Covid-Injections For Children – Child Abuse?editor
This current determined drive to inject healthy 5-11 year old children with the experimental Covid jab is nothing less than sinister.
To call it “insane” is to understate the truth by a country mile. How can it be morally justifiable to do this?
Isn’t it – self-evidently – a form of child abuse, in the same category as forcing children to wear face-masks?
If you disagree, say so, but make sure you have a tenet from the Moral Law to support your position…
It’s absolutely immoral (even without the abortion taint issue) to inject children with harmful substances that do not prevent them from getting an illness or passing it on. We know already that children have been harmed by these particular “vaccines” and ordinarily recover from a bout of Covid quickly. It makes no sense.
It’s really about getting them on the digital identity passport so that they can be tracked and controlled for life. An annual booster, which is the intention, requires a compliance device to track – along with every other aspect of one’s life. Project Veritas had the goon from the FDA admitting annual mandatory jabs for children in the US is “Catholic” Joe’s plan its undercover footage yesterday. These politicians – and the bishops who support them – are evil.
It is definitely child abuse to force vaccinations on children of any age. I’ve even heard calls for babies to be vaxxed. It’s downright evil.
What sort of parent would allow their child to be jabbed by an experimental medicine? It really is incredible that we are living through this.
I agree about the child abuse, without any doubt. There is absolutely no need to inject children for Covid, absolutely no need at all. There’s something else going on here. I wonder if Andrew Q is right about it being to make it possible to track and control them for life. That would be written off as a conspiracy theory, of course. I don’t have sufficient knowledge of that to argue the case, but nothing surprises me any more. If governments would lock us down and make us live under draconian restrictions, they wouldn’t hesitate to use other means to control us for life.
I agree that it is child abuse to force vaccinations on children of any age. But it would not surprise me if new born babies were vaxxed, criminal though that would be. Track and control is the ultimate agenda for life. Yes that would be put down to a conspiracy theory. Governments are not beyond having their populations living under draconian restrictions, for as long as they deem necessary never mind on a permanent basis. It is especially what Totalitarian States do.
“What sort of parent would allow their child to be jabbed by an experimental medicine?”
The sort who want to be able to book a holiday in a country somewhere in the world where they demand vaccination as a condition of entry. THAT sort of parent.
There will also, of course, be parents who have no idea of the dangers of these injections – it is surprising how many people rely totally on the mainstream news media for their information and have fallen for the propaganda that other outlets with other scientific findings are “conspiracy theorists” to be avoided.
I think we also need to remember that many of these decisions by parents are not rational. Some people are more susceptible to psychological programming than others. They believe they’re doing the right thing. Professor Desmet, when describing Mass Formation Psychosis, reckons that 30% are fully programmed by relentless propaganda and can’t easily be changed; 40% are malleable; and the remaining 30% of the population are of a skeptical nature and resistant to hypnosis.
Point taken. I have no difficulty believing that holidays would be put before safeguarding their children from the jab, if it came right down to it. Any slight worry a parent might have is easily pushed aside in the present climate of “follow the science” with the government scientists saying jabbing kids is a good thing.
What kind of parent would risk their child’s health and life just to get a holiday? It beggars belief – but I believe it!
The answer to your question seems to be found in Andrew Q’s post at 11.45am – that is to say, such parents fall into the category of those who are either fully programmed by the “fearful” propaganda, and cannot easily be changed OR the 40% who may be convinced against the propaganda; that is, the majority are fearful due to the propaganda, some more than others.
Thank God that most of us here are in that 30% who are resistant to the hypnosis of the propaganda campaign waged in the past two years.
The MSN news says the government plans to make some of the temporary legislation permanent. I don’t really understand what the four things are that they are keeping permanent. May be someone else can shed a light on what ‘they’ are up to now.
I paid a visit to your link, but it’s not clear what it all means – I agree with you about that.
I had to read it twice and all I can work out is, I think, (1) they want to keep virtual court hearings, so that inquests can be heard without a jury. (2) something to do with making it easier for NHS to get financial help if sued (my interpretation) and (3) to make it easier for businesses to get government funding.
It’s really not clear, though. Sorry I can’t be more help.
The Moral Law, a blueprint for how life should be lived, is anathema to the proponents of Covid jabbing, of compulsory jabbing , of jabbing without informed consent or without undue influence. Their guiding “principle” is what they mendaciously call the “Greater Good”, a thoroughly collectivist communist idea that would reduce us to nothing more than cogs in the State machine. Working for the Good of the State Machine.
The objection to the proposed English Bill of Rights is that it ignores our inbuilt God given moral law rights and regards us as having no rights apart from those which the State can choose to grant or withdraw. It is a recipe for tyranny.
Comments are closed.