Will you get the COVID vaccine?

Help Support CattleToday:

I am a very practical type person - if available and can help people, why not utilize something that would be thrown away. Not sure, but I think they can also use the placenta from a women's birthing. If so, that would be a moral, very readily available product to use.
Yes J-SV, placental cells CAN be used... and that would be an entirely morally proper means to development of these cell lines, as long as donor permission is received. That then begs the question, did they receive permission to use that infants "tissue" to start these "immortalized cell lines"? Did they receive even its parents permission?

Keep in mind though, that the "placental tissue" approach was also most likely an option when the currently existing "immortalized cell lines" were developed as well... So you have to wonder, WHY did they choose to use aborted infant cells instead??? Perhaps because a recognition of the "tremendous potential 'fetal tissue' medical advances" offer for saving life (saving the lives of those that made it to full term and birth... at the expense of one who was intentionally killed in utero then in part for medical use of its tissue before it was rendered as being "viable" outside the womb... out of sight, out of mind... ), may bring some "justification" to an otherwise abhorrent and wholly immoral act?

Those who are involved in this heinous and barbaric practice (of even encouraging abortion, using this as "justification" for the act, even in the smallest way, perhaps even only subconsciously in their own thoughts, without ever verbally or in written form stating it as such), if they continue unrepentant, will answer for it, if not in this life at the hand of God appointed government carrying out His will, then when they face Him in judgement. I pray for all in this matter... (governments, and all people, including myself, so that I will not fall prey to the same lie............. remember that Satan is the source and father of all lies).

1 Timothy 2:4

1I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; 2For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. 3For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; 4Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. 5For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; 6Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
 
Last edited:
Salvation is freely given to any one of sound mind and a repentant heart who stands before the brethren and asks for it.
One great problem with abortion is that someone(s) has made a concious decision to deny another person their self evident right to make a choice.
G-d in His infimite wisdom has and will balance the scales.
 
Yes J-SV, placental cells CAN be used... and that would be an entirely morally proper means to development of these cell lines, as long as donor permission is received. That then begs the question, did they receive permission to use that infants "tissue" to start these "immortalized cell lines"? Did they receive even its parents permission?

Keep in mind though, that the "placental tissue" approach was also most likely an option when the currently existing "immortalized cell lines" were developed as well... So you have to wonder, WHY did they choose to use aborted infant cells instead??? Perhaps because a recognition of the "tremendous potential 'fetal tissue' medical advances" offer for saving life (saving the lives of those that made it to full term and birth... at the expense of one who was intentionally killed in utero then in part for medical use of its tissue before it was rendered as being "viable" outside the womb... out of sight, out of mind... ), may bring some "justification" to an otherwise abhorrent and wholly immoral act?
Medical ethics have come a long way since those days. It was not all that long ago that physicians were trained using stolen cadavers or the bodies of paupers without even a thought as to the wishes of the deceased. The notion that a person's permission should be required before enrolling them in medical or scientific research is relatively recent. That's not to excuse those practices of the past, they were wrong, but we can't undo what's already happened. If we were to throw out every advancement that was made under conditions we consider unacceptable today, we'd be back in the stone age.

The technology to work with undifferentiated stem cells like those found in the placenta or amnion didn't exist at the time these cell lines were cultured. If you wanted to grow lung cells or liver cells, you had to start with lung or liver cells. Today scientists can take a placental stem cell and stimulate it to grow into a desired tissue, making the old techniques obsolete.

The idea that anyone would encourage or promote abortion in order to use fetal tissue for research is insane. Hundreds of thousands of abortions are performed every year in this country, in addition to the 10-20% of pregnancies that are estimated to end in miscarriage. The abortion rate could drop to 0 overnight and there would still be more fetal tissue available than anyone could ever dream of using for research. There's absolutely no practical reason for anyone to encourage it.
 
