Court rules 8 Oregon children to be vaccinated against parents' will

So a court can order your children poisoned against your will in Oregon.

Tyranny

A ruling from The Oregon Court of Appeals said that the parents did not have the right to exempt their children from forced vaccinations after child welfare workers and the Oregon Department of Human Services fought to obtain a court order demanding the children receive multiple vaccinations last year. The court also decided that since the state had custody of the children, it had the right to make all their medical decisions without the parents' consent. Although the children are living with relatives, they are considered wards of the state. The parents, who say vaccinations are against their religious beliefs, had their children removed for undisclosed reasons last year after the state claimed concerns over their welfare. Despite the ruling, it appears the children have yet to be vaccinated while the parents have the option of appealing the ruling to Oregon's Supreme Court.

As a biochemist who has worked in the vaccine industry for the last 8 years, I think I might know a bit more than some black robed tyrant regarding what is or isn't best for my child. Apparently said tyrants, in Oregon, have the ability to force a child to receive the shot(s) without regard to what a well educated and informed parent knows regarding the cocktails of poison?

Believe what you wish about vaccines. I am not here to convince you nor to debate you. I KNOW what is in many of them and wouldn't even think about letting a member of my family be injected with one.

To insist that me or a member of my family be injected against our will is an act of aggression that deserves a similar response. What is the recourse? To provide a high velocity lead injection to those who insist they have the right to inject your children?

As a parent, it is your responsibility to take care of your child. If you are OK with your child being injected with these toxins, so be it. Should a parent who knows precisely what is in them and decides their child will not be injected with them be subjected to a court ordered poisoning of their child?

I think not.

Sadly, this is probably just the beginning.

reply to post by bozzchem


And if a parent decides they want to conduct female genital mutilation as part of their religious beliefs on their young daughter should the state allow that also?

After all, don't the parents know better what is for their children or not?

Is this one more step towards mandatory vaccines?

I remember a recent story where nurses lost their jobs because, they didn't want to get a flu shot.

There was also a recent thread about our children not being 'ours' anymore, could this be further evidence of that?

I don't vaccinate my children anymore. I was given several vaccines that were required for college and my health took a nosedive after receiving them. I can't prove a link, but, I can't get past the feeling that they played a role. I will be affected by this for the rest of my life and I will not subject my children to them. If they wish to get inoculated when they are adults, that is fine. They will be old enough to understand the risks at that point. I don't think it is right to inject them with something that could have life long consequences before they have the cognitive ability to fully understand that choice.

Originally posted by daryllyn
Is this one more step towards mandatory vaccines?

I remember a recent story where nurses lost their jobs because, they didn't want to get a flu shot.

There was also a recent thread about our children not being 'ours' anymore, could this be further evidence of that?

I don't vaccinate my children anymore. I was given several vaccines that were required for college and my health took a nosedive after receiving them. I can't prove a link, but, I can't get past the feeling that they played a role. I will be affected by this for the rest of my life and I will not subject my children to them. If they wish to get inoculated when they are adults, that is fine. They will be old enough to understand the risks at that point. I don't think it is right to inject them with something that could have life long consequences before they have the cognitive ability to fully understand that choice.

My sister is a nurse and was required to get a flu shot or lose her job.

She didn't want to but did anyways and is just fine.

reply to post by Hopechest

My sister is a nurse and was required to get a flu shot or lose her job.

She didn't want to but did anyways and is just fine.

I'm sorry she was put into that position.

I don't think it is right to force someone to be injected with anything, ever.

I can understand the reasoning behind it from a nursing standpoint, because, it is essentially to protect the patients that may be immunocompromised, but, I don't agree that the employee's rights should be violated by forcing them to chose between their job or an inoculation.

Vaccination should not be mandated.

reply to post by bozzchem

My husband has been getting these flu shots for about 15 years. Twice after receiving the flu shot, I had to rush him into the emergency room with a fever of about 106.

He still insists these shots are safe, and that the medical profession would never lie to him. I say anyone who is giving out free shots, and they are able to make money off of you getting sick, is at least worth stepping back, and looking at...

Anyways you won't see me getting anywhere near these shots, and I am the one that is stuck nursing him back to health when he does get sick from them.

