The covid vaccine is not the mark of the beast.

[expos4ever]

The BLM riots consisted of hundreds to thousands of maskless people within close enough proximity to breath on one another, breathing in each other's air. It doesn't matter that there was no roof above them and they were outside. Being inside while observing social distancing measures would do more to stem the proliferation of COVID than large groups of people within breathing proximity of one another, even while being outside. To say otherwise is propaganda.

What, exactly, are your medical qualifications to render such a judgement? In any event, I politely suggest that the facts suggest otherwise. Here is a report from the National Post:

When millions of people streamed into the streets around the world to protest the murder of George Floyd at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer, it gave a sinking feeling to public health officials, whether or not they supported the cause behind the demonstrations.

“It’s a perfect setup for further spread of the virus,” said Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the United States, in early June. “I get very concerned, as do my colleagues in public health, when they see these kinds of crowds. There certainly is a risk. I can say that with confidence.”

But it never came to pass. Hundreds of cities saw protests in North America earlier in the month, but it’s hard to trace even a single outbreak to the rallies. Vera Etches, Ottawa’s medical officer of health, confirmed this week that not even a single new infection could be attributed to the recent demonstration in the city.

 

[friend of]

@expos4ever Let's do a thought experiment.

Group 1 is a church meeting of 50 people inside with masks and 6 foot social distancing, while Group 2 is a BLM riot of 50 people without masks, within 1 foot of eachother, outside.

Which group is more likely to spread a virus?

 

[Lawrence87]

What, exactly, are your medical qualifications to render such a judgement? In any event, I politely suggest that the facts suggest otherwise. Here is a report from the National Post:

When millions of people streamed into the streets around the world to protest the murder of George Floyd at the hands of a Minneapolis police officer, it gave a sinking feeling to public health officials, whether or not they supported the cause behind the demonstrations.

“It’s a perfect setup for further spread of the virus,” said Anthony Fauci, the director of the National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases in the United States, in early June. “I get very concerned, as do my colleagues in public health, when they see these kinds of crowds. There certainly is a risk. I can say that with confidence.”

But it never came to pass. Hundreds of cities saw protests in North America earlier in the month, but it’s hard to trace even a single outbreak to the rallies. Vera Etches, Ottawa’s medical officer of health, confirmed this week that not even a single new infection could be attributed to the recent demonstration in the city.

Clearly if the CDC don't know whether or not the vaccine conveys immunity, having medical qualifications doesn't even give you any insight into the matter.

When scientists say that something potentially might do something what they mean is that more studies need to be conducted in order to assess whether or not this is the case. In other words they haven't really studied these vaccines well enough to fully know what they do.

If that fills you with confidence then go ahead and get the jab, personally I'll wait until the facts are actually known.

 

[Glorytothefather2245]

I'm getting a little sick of hearing about this but yeah, the covid vaccine is not the mark of the beast. For one, the mark of the beast is supposed to be a MANDATORY mark that you receive on your right HAND or FOREHEAD. My wife and I both got our COVID vaccinations this morning and we were both injected in the ARM. Not to mention, participation in getting our vaccines was COMPLETELY voluntary. If you refuse to take the mark of the beast, the government will KILL you. Plus the covid vaccine is in the ARM not the hand or forehead.

Another thing I noticed. Before the nurse injected both of us she asked which arms we wanted to get injected into. So we could even chose what side of our body we could be injected into. Umm... last I checked the mark of the beast is not voluntary. They do not say "do you want it on your left hand or your right?" They just stick the mark in.

And the biggest clincher for me? God promised to protect his people from the coming tribulation. So even if the covid vaccine IS the mark of the beast... God willingly allowed me, one of his children to get injected.

Last I checked God never and could never go back on his promises. But everybody just acts like God doesn't even exist.

Don't be stupid. Do your part in eliminating this epidemic, get vaccinated if you can. And even when you're vaccinated still wear a mask. The vaccinations don't turn you into superman.. When we are smart during this epidemic we can lower the global death toll. But if we're not even going to read scripture and just automatically assume the two solutions to this global epidemic is evil and cursed and from Satan.... we're going to see another black death.... literally.