The idea that anyone would encourage or promote abortion in order to use fetal tissue for research is insane. Hundreds of thousands of abortions are performed every year in this country, in addition to the 10-20% of pregnancies that are estimated to end in miscarriage. The abortion rate could drop to 0 overnight and there would still be more fetal tissue available than anyone could ever dream of using for research. There's absolutely no practical reason for anyone to encourage it.
Agree with you there Buck... it's unconscionable that "hundreds of thousands of" [elective, medically unnecessary] "abortions are performed every year in this country", and that our government doesn't currently recognize every single one of them as the premeditated murder of an innocent child that it is. Pray that "the abortion rate".... WILL.... "drop to 0 overnight" very soon!

Unconscionable too, that organizations that are Federally funded with our tax dollars are heavily involved in and profiting from the "business of abortion ", AND the selling of aborted infants' body parts.
 
Last edited:
Agree with you there Buck... it's unconscionable that "hundreds of thousands of" [elective, medically unnecessary] "abortions are performed every year in this country", and that our government doesn't currently recognize every single one of them as the premeditated murder of an innocent child that it is. Pray that "the abortion rate.... WILL.... drop to 0 overnight very soon!

Unconscionable too, that organizations that are Federally funded with our tax dollars are heavily involved in and profiting from the "business of abortion ", AND the selling of aborted infants' body parts.
I don't pray for things that can't happen. The fight over abortion legislation is a waste of time, and politicians use it as an intentional distraction. I don't care who is on the supreme court or what the law says; abortion rates are tied to demand. If you want to eliminate abortion, you've got to tackle the root problems. No woman gets an abortion for fun. Free birth control, pre- and post-natal medical care, and public daycare would go an incredibly long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

I understand why that rankles the "personal responsibility" crowd, but there are a lot of irresponsible, unlucky, and/or victimized people out there. If the goal is really the welfare of the child, we should be making it easier for everyone to get by, not using babies to punish people who make bad decisions.
 
Completely agree! The child whose life is ended in an elective abortion has had absolutely no voice in the decision that its life be ended.
Or had a say in the fact that his/her tissue has been kept growing for so many years to be used for medical research. We need to give these poor children a proper burial and let them rest in peace.
 
I don't pray for things that can't happen. The fight over abortion legislation is a waste of time, and politicians use it as an intentional distraction. I don't care who is on the supreme court or what the law says; abortion rates are tied to demand. If you want to eliminate abortion, you've got to tackle the root problems. No woman gets an abortion for fun. Free birth control, pre- and post-natal medical care, and public daycare would go an incredibly long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

I understand why that rankles the "personal responsibility" crowd, but there are a lot of irresponsible, unlucky, and/or victimized people out there. If the goal is really the welfare of the child, we should be making it easier for everyone to get by, not using babies to punish people who make bad decisions.
If I was counting on the world around me to be in control, I'd probably be with you. However, I guess I'm a little more optimistic....
1609021288518.png
 
I don't pray for things that can't happen. The fight over abortion legislation is a waste of time, and politicians use it as an intentional distraction. I don't care who is on the supreme court or what the law says; abortion rates are tied to demand. If you want to eliminate abortion, you've got to tackle the root problems. No woman gets an abortion for fun. Free birth control, pre- and post-natal medical care, and public daycare would go an incredibly long way toward reducing unwanted pregnancies and abortions.

I understand why that rankles the "personal responsibility" crowd, but there are a lot of irresponsible, unlucky, and/or victimized people out there. If the goal is really the welfare of the child, we should be making it easier for everyone to get by, not using babies to punish people who make bad decisions.
In your own words.....

