Letter to the Editor – John Dawkins Ennis

Dear Editor,

The last year and half has brought to light many issues within our society. From the transgressions of our forefathers to the sins of the current generation, modern culture has seen fit to demonize all things that are contrary to popular or even progressive thought. With the constant bombardment of cancel culture and the “woe is me” mentality of the current generations, it is not without understanding that our perilous times in which we live would begin to tug at the very fabric of our society that has been completely woven, yet left untied. While our society is strong in the center, the frayed ends allows for weaknesses to be exposed and a slow and methodical undoing of what was once deemed as righteous actions are now considered an act of Judas, and there is now no place for dissention or disagreement within the ranks of our great land.

The Safer Federal Workforce Task Force that was established by Executive Order has deemed it necessary to require a mandatory coronavirus disease vaccination for Federal employees. This Executive Order has been issued with little regard to any debate on vaccine’s effectiveness or natural immunity and has been directed to the workforce of Robins AFB and other government employees.

When one receives a direction from their superior, there should always be a logical and simple examination done in order to deem that the order is indeed effective, legitimate and morally comprehensive. The basis for this is built off of a foundation of three simple questions. The first, is the direction or order that is received legal? Secondly, is the direction or order that is received ethical? Last but not least, is the direction or order received morally sound? These questions should be asked by each person that receives direction, and there should be a solid answer for each question based off the foundations and beliefs of those that are directed.

The legality of the Executive Order is not in question here and cannot be debated. For no Executive Order can have an everlasting effect since they are at best, just temporary laws of the land. For as the wind changes, so does the administrations that write these orders. As quickly as they are penned, they can be erased by subsequent administrations. One should allow the courts of this great land to determine if any Executive Order is indeed legal or illegal.

This brings into light the immediate issue of the second question. Is the order an ethical order? I will argue that this order is not ethical. The precedence of American employment was set way before any of us were ever employed within the Federal Government. At a time when our most recent history has based employment off of merit, we now find ourselves at a crossroads that will allow the laws of employment to completely obliterate the understood nature of these understood written and unwritten rights of employment. If this Executive Order were to be implemented and followed through without taking into account past performance, education, training, time in service, or current conduct it would be a travesty for all current and future employment. The question of ethics must be raised and answered by one simple question. Have the actions of this employee warranted him or her a dismissal from their service? Is 20 years of honest dedication, self-sacrifice, continued career improvement, and mission first minded objectivity now irrelevant? Does the fact that one’s refusal to comply with a single shot now trump a lifetime of dedication to this great country of ours? Would one perceive it to be an ethical decision to bring a long and successful career of dedication and undeniable loyalty to an abrupt end? I say no, this Executive Order should never outweigh the historical evidence of any single dedicated employee.

Third, is this Executive Order morally sound? Moral character can be weighed simply as the principles of right and wrong, the righteous and unrighteousness characterization of the human race. I would argue that implementation of this Executive order would be the anti-moral compass that we desire within our great society. In a culture that desires to put the needs of the people first and to treat all equally, this order drives a wedge deep into heart of this great notion. One must ask, how much discrimination is acceptable? How much mental anguish and physical pain is acceptable in a civilized society of the 21st century? To single out those that desire to remain unvaccinated or maintain their vaccination status in confidence would be a direct violation of the natural law of man. Our God given rights to equal treatment would be pounced upon and trampled into the mud of the abyss of oppression and should never be tolerated. The mental anguish of whether one could maintain their current employment status in which to provide for their family has been exasperated by an order that lacks a moral code. This should never be allowed into the fabric of the society that we are all so greatly intertwined with. This should be and must be classified as no less than mental abuse of the backbone of our society, the worker. This order is indeed contrary to our current goal of a more inclusive and acceptable work force.

To conclude, the argument is not to whether one should or should not receive the injection. The argument is solely and simply based off our tried and true measures of weighing our orders. I have done this and reason that this order is indeed unethical and unmoral; therefore, it should not be enforced or directed onto the workforce. If this order is allowed to continue, then there will always linger in the psyche and will undoubtedly foster a distrust of those that have a responsibility to not only lead, but to lead justly. You are the first line of defense for any order that is deemed unworthy and with your direction and fortitude, your people, your fellow workers, and your fellow Americans will not only stand next to you in the fight of oppression, but will stand with you to fight for righteousness. I ask each of you to make a stand, and with our combined voices make known our disapproval of those mandates that come for Washington.

The United States government is not ruled by one entity, no one person or agency has complete say over the people of this land. The power of the government is only awarded by the people; it is not the other way around. The government does not award the power to the people. Make a stand so that the hand of liberty will always prevail and never allow the seed of tyranny to be planted into our great Republic. Our resolve is absolute, our fight will be unending, and our knees will never bow to anyone or anything that wishes to divide this great land of ours.

In closing, we shall not comply with the mandate. Our choice is simple. We choose freedom of choice over fear from oppression. United, we must stand, or together we shall all fall. We owe this stance not to ourselves, but to the generations after us.

Respectfully,

John Dawkins Ennis

Warner Robins, Ga.

HHJ News