I Invite the Bishops Opposing the Use of Covid Vaccines to Retract. By Josef Seifert
The philosopher Josef Seifert has written a postscript to his article on the liceity of the Corona vaccine and the Declaration of the Immorality of getting these vaccines by Riga Cardinal Janis Pujats …More
The philosopher Josef Seifert has written a postscript to his article on the liceity of the Corona vaccine and the Declaration of the Immorality of getting these vaccines by Riga Cardinal Janis Pujats, retired Archbishops Tomasz Peta and Jan Paweł Lenga, Tyler Bishop Strickland, and Auxiliary Bishop Athanasius Schneider.
I wish to add some words on the deeply moving and magnificent document signed by Bishop Schneider (whom I hold in highest esteem for his prophetic words and mission) and other bishops. This document urges us, under threat of serious sin, to absolutely refuse receiving vaccines that make use of cell-lines derived from aborted babies, because to do so would entail a material cooperation with the evil of abortion and fail to manifest a clear rejection of the terrible crime of abortion.
As I stated in my article, I agree a 100% with all said in this document on the crime of abortion and the need to witness to the truth. I also agreed with their conclusions including the …More
I wish to add some words on the deeply moving and magnificent document signed by Bishop Schneider (whom I hold in highest esteem for his prophetic words and mission) and other bishops. This document urges us, under threat of serious sin, to absolutely refuse receiving vaccines that make use of cell-lines derived from aborted babies, because to do so would entail a material cooperation with the evil of abortion and fail to manifest a clear rejection of the terrible crime of abortion.
As I stated in my article, I agree a 100% with all said in this document on the crime of abortion and the need to witness to the truth. I also agreed with their conclusions including the …More
- Report
Social media
Change post
Remove post
atreverse pensar
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
You are stupid.
If you have to oppose something, oppose Bergoglio's aberrations.
If you have to oppose something, oppose Bergoglio's aberrations.
"If I am murdered and a medical research team can develop from one of the cells of my body a vaccine, I shall be happy..."
---
OK you answer that you'll be happy, sir, but who asked those children? Do you have the right to decide for them? Who gave you such right then?
"is no cannibalism because a cell of his body is not the murdered person"
---
Two cannibals meet in new Cov-normality.
- I've heard …More
"If I am murdered and a medical research team can develop from one of the cells of my body a vaccine, I shall be happy..."
---
OK you answer that you'll be happy, sir, but who asked those children? Do you have the right to decide for them? Who gave you such right then?
"is no cannibalism because a cell of his body is not the murdered person"
---
Two cannibals meet in new Cov-normality.
- I've heard you ate a missionary - one says.
The other replies: - You're wrong, man. His leg only.
" If this appeal to all men not to use the vaccine, as long as no others are available, may contribute to many deaths.."
-
Oh, it's a two-edged sword: if your appeal to all men to use the experimental vaccine may contribute to many deaths then... you are doomed, sir.
---
OK you answer that you'll be happy, sir, but who asked those children? Do you have the right to decide for them? Who gave you such right then?
"is no cannibalism because a cell of his body is not the murdered person"
---
Two cannibals meet in new Cov-normality.
- I've heard you ate a missionary - one says.
The other replies: - You're wrong, man. His leg only.
" If this appeal to all men not to use the vaccine, as long as no others are available, may contribute to many deaths.."
-
Oh, it's a two-edged sword: if your appeal to all men to use the experimental vaccine may contribute to many deaths then... you are doomed, sir.
Mr Seifert's brother is Lucifer and his father is Satan. I wonder if he would write such a philosophic article if murdered person would be homosexual one instead of murder innocent child.He reminds me about another great "philosopher" Adolf H who justified killing non Aryans for the sake of the purity of his race.
Ultraviolet
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
You defame Lucifer with the accusation @Franek99 :D He is, if nothing else, is supernaturally clever. This guy's BS is a pack of fallacies and error.
Actually A Catholic
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
May Mr. Seifert and all those like him repent before it is too late.
This is NOT only about the EXPLOITATION of the corpses of SLAUGHTERED infants.
Which is horrifying in itself.
No.
This is about MURDERING infants that have been DENIED BAPTISM and therefore the BEATIFIC VISION.
We are CREATED TO BE WITH GOD.
Those responsible for this, including Mr. Seifert and his like will answer to God AND …More
May Mr. Seifert and all those like him repent before it is too late.
This is NOT only about the EXPLOITATION of the corpses of SLAUGHTERED infants.
Which is horrifying in itself.
No.
This is about MURDERING infants that have been DENIED BAPTISM and therefore the BEATIFIC VISION.
We are CREATED TO BE WITH GOD.
