The battle over unvaccinated blood is not just about health, but your family vs. the state by Frank Wright for Life Site News
GNN Note – Do you belong to God or to the state? / END
In a further blow to the institution of the family, the High Court of New Zealand has ruled that a baby be taken from its parents and placed in the custody of the state.
Following reports in 2021 of unvaccinated patients requesting “untainted blood” from unvaccinated donors, a study was commissioned to investigate the phenomenon in October 2021. Now, a nonprofit organization is offering to match requests with mRNA injection free donors, whilst a Swiss brokerage for unvaccinated blood donation is operating in seventeen countries and across Africa and Asia.
Support Our Site
Now is your chance to support Gospel News Network.
We love helping others and believe that’s one of the reasons we are chosen as Ambassadors of the Kingdom, to serve God’s children. We look to the Greatest Commandment as our Powering force.
The case may appear to be one of choice. However, it is a question of whether parents or the state have the right to decide what is best for children. In a further blow to the institution of the family, the High Court of New Zealand has ruled that a baby be taken from its parents and placed in the custody of the state – because the parents refused to accept blood transfusions for the child from mRNA vaccinated donors during the child’s forthcoming vital heart surgery.
In a similar case earlier this year, an Italian couple was denied the right to decide whether their child was to be given a blood donation from mRNA injected donors. Despite producing a list of forty willing – and unvaccinated – donors, the judge ruled against them, saying that vaccinated blood was safe to use. This is despite the fact that the parents did not object on safety, but on religious grounds.
Catholics have objected in principle to mRNA vaccines as aborted fetal cell lines were used in the development and the minimal testing of the experimental treatments. To overturn this objection is to nullify any ethical objections on the grounds of religious belief, a sentiment which expresses the sense of complete and unquestioned moral supremacy characteristic of a contemporary liberalism which discards Christian conviction as readily as it undermines the rights of the individual to disagree. The issue is clearly more than a medical matter, and is one which opens questions about the limits of freedom – and of rights – in the West.
This week a second New Zealand family have reopened the debate with a similar refusal to consider blood from vaccinated donors in their child’s heart surgery. Their objection differs inasmuch as they describe themselves as “natural minded,” preferring not to vaccinate their children at all. Having ceased to do so ten years ago, they now face a costly trip to India to secure the treatment they prefer for their infant son.
The news comes in a year which has seen patients refused organ transplants in Colorado and in Boston for having declined the experimental jab, whose side effects are becoming much more widely acknowledged.