Originally posted by daryllyn
reply to post by Hopechest

 

My sister is a nurse and was required to get a flu shot or lose her job.

She didn't want to but did anyways and is just fine.

I'm sorry she was put into that position.

I don't think it is right to force someone to be injected with anything, ever.

I can understand the reasoning behind it from a nursing standpoint, because, it is essentially to protect the patients that may be immunocompromised, but, I don't agree that the employee's rights should be violated by forcing them to chose between their job or an inoculation.

Vaccination should not be mandated.

She almost quit over it, even managed to get most of the other nurses to agree with her but in the end it came down to their job or the shot. Shes got a degree in virus biology or whatever it is and swore up and down that if she got the shot it would simply weaken her to further mutations of the virus later down the road. I didn't understand all that she was saying but I guess she wanted her insane paycheck. lol

Now That is scary-as close to a waking nightmare as it gets.

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by bozzchem

 

And if a parent decides they want to conduct female genital mutilation as part of their religious beliefs on their young daughter should the state allow that also?

After all, don't the parents know better what is for their children or not?

Really? I never mentioned a religious belief on my part. I don't cling to that as a means of escape.

I shouldn't even respond to your post since it's the equivalent of feeding a troll.

Believe what you wish, tinkerbell, I am not some religious fanatic looking to shield my children based on religion. I am a BIOCHEMIST who has full involvement with the design and implementation of these poisons.

Did you read in my OP that I'm not here to debate efficacy? Do what YOU want. Don't point a gun to MY head and force me or a member of my family to take what I know is toxic.

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by bozzchem

 

And if a parent decides they want to conduct female genital mutilation as part of their religious beliefs on their young daughter should the state allow that also?

After all, don't the parents know better what is for their children or not?

Mutilation is obvious bodily harm. Which is illegal.

A parent not wanting to put their child at risk of possible bodily harm because they are uncertain about the health effects of vaccinations is a protecting parent. That's not entirely illegal...yet.

Originally posted by StarsInDust
reply to post by bozzchem

 

My husband has been getting these flu shots for about 15 years. Twice after receiving the flu shot, I had to rush him into the emergency room with a fever of about 106.

He still insists these shots are safe, and that the medical profession would never lie to him. I say anyone who is giving out free shots, and they are able to make money off of you getting sick, is at least worth stepping back, and looking at...

Anyways you won't see me getting anywhere near these shots, and I am the one that is stuck nursing him back to health when he does get sick from them.

The adjuvants used in the shots are typically aluminum hydroxide or Squalene based. The purpose of an adjuvant is to invoke an immune response so the body will develop antibodies to the species for which the shot was given. Many of us will have a pretty negative reaction biochemically when our system is compromised by these adjuvants. Unfortunately, your husband responded quite negatively to the adjuvants and is quite lucky you were there to help him.

It's not rocket science. Sure, many have no bad response so it's OK. So why do vaccine manufacturers not have to worry about litigation for contraindications? They have their OWN court and can't be sued via normal means should an individual become ill or die.

IF these shots are so safe, why do the companies who make them have their own "legal" system to deal with the aftermath of these poisons?

Originally posted by StarsInDust
reply to post by bozzchem

 

My husband has been getting these flu shots for about 15 years. Twice after receiving the flu shot, I had to rush him into the emergency room with a fever of about 106.

He still insists these shots are safe, and that the medical profession would never lie to him. I say anyone who is giving out free shots, and they are able to make money off of you getting sick, is at least worth stepping back, and looking at...

Anyways you won't see me getting anywhere near these shots, and I am the one that is stuck nursing him back to health when he does get sick from them.

Sadly, too often it's all about the money. Your husband doesn't think the medical profession would ever lie to him? Is he aware that Bayer (Aspirin) Company DELIBERATELY, so as to not lose money, sold AIDS-infected medication overseas (they were not permitted to sell it here)....mostly to children with hemophilia....the B**tards!!
If they are capable of that, imo, they are capable of just about anything! They should all be in prison--or worse!

Originally posted by Habit4ming

Originally posted by StarsInDust
reply to post by bozzchem

 

My husband has been getting these flu shots for about 15 years. Twice after receiving the flu shot, I had to rush him into the emergency room with a fever of about 106.