"If the goal is really the welfare of the child..." OK, so by your own words, we HAVE established that we BOTH recognize that this IS a child we are talking about,........ that's very good, because there are many "pro-abortionists" that DENY that it's actually a child, in spite of every shred of scientific evidence we have today. Yes... I'm glad we agree! Every single persons life began when they were conceived, i.e.: a sperm fertilized an ovum. Period. The child may or may not live to full term, either naturally, OR, perhaps by intervention by someone that may seek to HARM that child, but absent that intervention, the only way it will die is by NATURAL death causes. It is entirely unreasonable and thoroughly impossible to justify murdering the very child that we are talking about, or that it can be an "option" for discussion, "If the goal is really the welfare of the child..."

"we should be making it easier for everyone to get by..."
OK, now we're getting somewhere. You've established what your goal is, and where you turn to determine your justification of the murder of the child. You've suggested that if it was "easier" to get by and to raise a child, at least if it was "easy enough", then there would be no "need", or at least a drastically reduced "need", or in your words again, "demand" ("abortion rates are tied to demand"), for abortion. This is an "arbitrary" claim though. Who is to be the "arbiter" that decides what is to be the line where it is "easy enough" so that an abortion, "in this case", is not justified, but "in this case", is. You've just stated that "abortion on demand", in your opinion, should be the law of the land, and that every [parent???... or perhaps only every mother, with the father having no authority at all???] should have the right to murder their child, and decide if THEY think that it's going to be "easy enough" to raise it. Raising a child should be "easy", and if it's not, or even if you THINK it's not going to be, go for it... it's alright to kill that child then. Oh... but please, do it in a way that nobody ever really knows about it, won't you. If you let that child come visibly into this world alive outside of your womb, we're going to have to charge you with murder....... or perhaps not? I don't know for sure where you might stand on that one... only because you haven't yet stated it here...

"not using babies to punish people who make bad decisions..." What you're saying then is that you feel it's a better, and an "acceptable" solution to punish the completely innocent babies with the death penalty for "bad decisions" other people made.... well, at least as long as we intentionally murder the child before it's actually physically been seen alive by anyone (oh, should that include "not seen alive on an ultrasound image then, or not??), and as long as we don't tell anyone/too many people that the child actually existed (of course the mother will have to know, and at least the abortionist performing the abortion.... or maybe not.... we can use drugs to do it too....), and as long as we then hide/destroy all the evidence that it ever existed? (If a tree falls in the woods and nobody sees it fall, did it or didn't it fall?) Or maybe you're supportive of "full term" abortions? Or partial birth abortions? Why not go one step further... I mean, a kid is a HUGE burden (responsibility..... I mean.... punishment) at least until 2 years after it's been delivered or so. And have you ever been through the punishment (your word) of raising a teenager? Man, a baby is a piece of cake compared to one of them. Caring for a child as it grows in the womb is probably the easiest point in its life of all! Shoot, just from the words you've used here, I don't think you were referring to the "punishment" that "people" go through while the child is in the womb as being the real "punishment" at all........... I'm pretty sure you were referring to the "punishment" that comes AFTER they are delivered. Maybe we ought to make abortion illegal, and only use the death penalty as a solution for the child if it actually turns out to BE a "punishment" at these other stages of life? I mean, who knows, maybe "some" of those children would actually turn out to even be blessings??? Why legally allow a preemptive premeditated death hit on them, purely on the basis that "they MIGHT turn out to be a "punishment"?

The whole abortion discussion is based on the premise, "I brought you into this world, and therefore I have every right to take you out"! There is one more thing that I wholeheartedly agree with you on Buck. You said, "If you want to eliminate abortion, you've got to tackle the root problems". The problem here is as old as this world... the sinful heart of man. Our Creator God is the one who makes the rules here, and God tells us that murdering an innocent child that HE created and died for in the womb is immoral and sin, and against HIS law. Man rejects God and His laws, because man is a sinner, born that way, and inescapable. The only thing that has the power to change man's sinful heart is the gospel.

1 Timothy 2:1-6 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
 
Last edited:
I got the flu shot in October. I feel a little knot on my shoulder. Thinking that might be the antenna. I have also been hearing ringing in my ears.
Now the Gates Foundation will control you! Imaginations and gullible people are scary!
 
