‘Canto fermo’ is the term for an existing melody used as the basis for a new composition.
The prose and poetry of mystics like John of the Cross, Teresa of Avila and Edith Stein – all informed by the Gospel – is my ‘melody’. The ‘new composition’ is this blog and my indie novel ‘The Age for Love’. To buy my book go to amazon.com or smashwords.com and download to your kindle, iPad, phone or any reading device.
Sunday, 28 November 2021
ETHICS OF USING HUMAN BODY PARTS FOR CONSUMPTION, MR LITTLE
To comment please open your gmail account or use my email address or Messenger. Significant Facebook comments on matters of faith and morals will also be posted on this page,
Albert Einstein, lover of God and freedom
New Zealand's Catholic Bishops might just find the following article, from a secular NZ source, a teensy bit embarrassing.
But then again, they might not. NZ's Catholic Bishops must have acquired immunity from embarrassment or they'd have resigned en masse long ago.
How much longer will they hold out, not only against the established evidence that their cherished Pfizer jab is morally compromised, but the incoming tide - which the King Canute-ish media command to stop - of data showing it's physically compromised - in fact, deadly - as well?
Looking back to a time almost two years ago now, I did not expect to be writing this. I was probably one of the very few promoting a vaccine for a disease that many readers here possibly had not even heard of at the time.
My mother-in-law was preparing to return to a “COVID hotspot” and I told my sister-in-law, “Don’t worry, if the disease is that serious, they’ll just make a vaccine.” “No,” she argued, “It isn’t possible to make a vaccine that quickly – it takes years!” Little did she know.
I like to keep up with science. I must admit biology was my least favourite science, but I had spent a fair bit of time before the pandemic learning a bit about genetics. I have an interest in Christian apologetics (NO, that doesn’t mean apologising for being a Christian – it is studying the evidence for Christianity) and I had been quite interested in the “ENCODE” project which had been studying the human genome.
I was convinced that scientists had made much progress in understanding viruses and that technology had advanced enough to allow things to be developed much faster than in the past. I had also been researching a bit on a few other issues, one of which involved human trafficking. But why mention human trafficking and what could it possibly have to do with studying genetics?
Well, that’s where things get interesting. As part of another issue that I had been researching, I received an email from someone making an ‘outrageous’ claim about vaccines (among other things) which I decided to investigate. I am not sure that I believed the claims at first but I wanted to find the truth.
Eventually, I found a website that appeared to be the source of a few of the ‘conspiracy theories’ and ‘false information’. They actually had an article on their website clearing everything up and pointing out that their research appeared to have been misunderstood and then misused by others. The problem is that at least one of the claims was actually true, which they acknowledged in the article.
So what was the outrageous claim? And what did I find that would help convince someone like myself to NOT take the Pfizer “vaccine”?
Before I get any further I would like to point out that I am absolutely NOT writing this to judge anyone on any of this and I believe that everyone should be free to act according to their own conscience. I am a Christian and I believe in God’s love and forgiveness through Jesus Christ. Sometimes we have to make tough choices, God knows our hearts and motives.
Again, I am not writing this to judge,
It might be helpful to point out that while you're not "writing this to judge" any person or persons, you're obviously, and rightly, writing it to judge the facts.
... but to inform so that others may understand my position and perhaps take action to pressure governments to seek ethical options.
It was related to the use of cell lines such as MRC-5 and WI-38 in the development of vaccines. So why is that an issue? I’ll get to that soon, but this relates to an issue that I have with the “vaccines” promoted for the current pandemic and it is one that is being largely ignored and/or played down by politicians and media.
One of the major issues that I have with the Pfizer “vaccine” is the ethical concern regarding the use of the HEK293 cell line. Some may be more familiar with this cell line and others may still be wondering what this is and why it is a concern.
So what are HEK293 cells and where do they come from? HEK293 is a cell line derived from a Human Embryonic Kidney. A baby girl was killed in an abortion and her kidney was used to produce the cell line. This is called “human organ harvesting”.
Cell lines such as MRC-5, WI-38 and PER C6 are also derived from organs harvested from aborted children.