There is 4 parts to the mark of the beast not two. You also have his name and his number. The vaccine can actually become the mark of the beast. The mark is mandatory but that does not mean that it cant start off as a choice first, and thats where a lot of deception can come into place. And the fact that there are passports coming out in a couple states already draws a red flag. Passports will show whether or not you have been vaccinated or not or have been tested for covid in order to participate in the world normally again. There as an individual my self i say the vaccine is the name of the beast and the passport will be the number of the beast. The beast is not gonna show up as big red guy with a pitch fork to brand you with 666. The covid vaccine has MRNA in it which changes your DNA. How then are you created in the image of God if you change your DNA to fit their agenda? Nobody even fully knows where they are going with this, but based on my research the vaccine will change your DNA so they can then hook you up to AI and control everything digitally with the new 5g later on down the line. But we do know they have an agenda to bring about the new world order and that we are not far off from it, as to how far or close is the bigger question.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Are you joking? There is no reason at all to fear "the media". That is nothing more than propaganda left over from the ex-president.

What propaganda are you talking about? The warnings of the left not to trust the Trump vaccine because it was rushed though by Operation Warp Speed?

 

[Hmm]

The covid vaccine has MRNA in it which changes your DNA

This is just a social media myth. The mRNA Covid-19 vaccines such as Pfizer and Moderna won’t change your DNA.

mRNA is naturally made by the body, it encodes instructions for your body’s cells to make protein. And any mRNA vaccine has the same purpose, to teach your body to make an immune response toward a particular pathogen, so if the pathogen gets into your body, your immune system can attack it.

mRNA-based vaccines are a bit like standing in your kitchen and thinking what to make for dinner. You know you’ve got all of the ingredients to make a meal, but you don’t exactly know how to make it. So you consult a recipe and put everything together using ingredients and equipment you already have in your kitchen and eat your dinner.

The vaccines are simply the recipe, injecting it into your arm is simply giving specific information to your cells and letting them read it. Your cells expertly assemble the tiny part of the Spike protein from ingredients and equipment which they already have. After this, the immune system quickly goes after the spike protein fragment, learning to build up a defense against the coronavirus, should it ever encounter it. Your DNA remains completely unaffected. The myth that it is probably developed because mRNA and DNA both encode information but that's where the similarity ends.

 

[expos4ever]

My point about the blood clots is they started rolling out these vaccines with no mention that this was even a potential risk, and now certain places are halting the rollout because of it. Which suggests to me that the effects of these vaccines are as yet not fully known, so who knows what else they will discover about them. I personally am not willing to subject myself to such experimentation

You seem to have unrealistic expectations about all this. I doubt you can point to a reputable medical expert (emphasis on reputable) who would guarantee no unforeseen risks.

And of course the long-term effects are not fully known.

The reality, however, is that you (and I) face a dilemma: vaccine risks vs Covid risks. You talk about how you do not want to be a vaccine "experiment".

Well, what about being a Covid experiment? You appear to simply assume that you will be able to fight off the virus and suffer no long-term consequences - this is as much an "experiment", if not moreso, than taking the vaccine.

 

[expos4ever]

I want to point a fundamental flaw in the way some posters have been arguing in this thread. And that flaw is not accounting for all aspects of the issue. For example:

- some argue that the restrictions limit religious freedom. Obviously they do. But equally obviously, there are other dimensions to consider, not least public health.

- others argue that the long-term risks of the vaccines are not known. True again. But what about unknown long-term risks of even mild Covid?

 

[pescador]

As I understand it, were I to be vaccinated I could still pass on the virus, as the vaccines do not convey immunity but rather are a defence against severe effects. So the argument for these vaccines comes down they are for your own good.

However, I don't think the case for this is entirely clear. I feel like there was a lot of political motivation for these vaccines to be rolled out quickly without enough time to fully assess any potential side effects. This is bolstered by the fact that there are certain places that have halted the roll out of one of the vaccines due to the potential link to blood clots. Now my apprehension isn't based on being convinced that there is a huge risk of me personally getting a blood clot, but rather that this fiasco is indicative of inadequate testing, and highlights for me that these vaccines haven't existed for long enough for the potential side effects to be known. Therefore I do not wish to volunteer myself as a guinea pig. Who knows what unforeseen consequences they might have. For something that does not convey immunity, for a virus which is extremely unlikely to prove fatal, I do not think it is worth being experimented upon for.

As I heard this morning on TV from a well-respected immunologist, you have the right to potentially harm yourself but you do not have the right to harm others. Therefore, get vaccinated!

Clearly if the CDC don't know whether or not the vaccine conveys immunity, having medical qualifications doesn't even give you any insight into the matter.

When scientists say that something potentially might do something what they mean is that more studies need to be conducted in order to assess whether or not this is the case. In other words they haven't really studied these vaccines well enough to fully know what they do.