Now the Gates Foundation will control you! Imaginations and gullible people are scary!
I do need some new gates and some of the existing gates could stand a better foundation. But, generally things are out of control, aren't they. There are some very vivid imaginations in play.
 
In your own words.....

"If the goal is really the welfare of the child..." OK, so by your own words, we HAVE established that we BOTH recognize that this IS a child we are talking about,........ that's very good, because there are many "pro-abortionists" that DENY that it's actually a child, in spite of every shred of scientific evidence we have today. Yes... I'm glad we agree! Every single persons life began when they were conceived, i.e.: a sperm fertilized an ovum. Period. The child may or may not live to full term, either naturally, OR, perhaps by intervention by someone that may seek to HARM that child, but absent that intervention, the only way it will die is by NATURAL death causes. It is entirely unreasonable and thoroughly impossible to justify murdering the very child that we are talking about, or that it can be an "option" for discussion, "If the goal is really the welfare of the child..."

"we should be making it easier for everyone to get by..."
OK, now we're getting somewhere. You've established what your goal is, and where you turn to determine your justification of the murder of the child. You've suggested that if it was "easier" to get by and to raise a child, at least if it was "easy enough", then there would be no "need", or at least a drastically reduced "need", or in your words again, "demand" ("abortion rates are tied to demand"), for abortion. This is an "arbitrary" claim though. Who is to be the "arbiter" that decides what is to be the line where it is "easy enough" so that an abortion, "in this case", is not justified, but "in this case", is. You've just stated that "abortion on demand", in your opinion, should be the law of the land, and that every [parent???... or perhaps only every mother, with the father having no authority at all???] should have the right to murder their child, and decide if THEY think that it's going to be "easy enough" to raise it. Raising a child should be "easy", and if it's not, or even if you THINK it's not going to be, go for it... it's alright to kill that child then. Oh... but please, do it in a way that nobody ever really knows about it, won't you. If you let that child come visibly into this world alive outside of your womb, we're going to have to charge you with murder....... or perhaps not? I don't know for sure where you might stand on that one... only because you haven't yet stated it here...

"not using babies to punish people who make bad decisions..." What you're saying then is that you feel it's a better, and an "acceptable" solution to punish the completely innocent babies with the death penalty for "bad decisions" other people made.... well, at least as long as we intentionally murder the child before it's actually physically been seen alive by anyone (oh, should that include "not seen alive on an ultrasound image then, or not??), and as long as we don't tell anyone/too many people that the child actually existed (of course the mother will have to know, and at least the abortionist performing the abortion.... or maybe not.... we can use drugs to do it too....), and as long as we then hide/destroy all the evidence that it ever existed? (If a tree falls in the woods and nobody sees it fall, did it or didn't it fall?) Or maybe you're supportive of "full term" abortions? Or partial birth abortions? Why not go one step further... I mean, a kid is a HUGE burden (responsibility..... I mean.... punishment) at least until 2 years after it's been delivered or so. And have you ever been through the punishment (your word) of raising a teenager? Man, a baby is a piece of cake compared to one of them. Caring for a child as it grows in the womb is probably the easiest point in its life of all! Shoot, just from the words you've used here, I don't think you were referring to the "punishment" that "people" go through while the child is in the womb as being the real "punishment" at all........... I'm pretty sure you were referring to the "punishment" that comes AFTER they are delivered. Maybe we ought to make abortion illegal, and only use the death penalty as a solution for the child if it actually turns out to BE a "punishment" at these other stages of life? I mean, who knows, maybe "some" of those children would actually turn out to even be blessings??? Why legally allow a preemptive premeditated death hit on them, purely on the basis that "they MIGHT turn out to be a "punishment"?