Cell lines such as these were used in the production, manufacture and/or testing of ALL leading “vaccine” candidates for the current pandemic. (Even Novavax which was looking to be one of the more “ethical” options was recently tested using HEK293 cells).
Some people do not actually have any objection to this and it is possible that the Pfizer “vaccine” only used such cells in the “testing” process, but others including myself are completely against the use of such cells whether it is in the manufacture of a vaccine or just the testing process.
This is where my research into human trafficking has collided with my research on genetics.
There has been criticism of China with allegations of organ harvesting, yet when I have asked some of our politicians here about supporting “vaccines” manufactured/tested using cell lines derived from human organ harvesting I have been met with an overwhelming wall of silence.
The media has also been a bit quiet on this issue, but I am not one to give up easily, so here I am writing this article myself. I am reminded of an article I saw quoting Albert Einstein when he was faced with a similar suppression of truth:
Being a lover of freedom, when the (Nazi) revolution came, I looked to the universities to defend it, knowing that they had always boasted of their devotion to the cause of truth; but no, the universities were immediately silenced. Then I looked to the great editors of the newspapers, whose flaming editorials in days gone by had proclaimed their love of freedom; but they, like the universities, were silenced in a few short weeks… Albert Einstein
As I mentioned before, the Pfizer “vaccine” may have only used the cells for testing, so it may not actually contain any of the cells, but for me, this is not acceptable and there was no ‘need’ to use them at all.
What about Astra-Zeneca/Oxford and Janssen/Johnson & Johnson? Well, they are no better, in fact, some may possibly call them worse as the cells are used in the actual manufacture of their “vaccines”.
If this all sounds a bit too difficult to believe -that scientists would actually do this, the evidence on the use of HEK293 cells by Pfizer can be found on lines 269-277 of the following document: biorxiv.org.pdf
On the list of authors, the name Ugur Sahin can be found along with the name of his wife Ozlem Tureci. They are the founders of BioNTech – the company working with Pfizer to produce the “vaccine”.
Evidence of the use of HEK293 cells in the Astra-Zeneca “vaccine” can be found here: nature.com/articles-y
This shows the list of “ingedients” in the vaccine and that it may contain residual amounts of host cell proteins and/or host cell DNA. In this case “host” appears to mean “baby”. Think about it.Would you eat something that had the sign “May contain traces of dead baby”? Would you inject it?
This is part of a much larger issue involving vaccines in general. Organisations such as “COG for Life” have been working for many years to stop the use of cell lines derived from abortions.
Not all vaccines use cell lines but it does happen and people should know so that they can make an informed decision.
So why so much silence on this issue, why can we not discuss this openly? What are the media afraid of? Why don’t politicians just answer simple questions?
As an example, the following is part of an email that was sent to Chloe Swarbrick (Green Party). I still have not received a response on this.
Chloe Swarbrick MP - into drugs
I hope you are not supporting vaccine mandates, what happens if the “Pfizer jab” turns out to be less effective soon and “boosters” are mandated? You probably know about “waning immunity” overseas already. What if Janssen/J&J gets mandated?
Have a look at the “ingredients” list -see “Description” section -paragraph 3 on page 24 of the following document:
The reference to host cell proteins and/or DNA means “bits of dead baby” -hope you are not supporting this, even if you don’t care about aborted babies, how can someone who claims to be “vegan” want this injected in anyone?
If you can’t support this - STOP THIS NOW!
Perhaps the “vaccines” are just off-limits.
Can I question the ethics around the antiviral drugs then?
Andrew Little may enjoy boasting about work being done towards approval of the use of antiviral drugs such as “Molnupiravir”2 but there are similar ethical concerns with these treatments.3
Surely, Dr (Shane) Reti could ask a question or two in Parliament on the ethics; is that too much to ask for? Just a question on the ethics, the alternatives available and if we are getting informed consent.
There is big money being made from the trafficking of human body “parts”. Why is this not being questioned here?
Note: I have used the term “vaccine” throughout this article when referencing mRNA gene therapy technology. I know there is a lot of debate on the terminology and if they are actually vaccines, but that is another issue and not the focus of this article.
No comments:
Post a Comment