting them permission to meet in-person.

Two business days before the Court was scheduled to hear the constitutional challenge, Dr. Henry finally granted the Free Reformed Church and two other churches limited permission to gather outdoors, while refusing them permission to gather indoors, claiming that indoor gatherings were too risky. However, earlier that same week, Dr. Henry had granted all Orthodox synagogues in the province permission to gather indoors; that same week, mosques seeking permission to gather in-person received no accommodation.

On March 18, 2021, BC Supreme Court Chief Justice Christopher Hinkson dismissed the Free Reformed Church’s challenge, in part because Dr. Henry had granted them permission to meet outdoors. The BC Court of Appeal upheld Chief Justice Hinkson’s decision, and the Supreme Court of Canada subsequently refused to hear the case.

Meanwhile, Pastor Koopman of the Free Reformed Church, and other churches and pastors, were prosecuted by the Crown in BC Provincial Courts. On November 8, 2022, Pastor Koopman was found guilty of hosting an in-person worship service in December 2020.

On April 14, 2023, Pastor Koopman submitted an Application to the Provincial Court of British Columbia, alleging that the discriminatory actions of the Provincial Health Officer had made the continuation of his prosecution offensive to societal notions of fair play and decency and had brought the administration of justice into disrepute. In response, on May 10, 2023, the Crown argued that the abuse-of-process application should not proceed to an evidentiary hearing, and that Dr. Henry and Deputy Provincial Health Officer Dr. Brian Emerson should not be subpoenaed as witnesses in the case.

For three days, from May 15–18, 2023, Judge Andrea Ormiston heard arguments on whether the abuse of process Application could proceed to an evidentiary hearing. On September 6, 2023, Judge Ormiston denied the Crown’s Application to summarily dismiss Pastor Koopman’s abuse-of-process Application because she found that there was “some evidence that the Provincial Health Officer preferred some faith groups over others.” Judge Ormiston found that, under the circumstances, it was not “manifestly frivolous” to think that the continued prosecution of Pastor Koopman “risks undermining the integrity of the judicial process.” However, Judge Ormiston declined to allow Dr. Henry or Dr. Emerson to be subpoenaed on the matter.

“When government officials, including public health officers, exercise coercive government power, it is essential that they use that power honestly, in good faith and without discrimination against people based on irrelevant consideration, including their particular religious faith,” stated lawyer Marty Moore. “We believe that the evidence in this case will show that the Provincial Health Officer’s treatment of faith communities during 2020 and 2021 violated the rule of law and that the prosecution of pastors and churches in this context undermines public confidence not only in our public health officials, but also in our justice system.”

Todayville is a digital media and technology company. We profile unique stories and events in our community. Register and promote your community event for free.

Follow Author

COVID-19

Employee wins lawsuit filed by gov’t agency after losing job for refusing COVID shot

Published on

From LifeSiteNews

By Emily Mangiaracina

The federal government successfully sued on her behalf, citing a Title VII violation.

A former assistant manager who was fired after applying for a religious accommodation to refuse the COVID shot has been awarded a six-figure payout after a federal government agency filed a lawsuit on the employee’s behalf.

Federal Judge M. Casey Rodgers on Thursday ordered the Pensacola, Florida store Hank’s Fine Furniture (HFI) to pay a former manager, identified in the lawsuit as “K.M.O.,” $110,000 for refusing to accommodate her request for exemption from the COVID shot due to her “sincerely held Christian beliefs.”

“HFI is permanently enjoined from discriminating against any employee on the basis of religion in violation of Title VII,” Rodgers wrote, the Pensacola News Journal reported Monday. He further declared that HFI “will reasonably accommodate employee and prospective employee religious beliefs during all hiring, discipline and promotion activities,” and “any activity affecting any other terms and conditions of employment.”

Significantly, the store also “cannot require proof that an employee’s or applicant’s religious objection to an employer requirement be an official tenet or endorsed teaching of said religious belief,” according to Pensacola News Journal.

Hank’s Furniture must also adopt a written policy, disseminated to all employees, declaring that HFI “will not require any employee to violate sincerely held religious beliefs, including those pertaining to vaccinations, as a condition of his/her employment.”

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) sued on behalf of K.M.O. (EEOC v. Hank’s Furniture, Inc., Case No. 3:23-cv-24533-MCR-HTC) in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Florida after it was unable to reach a pre-litigation settlement “through its administrative conciliation process.”

According to Pensacola News Journal, about two weeks after HFI implemented a policy mandating that its employees receive a COVID shot, K.M.O. told the company she would not get the shot due to her “sincerely held religious beliefs,” and then requested a religious exemption.

According to the lawsuit, HFI ignored her request and asked if she would comply with their COVID shot policy, and K.M.O. then told HFI she planned to submit a written religious accommodation request, asking “whether HFI had a particular form she should use.”

HFI reportedly did not respond to her request. When K.M.O. complained that HFI’s unwillingness to grant her a religious exemption was “unjust,” her new supervisor reportedly told her that “HFI did not care why she would not take” the COVID shot and that HFI “would never grant an accommodation.”

When K.M.O. emailed HMI on September 6, 2021, asking for the status of her religious exemption request, HFI informed her that her religious exemption request was “severely lacking,” and then denied it.

