Vaccination as a murderous practice has been warned about repeatedly throughout vaccine history, and yet, the vaccinators — ignorant at best, hardened at worst — continue in their genocidal practice.
The principle of the goring ox in Scripture reveals the moral culpability of neglecting to take safety precautions after one is warned about a particular danger. This is a criminal matter, so serious that it may warrant capital punishment by the state:
When an ox gores a man or a woman to death, the ox shall be stoned, and its flesh shall not be eaten, but the owner of the ox shall not be liable.
But if the ox has been accustomed to gore in the past, and its owner has been warned but has not kept it in, and it kills a man or a woman, the ox shall be stoned, and its owner also shall be put to death.
If a ransom is imposed on him, then he shall give for the redemption of his life whatever is imposed on him. (Exodus 21:28-30, ESV)
However, vaccination is more aggravated than neglecting to properly deal with a known dangerous ox. It is not accidental, but deliberate — purposeful injection of poison. However well-intentioned it might be, it is equivalent to deliberately unleashing a “goring ox” on the populace — an especially murderous ox that has proven to kill again and again for centuries.
There is the matter of ignorance of vaccine dangers in some doctors, but even in ignorance, there are different levels of complicity.
One would think, though, that one doesn’t even need to know of the horrific results of vaccination ahead of time to refrain from attempting it. Injecting foreign substances into the bloodstream should be obviously dangerous to anyone — and thus the result of harm should be anticipated.
In any case, the following piece titled “Vaccination Murders,” published in the National Anti-Compulsory-Vaccination Reporter in 1880, is a powerful read that speaks to moral culpability for vaccinating. Continual deaths from vaccination serve as a warning to its dangerous practice, and yet — in violation of the goring ox principle — they are disregarded for selfish ambition (although perhaps in many cases, they are disregarded due to a delusion — but this does not necessarily exempt one for moral culpability, especially if one knows of the dangers).
VACCINATION Murders. Is this too strong an expression? Long ago Professor F. W. Newman declared that after all the admissions that had been made even by medical men themselves of the dangerous character of vaccination, every subsequent death from this foul practice should be reprobated as “a foul murder.” “But there is no intention of killing.” There is the determination to continue a most dangerous because lucrative practice, in spite of all warnings; to continue it from selfish greed or from passion for domination though it may kill, or far worse than kill, little tender babes.
Whenever its results are fatal, surely in such case, gain or domination being preferred to the risk of destroying life, a murder has been perpetrated.
Peace said he never intended to take away life. He only shot a man when his blood was up. That is, he only took away life when it intervened between him and temporary gain. He set his heart upon unlawful possessions, and when he was likely to be thwarted he swept the obstruction out of his way.
Though doctors have been told for years that vaccination is always dangerous and may be a murderous practice, they nevertheless continue the gainful practice, preferring it, we repeat, to the risk they know they run, of taking away life. Then, when it results in death, that death must be a murder.
Dr. Abrath had the courage to state publicly at Birmingham that he murdered three children by vaccination, and that the effect upon his own conscience made him an Anti-vaccinator. Dr. Turnbull in public has made a similar acknowledgment. There undoubtedly are hundreds upon hundreds of vaccination murders. Deaths from vaccination should now always be held up and condemned as murders.
As to strong language, it is never declaimed against except by those who are themselves either weak or criminal. We are fighting against an evil too serious to be trifled with. Our opponents are too graceless and obdurate to merit soft words. In a private letter from Mr. Gibson Ward are these words: “Hard smiting should be our cue; so long, of course, as it is sensible, and the thing censured deserves the censure.”. Our language should ever be strictly true and just, but it should in this crusade, be always launched with the force of Heaven’s red-hot thunderbolts.
“Vaccination Murders,” National Anti-Compulsory-Vaccination Reporter, Vol. V, No. 3, December 1, 1880, in National Anti-Compulsory-Vaccination Reporter, Vol. V, October 7, 1880-September 1, 1881, 43. For better readability, I have made multiple paragraphs out of the text (originally one paragraph).
If you find this site helpful, please consider supporting our work.
