covid questions
Featured News Opinion

Assemblyman David DiPietro Sponsors COVID-19 Vaccine Bill to Protect Body Autonomy

by Teresa Reile

NYS Assemblyman David DiPietro has sponsored a bill to protect the right to choose and to safeguard the sanctity of one’s own body from unwanted injection of the coronavirus vaccine. The bill was introduced in response to one proposed in the NYS Legislature by Assemblymember Linda Rosenthal. Rosenthal’s bill would mandate the new coronavirus vaccine for everyone — regardless of whether one wants it or not.

Should the Rosenthal bill become law, DiPietro fears that it would put undue and unwanted pressure on those who truly have an aversion to being forced to inject things into their bodies against their will. DiPietro feels, as do many others, that what goes into one’s own body should be their choice and not something mandated by the government.

DiPietro’s bill would protect one’s rights should government try to make getting the vaccine mandatory in order for a person to go to work, attend school, travel, enter public buildings or use public transport.

While the world is anxiously awaiting a vaccine that alleges to save us all from demise resulting from the Covid-19 pandemic, Assemblyman DiPietro feels that there are some who are overly anxious about mandating that every single person in NYS get injected by said vaccine.

“This is a very slippery slope and one that we may never be able to reverse once it has been mandated.”

Dave DiPietro Assemblyman
David DiPietro, NYS Assemblyman

Some people feel concerned that the vaccine has not been around long enough to have been tested properly and that there are no long-term safety studies, yet it is being marketed as ‘safe and effective.’

Some people want to wait and see how it shakes out.

These people point out that Oxycontin was once marketed as safe and effective also.

People who want the vaccine should be entitled to get it if they see fit; however, there is a growing number of people who are suspicious of the vaccine for various reasons. They cite philosophical beliefs, religious beliefs and concerns that vaccine manufacturers have complete immunity from liability if a recipient suffers an adverse reaction. That there are no long-term safety studies and there has never been a vaccine on the market to date which uses mRNA also raises serious concerns for some people.

COVID-19 is a new virus —a mere one year old.  Some people just think it is more prudent to wait.

It is for THOSE people that DiPietro’s bill is offered.

It Is About Choice

“There simply can not be a one size fits all when it comes to one’s health”, says DiPietro, “What is good for one may not be good for another.”

DiPietro, a staunch advocate for the people of NY, realizes the very real danger of mandating what people put into their own bodies.

“I feel that it is my duty to do what I can to protect the people,” says DiPietro, “I have no problem with people taking a vaccine if they want it, but for the people who do not want it, I feel that to force them to do it is a blatant violation of the right to one’s own body.”

If there ever were a time when the “My Body, My Choice” mantra would pertain, it would certainly apply to this.

DiPietro’s bill would also protect children from getting the vaccine against parents’ wishes or without their knowledge, and/or consent.

Moreover, one will not be required to carry evidence of having been vaccinated, and the bill will preclude the government from offering special privilege or financial reward to those who do partake of the vaccine.

Wherever There Is a Risk, There MUST Be a Choice

It goes back to the age-old debate of: ‘If the vaccine worked, then why are you afraid if I am not vaccinated?  Aren’t you protected?”

And, “If I am such a risk for you to be around and you ARE vaccinated, then does that mean that the vaccine didn’t work?”

There is also the fact that vaccine manufacturers are completely immune to liability for adverse reactions — including death — from any vaccine that they make, so where is their incentive to make a product that is ‘safe and effective’ as they claim?

The other side of the argument is, “You are harming me by not being vaccinated” or “You are insensitive to those around you,” but again, it goes back to this: If the vaccine really worked, then the vaccinated people are in no danger.

In early December, Governor Cuomo said, “You can’t mandate that somebody takes the vaccine. We’re trying to do it the other way — education, show that it’s safe.”

Currently, Rosenthal’s bill is in committee and has no co-sponsors in either the Assembly or the Senate.

With the World Health Organization releasing their findings regarding the PCR test cycle threshold being too high, thereby giving an excessive number of false-positive cases, it would make sense to ask why a vaccine is even warranted at this point — much less a mandatory one.

Dr. Kary Mullis, the inventor of the PCR test, which basically amplifies genetic material until something is found, said that by using a PCR test “You can find almost anything in anybody.”  He was clear when he said that it is not to be used as a diagnostic tool.

The higher the cycle threshold, the lower the probability of having a live virus.

Even Dr. Fauci, the lauded expert on infectious disease, stated that cycle thresholds over 35 are going to be detecting “dead nucleotides” — not a living virus.

The WHO’s issuance of its statement recommending that labs reduce the cycle thresholds raises several questions: How high were the cycle thresholds? Who told them to make them that to begin with, and why?

People on the vaccine-hesitancy side of the debate argue that a vaccinated person may be MORE of a danger to the people around them. That is because once the virus is injected into them, they can shed the disease to others, thereby infecting them.

In the end, it comes down to choice. People should have the freedom to choose what is best for themselves and their own bodies.

At this point in time, no one can surmise as to where any of this is going on either side of the issue. However, the issue of body autonomy doesn’t look like it will be going anywhere anytime soon.

You can call your legislators on both sides of the debate and let them know how you feel.

Assemblyman David DiPietro has been a strong advocate for people’s rights, body autonomy and upholding the constitution of the United States.

For more information on some of his initiatives, go to

Read Assemblyman DiPietro’s vaccine bill at this link [opens as a PDF].

About the author

Teresa Reile

Teresa is a strong leader having worked closely with Nobel Peace Prize Nominees, business and entertainment icons, political and religious leaders the world over.


Click here to post a comment
  • Dear Assemblyman DiPietro: While I applaud your legislation, because it is inevitable that the current Marxist Government of Biden, Cuomo, etc. will implement forced injections. Unfortunately the so called “vaccine” is not necessary. The recent publication and study results in the American Journal of Medicine clearly state that overpaid Fauci was wrong, Cuomo was negligent, etc. Hydroxychloroquine works. Increase production of of safe, efficient, inexpensive hydroxychloroquine and open distribution centers instead of testing centers. Give medical care back to patients and their doctors.

  • This was a very one sided article ignoring the total hypocrisy of DiPietro’s position here, but that is typical of republicans these days. It looks more like a press release from DIP staff.

  • This is not a serious piece of reporting. An opinionated editorial, maybe. In fact, knowing that Assemblymember DiPietro is a staunch pro-life, anti-choice evangelist, I actually read this as satire. The hypocrisy is astounding. “My body, my choice” for everyone *except* for women is what this bill actually stands for. Got it. DIPietro’s shame knows no bounds — everyone in the 147th knows that. But shame on you, Teresa Reile, for this one-sided puff piece that leaves out any accountability for the Assemblymember.

    • See my comment. This was not a puff piece just because you disagree with the substantive content and what the author decided was important to highlight and she doesn’t slant left like you’re used to reading living in WNY.

%d bloggers like this: