Why do some Christians who oppose vaccination are OK with blood transfusions and organ transplants?

My beliefs as a ‘fundi’...

1. All bodies are unique
2. One must go with what your body is telling you.

I haven’t seen a doctor or gotten any kind of shot in years. But that don’t work with everybody. While I thank God for good health that may not even work for me down the road.

Thera said:

As the life is in the blood, I can understand Christians rejecting vaccines as a blood pollutant. But were the blood pollutant necessary to save a life, I can understand the higher law (i.e. to save a life) to take priority.

Click to expand...

Life of the animal is in its blood. It says the life of the creature, not man.

Life of man? Is not in his blood. Is in his SOUL! And, our life is to be in God!

Animals die, and then they are gone.

Man, his body dies, but his soul continues.

We are not animals though our bodies are similar to animal bodies.
Our souls were created in the Image of God.

An animal soul (nephesh) was never created in the image of God!

I wish more could understand this. Our life is not in our blood. Only out temporal life is.

Our life is found in our soul. What poisons a believer's life is false doctrine.

Nige55 said:

I'd say there's ample evidence to not trust ALL people that practice medicine.
Let's face it, it wasn't that long ago that we were being told that smoking was actually healthy !

Click to expand...

genez said:

Life of the animal is in its blood. It says the life of the creature, not man.

Click to expand...

Is man not a creature?

genez said:

Life of man? Is not in his blood. Is in his SOUL!

Click to expand...

Scripture and verse, please.

genez said:

And, our life is to be in God!

Click to expand...

Our life is in God, through the shed blood of His Son. The life is still in the Blood.

genez said:

Animals die, and then they are gone.

Man, his body dies, but his soul continues.

We are not animals though our bodies are similar to animal bodies.
Our souls were created in the Image of God.

An animal soul (nephesh) was never created in the image of God!

I wish more could understand this. Our life is not in our blood. Only out temporal life is.

Our life is found in our soul. What poisons a believer's life is false doctrine.

Click to expand...

You seem to contradict yourself, and scripture, and certainly ascribe more to my post than was posted. I leave you with the fact that man is flesh and blood, and this scripture.

Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Redwingfan9 said:

I'm not in favor of the immunity in part because it stands to reason that on occasion a vaccine may be improperly manufactured or subject to some manner of contamination. That said, the immunity protection exists to prevent what would no doubt be thousands of bogus lawsuits claiming vaccines cause autism and any number of other problems. The cost to the court system alone would be astronomical.

Click to expand...

Imagine if this statement were applied to car manufacturers: "The immunity protection exists to prevent what would no doubt be thousands of bogus lawsuits claiming car manufacturers caused crashes vaccines cause autism and any number of other problems. The cost to the court system alone would be astronomical."

It doesn't make sense, does it? Indeed, it doesn't make sense applied to any manufacturer, including manufacturers of vaccines. If the court system is any good, it would easily be able to weed out false claims against car manufacturers, just as it would weed out false claims against vaccine manufacturers. The problem is that vaccines do indeed cause autism (and other diseases), but the immunity prevents the manufacturers being properly sued, and thereby removes the profit motive to fixing their faulty product/s.

Thera said:

Imagine if this statement were applied to car manufacturers: "The immunity protection exists to prevent what would no doubt be thousands of bogus lawsuits claiming car manufacturers caused crashes vaccines cause autism and any number of other problems. The cost to the court system alone would be astronomical."

It doesn't make sense, does it? Indeed, it doesn't make sense applied to any manufacturer, including manufacturers of vaccines. If the court system is any good, it would easily be able to weed out false claims against car manufacturers, just as it would weed out false claims against vaccine manufacturers. The problem is that vaccines do indeed cause autism (and other diseases), but the immunity prevents the manufacturers being properly sued, and thereby removes the profit motive to fixing their faulty product/s.

Click to expand...

You can't sue Ford because a Ford automobile was involved in a crash. You can only sue Ford if there was some defect in a car that caused a crash which resulted in injury.

With vaccines, if there is some defect in the manufacturing I'm all in favor of being able to sue. However there's a big difference between injury caused due to manufacturing defect and the wild and unsupported claims of the anti-vax crowd which alleges that the vaccine itself causes injury as opposed to some manufacturing defect.

The problem with expecting the Court system to weed out false claims is that it's incredibly expensive to defend lawsuits. Even small suits that have no merit are expensive to defend and if a company is subjected to a lot of them that adds up quickly. I can think of a mid-level insurance company that spends over $100 million annually defending lawsuits. They're at least equipped to deal with the cost of litigation, it's part of the premium they charge to their insureds. Most companies aren't equipped for that sort of expense.

Redwingfan9 said:

You can't sue Ford because a Ford automobile was involved in a crash. You can only sue Ford if there was some defect in a car that caused a crash which resulted in injury.

With vaccines, if there is some defect in the manufacturing I'm all in favor of being able to sue. However there's a big difference between injury caused due to manufacturing defect and the wild and unsupported claims of the anti-vax crowd which alleges that the vaccine itself causes injury as opposed to some manufacturing defect.

The problem with expecting the Court system to weed out false claims is that it's incredibly expensive to defend lawsuits. Even small suits that have no merit are expensive to defend and if a company is subjected to a lot of them that adds up quickly. I can think of a mid-level insurance company that spends over $100 million annually defending lawsuits. They're at least equipped to deal with the cost of litigation, it's part of the premium they charge to their insureds. Most companies aren't equipped for that sort of expense.

Click to expand...

Car manufacturers, and all other manner of manufacturers, are able to survive in such a legal system. I see no legitimate reason except conspiracy that vaccine manufacturers are afforded a protection that others are not.

All the vaccine manufacturer would need to do to defend itself from bogus claims would be to demonstrate its data of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients, and show no statistically significant difference in autism rates. However, if it doesn't have this data (no such safety studies are ever done by vaccine companies), in my opinion, it deserves to lose in court.

Thera said:

Car manufacturers, and all other manner of manufacturers, are able to survive in such a legal system. I see no legitimate reason except conspiracy that vaccine manufacturers are afforded a protection that others are not.

All the vaccine manufacturer would need to do to defend itself from bogus claims would be to demonstrate its data of vaccinated vs. unvaccinated patients, and show no statistically significant difference in autism rates. However, if it doesn't have this data (no such safety studies are ever done by vaccine companies), in my opinion, it deserves to lose in court.

Click to expand...

The problem though is that it is settled law that simply because there's a crash with a Ford vehicle doesn't equate to liability for Ford. The anti-vax crowd seeks to argue that a product alone is the cause of damages, even if that product wasn't negligently manufactured. There's a big difference between the two, which is why the Feds provide immunity to vaccine manufacturers, it protects them from essentially a res ipsa loquitur argument in court.

Redwingfan9 said:

The problem though is that it is settled law that simply because there's a crash with a Ford vehicle doesn't equate to liability for Ford. The anti-vax crowd seeks to argue that a product alone is the cause of damages, even if that product wasn't negligently manufactured. There's a big difference between the two, which is why the Feds provide immunity to vaccine manufacturers, it protects them from essentially a res ipsa loquitur argument in court.

Click to expand...

As stated, the only reason the anti-vax crowd can claim this is that the vax-manufacturer safety studies are inadequate, and therefore won't hold in court. If the safety studies were adequate, the anti-vax crowd wouldn't have a case. As I said before, the only reasonable conclusion from the preferential treatment of vax companies by the government is conspiracy. And therefore, distrust of government and vax companies is a reasonable response.

Thera said:

As stated, the only reason the anti-vax crowd can claim this is that the vax-manufacturer safety studies are inadequate, and therefore won't hold in court. If the safety studies were adequate, the anti-vax crowd wouldn't have a case. As I said before, the only reasonable conclusion from the preferential treatment of vax companies by the government is conspiracy. And therefore, distrust of government and vax companies is a reasonable response.

Click to expand...

Anyone who thinks the only reasonable conclusion is a conspiracy theory needs to think deeper and more broadly about the issue.

Redwingfan9 said:

Anyone who thinks the only reasonable conclusion is a conspiracy theory needs to think deeper and more broadly about the issue.

Click to expand...

Yeah. Let the government give all manufacturers blanket immunity from faulty products. Then we can think deeper and more broadly about how immunity from the law is a perversion of justice, and perhaps get rid of this foolish idea that vaccine manufacturers need special protection.

Redwingfan9 said:

Anyone who thinks the only reasonable conclusion is a conspiracy theory needs to think deeper and more broadly about the issue.

Click to expand...

The person didn't say it was conspiracy theory, s/he said it was conspiracy - which is an actual crime.

Thera said:

Yeah. Let the government give all manufacturers blanket immunity from faulty products. Then we can think deeper and more broadly about how immunity from the law is a perversion of justice, and perhaps get rid of this foolish idea that vaccine manufacturers need special protection.

Click to expand...

I didn't say give immunity to all manufacturers for all things. With vaccines there are clear reasons to give such an immunity, largely related to the inexact science of medicine.

Kaon said:

The person didn't say it was conspiracy theory, s/he said it was conspiracy - which is an actual crime.

Click to expand...

Not all conspiracy is a crime. I'm conspiring with my wife to join a new church. We're hardly criminals for doing so. The government giving immunity to an industry regulated by the FDA doesn't equal criminal conspiracy.

Redwingfan9 said:

Not all conspiracy is a crime. I'm conspiring with my wife to join a new church. We're hardly criminals for doing so. The government giving immunity to an industry regulated by the FDA doesn't equal criminal conspiracy.

Click to expand...

The implication is conspiracy to harm, defraud, or commit criminal acts: it is an inchoate crime. What @Thera was talking about was criminal conspiracy.

The government giving immunity to an industry regulated by the FDA may be conspiracy if the government knows about the dangers and harm that can come from vaccines. The fact that it is regulated by a federal entity, and people are harmed (but the industry has immunity) implies a cover-up.

You can pretend not to see the implications, or if you actually don't realize the implication you may need to look closer.