K.M.O. then “asked for help to submit an acceptable religious exemption request,” but HFI refused to discuss any accommodation, according to the lawsuit. Then on October 31, she was fired by HFI because she did not comply with their COVID “vaccination” policy.

Birmingham District Director Bradley Anderson remarked regarding the case for an EEOC press release, “Employees should not have to renounce their religious beliefs in order to remain employed. Let this case serve as a reminder that employers should afford accommodation for religious beliefs unless doing so would cause an undue hardship.”

Continue Reading

COVID-19

Undue Censorship Still Skews COVID Treatments

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

The censorship and institutional capture evident in the pandemic should be an ongoing concern for policy-makers, scientists, and the medical field. Someone who encountered this first-hand was clinical trials researcher Sabine Hazan, who testified to the National Citizens Inquiry on COVID-19.

Hazan, the CEO and principal investigator at Venture Clinical Trials is also the founder and CEO of Progena Biome, a genetic sequencing lab. Starting in 2020, she subjected stool samples of COVID-19 patients’ to next-generation sequencing (NGS) of the entire genome of the virus.

It wasn’t long before the tests, which were $3,000 each, showed the virus mutating into four different spike proteins. Patients had anywhere from one to all of them.

“‘How is the vaccine going to work if the spike protein itself is mutating into multiple combinations?’” she asked herself.

“Vaccinating against viruses is not a really a good idea because unfortunately, viruses mutate more than bacteria.”

Hazan was curious about three cases where the virus had completely disappeared by day five. Two of these patients said they had been taking hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin.

On April 2, 2020, Hazan submitted a protocol to treat COVID-19 consisting of hydroxychloroquine, azithromycin, vitamins C, D, and zinc. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) approved a request to do clinical trials within 24 hours, yet Facebook, Twitter, and Instagram blocked her advertisements for patients.

The few patients Hazan could recruit faced another hurdle as medical authorities warned pharmacists not to prescribe hydroxychloroquine and azithromycin together because of cardiac problems. Her monitoring of patients never revealed such problems.

“These drugs have been given to millions of people with arthritis, and all of a sudden, they’re bad?” she asked.

In the first 16 of 17 patients, the virus disappeared from stool samples between 5 to 8 days after being on the regimen. Hazan applied for a patent for her protocol in July 2020 and received it in December 2020. An unnamed party or parties offered her $10 million, then $40 million for her patent, but refused the money to continue her research.

Hazan found newborns have a lot of bifidobacteria and the elderly have little to none. Her research suggests that boosting a person’s microbiomes can address c difficile, anxiety, Lyme Disease, Crohn’s, psoriasis, Alzheimer’s, and cancer, while its deficiencies may be related to autism.

She had concerns from the vaccines from the start, but authorities kept doctors in California like her from warning patients about possible side effects.

“What I realized doing clinical trials is I couldn’t always trust pharmaceutical companies,” she said.

“When people are coming at me with a new medication that has been tested on animals for one week, I start freaking out.”

Some of her studies waited 6 to 8 months to get published, while 52 have not yet found a journal willing to print them.

“I’m trying to publish the data on the messenger RNA [of COVID vaccines] affecting the microbiome, which won a Research Award at the American College of Gastro[enterology], and nobody’s interested in publishing that.”

This study of more than 150 vaccine-injured patients found the entire phylum of bifidobacteria had been “wiped” out.

Frontiers in Microbiology published her most popular paper, Microbiome-Based Hypothesis on Ivermectin’s Mechanism in COVID-19: Ivermectin Feeds Bifidobacteria to Boost Immunity in July of 2022. The paper received 47,000 views before a complaint led to its retraction in May of 2023.

Twitter deemed her hypothesis as “misinformation” long before the retraction and blocked her account. Some of Hazan’s own patients who worked for Twitter helped get her account reinstated but could not keep her from a ‘misinformation’ label on her posts.

“I was doing the clinical trials. I was treating the patients, I was analyzing the stools. I was working with the FDA. Who’s giving misinformation? I’m publishing. You’re telling me I’m misinforming people?” she recalled thinking.

Hazan expressed concern that a “movement” to retract papers has yanked more than 14,000 of them and artificial intelligence will ignore them.

“What’s interesting about these papers is they all go against the narrative that is meant to sell you something. So that’s dangerous…if you’re trying to push a drug, or biologic, and now you’re removing everything else,” she said.

Such one-sided medical dogma is wrong, she insisted.

“That’s not science. That’s propaganda. That’s what we saw this pandemic,” said Hazan.

“Now I’m blacklisted from a lot of pharmaceutical companies…It actually killed my business of doing clinical trials.”

The fact that mRNA vaccines are still being pushed concerns the Moroccan-born doctor.

“You talk to scientists who do animal studies on the mRNA, they will tell you that the rats are eating their arms. So that’s all I need to hear,” she said.

“The technology may be promising, maybe, but it’s not there yet. It’s still very much experimental.”

Let’s hope more scientists, doctors, and journal publishers will find the integrity and courage of Hazan. Citizens have reason for concern that regulators have pushed risky mRNA vaccines while undermining the legitimacy of other promising options. When will honest science prevail?

Lee Harding is a Research Fellow at the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X