If that fills you with confidence then go ahead and get the jab, personally I'll wait until the facts are actually known.

Or until you're in a hospital breathing through a ventilator saying goodbye to loved ones via cell phone. Get vaccinated, for God's sake!

 

[expos4ever]

The Covid "vaccine" may not be the mark itself, but it sure sets a precedent and is useful as a trial run for the mark. Requiring people to get it or be denied services.

Do you feel the same way about voter id? Assuming you are in favour of laws requiring voters to provide id, please explain how this is any less of a "precedent".

You also appear to assume that "services" are a right. I doubt many experts on such matter would agree. Do you really think people have a "right" to travel by air, or eat at a restaurant, or go to basketball game?

The actual mark will no doubt be foisted upon the global population through fear and intimidation just as the current shot is.

Please explain to us exactly how people are being "intimidated" into getting vaccinated. When has Dr. Fauci, or any other other health authority, threatened people in any way. Examples please.

Are you implying that preventing someone from using services like air travel or restaurants without proof of vaccination is intimidation? How, exactly, is this intimidation?

The real source of fear is not those who promote vaccination - it is those who resist it and, in so doing, are gambling with other people's lives as well as their own.

 

[expos4ever]

The media aren't to be feared, but blindly believing everything they say is unwise. Fearing what the government will do with the power of vaccine passports etc is just smart.

Please explain specifically what you fear. If possible, give historical examples from your country's history to justify your concern that the government will overstep their proper role.

 

[expos4ever]

Illicitly? That implies illegality

I did not intend to imply illegality. All I am pointing out is that freedom of religious expression, while a right, is not the only consideration.

As a clergyman, it is my duty to work to promote in my congregation the following of medical advice, so in all cases where a parishioner’s licensed medical doctors recommend receiving the vaccine, I believe it should be taken as a matter of priority.

The wording here is troubling - surely you must know that basically all medical doctors recommend the vaccine for every adult, with rare exceptions. Asking your doctor "should I get the vaccine?" is equivalent to asking them "should I stop smoking?".

 

[The Liturgist]

I did not intend to imply illegality. All I am pointing out is that freedom of religious expression, while a right, is not the only consideration.

I never said it was the only consideration. What I did say is that the United States Supreme Court ruled that the prohibitions on religious services were unconstitutional, and I am glad they did so.

The wording here is troubling - surely you must know that basically all medical doctors recommend the vaccine for every adult, with rare exceptions. Asking your doctor "should I get the vaccine?" is equivalent to asking them "should I stop smoking?".

People should always consult with their doctor before undertaking any course of treatment. It would amount to me practicing medicine without a license if I were to tell people to get the vaccine without consulting with their doctor to find out which of the vaccines is most suitable for them, if they have any dangerous allergies which could pose a risk in taking the vaccine, if, they are in a lower priority group based on age, if they should be upgraded to a higher priority group based on pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable, and many other conditions. Only a qualified and properly licensed board certified medical doctor is able to give medical advice, and people should check with their doctor before doing anything.

And when it comes to ceasing smoking, people should absolutely talk to their doctor if they are addicted to cigarettes and get medical advice on the best approaches to quit (whether they should, for example, quit “cold turkey”, or use nicotine patches, or use some of the various prescription medications that have been developed, or some combination thereof). Only a doctor is qualified to provide guidance on how best to quit smoking, and only a doctor is qualified to provide guidance and assistance in terms of how to get immunized against Covid as quickly and safely as possible, bearing in mind pre-existing conditions.

It troubles me that you want people to undergo medical treatment without talking to their doctor, especially when their doctor might be able to expedite their receipt of the vaccine.

 

[pescador]

It's a virtue named "vigilance" and all Christians would be wise to practice it in these evil days.

Are the days "evil" in Canada?

 

[pescador]

"Potentially less likely" in other words they don't know. Precisely my point I am not willing to be a guinea pig for something that they have no idea about.

Also potentially less likely does not mean it does convey immunity. It means it might. In any case that statement doesn't fill me with confidence. What other things might it potentially do or not do? Since they clearly are working all this out as they go about injecting millions of people. You can queue up to find out if you want, but I'm not going to.

So you're satisfied with the so-called "UK variant" of COVID-19 that is easily transmitted and killing people around the world? People should be vaccinated against the worst health crisis people have seen in 100 years!

 

[pescador]

I never said it was the only consideration. What I did say is that the United States Supreme Court ruled that the prohibitions on religious services were unconstitutional, and I am glad they did so.