SaintCody777 said:

As I am taking immunology class, I am now learning in pictures and videos what are specific proteins and molecules and what do they have to do with the immune system. I noticed that many Bible believing Christians rail against all vaccination on reasons they claim is based in the Bible, but yet they're OK with blood transfusions. The JWs reject blood transfusions using many of the same Bible passages that the Fundies use to argue against vaccines, to claim the reasons why blood transfusions or donations are sinful.

Why are these very same Fundies who oppose vaccinating themselves or their kids, on Biblical grounds, are totally OK with blood transfusions, blood donations, and organ transplants?

I did watch the trailer for Vaxxed and several YouTube clips of parent's stories claiming that their kids got autism or other bad reactions after they got vaccinated on the Vaxxed II channel.

Oh yeah, I happen to have regressive autism, though now I'm at the Asperger's level of functioning. According to my parents, I was totally normal from the time I was born until I was about 15 months of age. At that point, which happened to be soon after I got my MMR vaccine, I started to talk less and less and became more socially inward and awkward. I also started doing very odd autistic stuff, like I used put a toy train in my ear and tapped it. I stopped talking altogether just before I turned 2, and I didn't speak again until I was 6.
I have yet to see videos my parents took of myself as a baby and a toddler before my autistic regression.

My parents story of my life before autism, I can totally believe that, even though that kind of autistic regression in which a kid is totally normal before the regression, is statistically very rare. But as far as whether vaccines are involved, I'm on the fence.

Click to expand...

Here is the difference. Vaccination is forced many times and there are consequences if you decide you do not want your child vaccinated. Organ transfers and blood transfusions are always your choice. As a christian, all I would want is the freedom to choose without facing any type of persecution.

Thera said:

Is man not a creature?

Click to expand...

Is an angel a creature? Forget the context?

An animal's blood was in the context. An animal is a temporal life. Man, on the other hand? Is a soul that will continue forever. Either in God's kingdom, or the Lake of Fire.

The animal could only "symbolize" the reality.

Our life is in God, through the shed blood of His Son. The life is still in the Blood.

Click to expand...

That's not accurate. That is how we entered into our life. Our life is in God IN CHRIST! His blood at present purifies from all sin. That is for NOW! What happens when we receive our resurrection body? No more sin. Yet, our life will remain IN CHRIST! For we shall be one flesh when that happens!

You seem to contradict yourself, and scripture, and certainly ascribe more to my post than was posted. I leave you with the fact that man is flesh and blood, and this scripture.

Click to expand...

The physical aspect of man is flesh and blood. Our life (if you are saved)? Is not flesh and blood!

Its body. But its also soul and human spirit! Animals have no such life!


Animals have no spirit to know God with! Man and angels do!

Lev 17:11 For the life of the flesh is in the blood: and I have given it to you upon the altar to make an atonement for your souls: for it is the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul.

Click to expand...

That speaks of the animal life. The animal was only used in a symbolic way. Was the wine Jesus offered really his blood? Symbolic usage.



An animal could not experience spiritual death. It could only symbolize it with its physical death. Only man has spiritual death.


Jesus on the Cross screamed out.. "My God! My God! Why have you forsaken me?

Jesus was forsaken because our sins were being poured upon his body! God the Father and God the Holy Spirit had to cut off being one with Jesus while Jesus took upon him our sins! God can not fellowship and be one with us while we choose to sin. Jesus had to be forsaken while bearing our sins! That was the death that saves us. Jesus only died physically after Jesus proclaimed... "IT IS FINISHED!"

Jesus was not physically bleeding to death. He was being put the death spiritually! He was FORSAKEN because of our sins piercing him! Dead to being able to call God "Father." That death was his unbearable agony! The physical beatings he remained silent for.

For the animal was not created in the image of God. A lamb was only symbolic in its use of bleeding to death. Bleeding for representing the spiritual death of Jesus. Spiritual death A death that being a sinner causes. Can an animal sin?

SaintCody777 said:

Why are these very same Fundies who oppose vaccinating themselves or their kids, on Biblical grounds, are totally OK with blood transfusions, blood donations, and organ transplants?

Click to expand...

I don't know of any Christians who oppose vaccinations because of the Bible. Opposition is based on ineffectiveness, additional materials added to vaccines, and autism in children that occurs after the vaccinations.

AlexDTX said:

I don't know of any Christians who oppose vaccinations because of the Bible. Opposition is based on ineffectiveness, additional materials added to vaccines, and autism in children that occurs after the vaccinations.

Click to expand...

Most vaccines given to children have extremely high rates of effectiveness with extremely low rates of serious adverse reactions. The "additional materials" each have a necessary purpose and are safe. The median age of onset for autism correlates to when children get vaccinations but vaccines are not the cause of vaccine. The myth that they are has been exhaustively debunked after years of studies.

AlexDTX said:

I don't know of any Christians who oppose vaccinations because of the Bible. Opposition is based on ineffectiveness, additional materials added to vaccines, and autism in children that occurs after the vaccinations.

Click to expand...

Jehovah Witnesses are not true Christianity. They are not fundies. They are the ones who refuse blood transfusions, based upon a bollixed and distorted understanding about what the Law states about the blood of animals.