The whole abortion discussion is based on the premise, "I brought you into this world, and therefore I have every right to take you out"! There is one more thing that I wholeheartedly agree with you on Buck. You said, "If you want to eliminate abortion, you've got to tackle the root problems". The problem here is as old as this world... the sinful heart of man. Our Creator God is the one who makes the rules here, and God tells us that murdering an innocent child that HE created and died for in the womb is immoral and sin, and against HIS law. Man rejects God and His laws, because man is a sinner, born that way, and inescapable. The only thing that has the power to change man's sinful heart is the gospel.

1 Timothy 2:1-6 I exhort therefore, that, first of all, supplications, prayers, intercessions, and giving of thanks, be made for all men; For kings, and for all that are in authority; that we may lead a quiet and peaceable life in all godliness and honesty. For this is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Saviour; Who will have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth. For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus; Who gave himself a ransom for all, to be testified in due time.
tl;dr
 
To the original question.....NO!
Injecting oneself with a concoction that includes anti freeze and other wonderful ingredients that can make people sterile, aniphlactic, and worse is not my cup of tea.
 
These new Covid vaccines haven't been tested for anything EXCEPT efficacy against the Covid 19 virus, and certainly not for ANYTHING "long term". They were rushed through the approval process at "warp speed". That SHOULD give all of us cause for concern about receiving them.
Not true.
The 2 vaccine currently approved for use in the US have gone thru far more testing for both effectiveness and side effects than what is probably the most successful vaccination program the US ever undertook.
I was fortunate, (like many of the members here of my age group) that were part of the very large 'field test' of the Salk Polio vaccine that had been previously tested on only 161 school children as of the report Salk presented in Jan 1953. I believe it was 1954 when I got my first one.

On 23 January 1953, Jonas Salk of Pittsburgh presented the results of his tests of a "killed virus" polio vaccine on 161 children to the Immunization Committee, a scientific advisory committee to the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis.

The following spring, over 600 000 schoolchildren were injected with vaccine or placebo and over a million others participated as "observed" controls.


We all know the results and thru the Salk and later Sabine vaccine, polio has been all but eliminated in this nation, due in great part to the courage of the medical community and even greater part, because of the kids' parents, which just happened to also be part of what we now and forever call "The Greatest Generation.

Many, of not most of my own generation, (self included) wouldn't make a pimple on that generation's posterior, far more worried about their own gluteus maximus than the well being of the nation as a whole. Too frightened of what 'might' happen versus what might not.
To be honest, I really believe people are not afraid it won't work...they are frightened it will, having climbed on the political 'natural herd immunity' bandwagon early on and now don't see an honorable way to get down off of it.

I will get the vaccination whenever it comes available for my demographic just as I took every other vaccination the medical community recommended thru out my 70 years.
I ain't skeered, never was.

One question:

Of the approximate 4.6 million people (2.3 million in the US) that have been given the covid19 vaccine, (not including the many tens of thousands that were part of the Phase 3 trials of Moderna and Pfizer) how many have died or have been hospitalized for any significant amount of time?

https://www.bloomberg.com/graphics/covid-vaccine-tracker-global-distribution/

🍿
 
Last edited:
I'm getting mine tomorrow afternoon-Medical staff. I'll let you know if my third eye starts twitching every time I pass a cell tower...
right now we have every ICU bed in the county full (2 hospitals), 22 of 24 beds on a regular med-surg floor are now Covid patients,the ER had 24 positive of 26 suspected cases yesterday, with daily ER visits of 220/24 hours-not just Covid or pneumonia. ER wait time is about 4 hours. Dang right I'm going to do whatever it takes to slow this crap down. If we all explode in 6 months or become zombies, it won't matter at that point (except to those who aren't part of the fun).
 
Have a friend down near Nixa, Mo. who gets a chemo injection each week and three times a week in for dialysis treatment. He came down with the virus, was put in the hospital and given remdesivir, and was home doing fine in 5 days. I was really surprised because if those with compromised immune systems are at high risk, he has to be in that category.
 

Latest posts

Top