He still insists these shots are safe, and that the medical profession would never lie to him. I say anyone who is giving out free shots, and they are able to make money off of you getting sick, is at least worth stepping back, and looking at...

Anyways you won't see me getting anywhere near these shots, and I am the one that is stuck nursing him back to health when he does get sick from them.

Sadly, too often it's all about the money. Your husband doesn't think the medical profession would ever lie to him? Is he aware that Bayer (Aspirin) Company DELIBERATELY, so as to not lose money, sold AIDS-infected medication overseas (they were not permitted to sell it here)....mostly to children with hemophilia....the B**tards!!
If they are capable of that, imo, they are capable of just about anything! They should all be in prison--or worse!

I have done extensive work for Bayer. Most of the projects I worked on for Bayer have since been sold to other corporations. I had to take the Hepatitis B vaccine to even be allowed to work for Bayer. At the time, I didn't know any better. Since I was working in a situation that involved plasma........the vaccine was for safety.....Riiiiiiiight. Actually, I believe it was a GSK vaccine for hep B at the time.

Don't worry everyone! These companies care about you!!! Just see below!

Bayer 1


Bayer 2

reply to post by bozzchem

These parents do not have custody of the children. They are DNA donors, nothing more. They have no more right to deny these children medical care than I do.

Over the last few months, Measles has been rife in Swansea, south Wales, with 600 cases reported. It is attributed to parents refusing to inoculate their children some years ago, when there had been a scare, found to be spurious, relating to the inoculation.

There is also another outbreak in Northumberland I think.

Now, 1,000's of parents are queuing to get their children inoculated pdq and centres have had to be specially opened to accommodate them.

www.bbc.co.uk...

Originally posted by FurvusRexCaeli
reply to post by bozzchem

 

These parents do not have custody of the children. They are DNA donors, nothing more. They have no more right to deny these children medical care than I do.

Ah yes, the crux of the problem.

At what point does some dictator wannabe judge determine that a parent has lost their "rights" to their child?

Some POS tyrant in a black robe gets to make that determination?

Back to my original remedy. Lead delivered at high velocity...without prejudice. Biologics are impartial to their target. Crosshairs ensure the right individual is meted the justice they deserve.

Originally posted by StarsInDust
My husband has been getting these flu shots for about 15 years. Twice after receiving the flu shot, I had to rush him into the emergency room with a fever of about 106.

For myself... I used to always get the flu shot. "I would rather be sick for 3 days than a week!" But the reality is that I rarely got flu / cold sick anyways so those 3-4 days of sickness is just not worth it. Once they put the new bird or swine or whatever without really testing it I opted out and have never since gotten the flu vaccine nor any other one.

As for my kids... I had gotten my kids all their required shots up until 2 years ago and I won't do anymore. Besides, I would much rather they get exposed to chicken pox naturally and naturally grow the antibodies their own way like I did then be safe for a few years and get it when they are adults and less able to fight it off.

I hope your hubby decides against them soon! =)

reply to post by bozzchem


Have a friend with a severely autistic 21 yr old daughter. It's been an ordeal for the whole family -- an ordeal that doesn't end.

The girl looks normal, in fact she's a lovely girl. One of the very real fears is that if this girl is institutionalized, she would be a prime target for sexual abuse. She cannot speak.

Tonight during dinner at a restaurant, this person let drop that the girl was completely normal until she was given a battery of innoculations/vaccines all at once.

I didn't ask for specifics (other conversations ongoing at the table), but it sounded as if she was a pre-schooler when this happened.

So this girl was developing normally, was able to speak, then has a battery of vaccines and virtually overnight the girl became an autistic mute.

Countless people have had their lives destroyed because of Big Pharma & the "for profit" medical industry.

It takes a willful blindness to NOT see what's happening.

Originally posted by Hopechest
reply to post by bozzchem

 

And if a parent decides they want to conduct female genital mutilation as part of their religious beliefs on their young daughter should the state allow that also?

After all, don't the parents know better what is for their children or not?

Are you actually going to compare trying to prevent vaccinations being forced on your children by the state... with choosing to perform female genital mutilation on your child?

Stop and think about what you REALLY said:
"And if the state decides it is going to force female genital mutilation on your child, are we going to allow you to stop it?"

Really really think hard about what sort of paint was being used there and what sort of corner it will paint everyone into.