Those responsible for this, including Mr. Seifert and his like will answer to God AND THOSE INFANTS for denying them the BEATIFIC VISION
This is NOT only about the EXPLOITATION of the corpses of SLAUGHTERED infants.
Which is horrifying in itself.
No.
This is about MURDERING infants that have been DENIED BAPTISM and therefore the BEATIFIC VISION.
We are CREATED TO BE WITH GOD.
Those responsible for this, including Mr. Seifert and his like will answer to God AND THOSE INFANTS for denying them the BEATIFIC VISION
Ultraviolet
- Report
Change comment
Remove comment
Re. Point 2: Afro-American activists would bitterly disagree with Seifert's reasoning since they still demand "reparations" for slavery 150+ years ago. . Re. Point 3.: Mr. Seifert ignores the "the fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine wihich is an integral part of Western Law. Re. Point 3. and point 4. What God chooses to do and what man should not do are not automatically the same. That's a …More
Re. Point 2: Afro-American activists would bitterly disagree with Seifert's reasoning since they still demand "reparations" for slavery 150+ years ago. . Re. Point 3.: Mr. Seifert ignores the "the fruit of the poisonous tree" doctrine wihich is an integral part of Western Law. Re. Point 3. and point 4. What God chooses to do and what man should not do are not automatically the same. That's a Fallacy of Composition. Re. Point 5: Many did so out of ignorance Re. Point 6. Buying goods at a pharmacy that sells abortifacients is not the same as buying the abortifacients themselves. Likewise, a product made in a country that practices abortion is not a product made directly from the abortion itself. Conflating these is a Slippery Slope Fallacy. Re. Point 7. He's wrong. for the reasons I explained to Louis IX over here. Re. Point 8 Bad faith argument. If the bishops' advice may result in many deaths, where is Mr. Seifert's concern for the pro-vaccine advice that already has resulted in many deaths?
"that are in full harmony with natural and revealed truth that many persons and I can in good conscience receive this vaccine..."
a.) "full harmony with natural and revealed truth" is a Fallacious appeal to Nature.
b.) "that many persons and I can in good conscience receive this vaccine." is a strongly implied Bandwagon Fallacy.
"that are in full harmony with natural and revealed truth that many persons and I can in good conscience receive this vaccine..."
a.) "full harmony with natural and revealed truth" is a Fallacious appeal to Nature.
b.) "that many persons and I can in good conscience receive this vaccine." is a strongly implied Bandwagon Fallacy.
The "fetal cells" used to test and/or grow the vaccines belong to the baby who was aborted. Proof of this is that the DNA in each and every one of those cells matches that innocent, aborted child. Cells divide. Old cells die. New cells are created in the "cell line." But all those cells have the same DNA of the original aborted baby.
The body parts of that baby, including every cell thereof, should …More
The "fetal cells" used to test and/or grow the vaccines belong to the baby who was aborted. Proof of this is that the DNA in each and every one of those cells matches that innocent, aborted child. Cells divide. Old cells die. New cells are created in the "cell line." But all those cells have the same DNA of the original aborted baby.
The body parts of that baby, including every cell thereof, should have been buried, as required by perennial Catholic teaching. This did not happen. It needs to happen now. Every Catholic must demand this.
Would Prof. Seifert be okay with digging up dead corpses, if some scientist said tomorrow that ground up bones of those corpses could cure cancer? If so, the man is a heretic.
The aborted baby whose cells are used in the development of the vaccine or any "medicine" must be returned to the earth through burial. We have no right to use that child in our quest for physical longevity.
The body parts of that baby, including every cell thereof, should have been buried, as required by perennial Catholic teaching. This did not happen. It needs to happen now. Every Catholic must demand this.
Would Prof. Seifert be okay with digging up dead corpses, if some scientist said tomorrow that ground up bones of those corpses could cure cancer? If so, the man is a heretic.
The aborted baby whose cells are used in the development of the vaccine or any "medicine" must be returned to the earth through burial. We have no right to use that child in our quest for physical longevity.
An answer to Prof. Seifert from a discussion group including him, "The main problem is that these vaccines are experimental and pose serious doubts concerning their safety to well informed scientists such as Prof. Yeadon. To impose these vaccines, far from being traditional Catholic doctrine, is a violation of the Nuremberg Code, because it is a violation of human dignity. And that is not traditional …More
An answer to Prof. Seifert from a discussion group including him, "The main problem is that these vaccines are experimental and pose serious doubts concerning their safety to well informed scientists such as Prof. Yeadon. To impose these vaccines, far from being traditional Catholic doctrine, is a violation of the Nuremberg Code, because it is a violation of human dignity. And that is not traditional Catholic doctrine, but a big confusion."