People should always consult with their doctor before undertaking any course of treatment. It would amount to me practicing medicine without a license if I were to tell people to get the vaccine without consulting with their doctor to find out which of the vaccines is most suitable for them, if they have any dangerous allergies which could pose a risk in taking the vaccine, if, they are in a lower priority group based on age, if they should be upgraded to a higher priority group based on pre-existing conditions that make them more vulnerable, and many other conditions. Only a qualified and properly licensed board certified medical doctor is able to give medical advice, and people should check with their doctor before doing anything.

And when it comes to ceasing smoking, people should absolutely talk to their doctor if they are addicted to cigarettes and get medical advice on the best approaches to quit (whether they should, for example, quit “cold turkey”, or use nicotine patches, or use some of the various prescription medications that have been developed, or some combination thereof). Only a doctor is qualified to provide guidance on how best to quit smoking, and only a doctor is qualified to provide guidance and assistance in terms of how to get immunized against Covid as quickly and safely as possible, bearing in mind pre-existing conditions.

It troubles me that you want people to undergo medical treatment without talking to their doctor, especially when their doctor might be able to expedite their receipt of the vaccine.

Seriously? People should check with their doctor before getting the COVID-19 vaccine? There are questions asked by those doing the vaccinations to insure that the recipient doesn't have any conditions that would create a danger to them. Unless your doctor is nuts, s/he would without question advise you to get the shot unless you have a preexisting condition that you both would know about.

We have a friend who has had cancer and a previous reaction to another vaccine. Her doctor recommended getting the vaccine but waiting for 30 minutes instead of the usual 15 minutes. Any responsible person should check with their doctor if they have any pre-existing condition that may affect the situation, but no doctor wants to be overwhelmed by many, many phone calls from healthy people asking if the FDA-approved vaccine is safe.

 

[expos4ever]

I never said it was the only consideration. What I did say is that the United States Supreme Court ruled that the prohibitions on religious services were unconstitutional, and I am glad they did so.

What, exactly, are you saying then? If restrictions on religious services are "unconstitutional", doesn't this mean they cannot be enforced?

And if they cannot be enforced, then people die.

Let me be blunt - if your constitution does not allow reasonable public-health related restrictions to be applied, then your constitution needs to change.

 

[expos4ever]

People should always consult with their doctor before undertaking any course of treatment...

This sounds all well and good in an ideal world, but we do not live in such a world.

I think you know all too well that if people are told they need to see their doctors before getting a Covid shot, this will dissuade millions from getting the vaccine they need to get, for their own sake and the sake of others - they either cannot afford a doctor's visit or they do not, or will not, make the time.

Notice the guidance here in Canada:

For some people, the decision to get vaccinated will require consideration of risks versus benefits.

You should consult your doctor or a health professional if you:

• are immunocompromised due to a disease or treatment, such as chemotherapy
• have an autoimmune condition
• are pregnant or breastfeeding
• have a severe allergy to an ingredient in the COVID-19 vaccine

The key point: people only need to consult their doctor in these cases.

At the risk of seeming cynical, suggesting that most people need to see a doctor before getting a Covid vaccine seems to smack of "vaccine suppression" - a calculated maneuver to effectively resist what is a no-brainer: almost everyone should get vaccinated.

 

[Isilwen]

here are questions asked by those doing the vaccinations to insure that the recipient doesn't have any conditions that would create a danger to them.

I can speak to that myself.

I got my first Covid shot on Thursday, but I almost didn't get it due to my severe allergy to tree nuts. The pharmacist made me sign a waiver releasing them on any liability should I have a severe allergic reaction (anaphylaxis) to the vaccine.

I had to plead with him to administer the shot so I can go see my kids 1200 miles away in case the passports are in effect. He said you want to arrive alive, right? I told him if I don't get it I cannot arrive at all if passports are in play. So that is when he had me sign a waiver.

So, they do ask you questions, it is actually in the paperwork that you fill out and then the doctor will ask as well.

 

[renniks]

Please explain specifically what you fear. If possible, give historical examples from your country's history to justify your concern that the government will overstep their proper role.

Historical examples? Ok, the trail of tears, Indian reservations, slavery ...
We should learn from all history, not just our own.
What I fear is: " Show your papers, or you aren't allowed to shop for food, or bank, or travel."
Only it won't be papers, it will be a card first, then eventually a microchip under the skin with all your medical and other information.