• CFN has a new look and a new theme

    "I bore you on eagle's wings, and brought you to Myself" (Exodus 19:4)

    More new themes will be coming in the future!

  • Desire to be a vessel of honor unto the Lord Jesus Christ?

    Join For His Glory for a discussion on how

    https://christianforums.net/threads/a-vessel-of-honor.110278/

  • CFN welcomes new contributing members!

    Please welcome Roberto and Julia to our family

    Blessings in Christ, and hope you stay awhile!

  • Have questions about the Christian faith?

    Come ask us what's on your mind in Questions and Answers

    https://christianforums.net/forums/questions-and-answers/

  • Read the Gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ?

    Read through this brief blog, and receive eternal salvation as the free gift of God

    /blog/the-gospel

  • Taking the time to pray? Christ is the answer in times of need

    https://christianforums.net/threads/psalm-70-1-save-me-o-god-lord-help-me-now.108509/

  • Focus on the Family

    Strengthening families through biblical principles.

    Focus on the Family addresses the use of biblical principles in parenting and marriage to strengthen the family.

Covid Vaccine, a Gospel imperative

Sun Sentinel is really giving us some good hard data here :chin . Newest Group ? 5 or 6 people ? Mostly ? 51% have no underlying conditions ?

Did you click the link to read the article which has links embedded in it?
 
That's quite false and deserves more than just a statement. Vaccines are a form of preventative medicine to lower risks or inoculate against diseases.
No, not at all. A single paper written by former Dr Andrew Wakefield tried to tie the specific MMR (Measels, Mumps, and Rubella) vaccine to irritable bowel and Autism. The paper was extremely controversial when it was discovered that the sample size was extremely small and contained no true control group. Not to mention many of the subjects had already show signs of autism before vaccination. All of this in a ploy for Mr. Wakefield to sell his own vaccine.
do you have evidence that this is happening, or hear say?
Google itself isn't a source. You can put anything on a website and pay Google to list it.
here is the catch 22. All medicine has risks and side effects and has a range of effectiveness based on individuals biology. The people are equally as likely to make sure the vaccine is safe to keep receiving government funding.

ok, I hope that works out for you.
[/QUOTE]
Sit down and have a glass of vaccine.
Then tell me how you feel.
I bet you'll feel you've been poisoned.

Enough said.
 
Rollo Tamasi said:
Sit down and have a glass of vaccine.
Then tell me how you feel.
I bet you'll feel you've poisoned.

Enough said.
I recieved the vaccine and am up to date on all the recommended ones. I feel fine generally.
 
Links links links
Everyone has links
No one has straight talk anymore

That is because this is the 21st century and is how media is now done. The links are also to sources. Which is the mark of a good article when it includes its sources.
 
[ACMP=warning]
Threads like this one can bring the worst out in a person opposing that of another's self right choice in whether to get vaccinated or not. When one starts slandering another for the choice they make, especially saying they are not a Christian as it's their duty to get vaccinated, then this only causes division.

Get the shot, don't get the shot as it's ones own choice and these derogatory remarks made towards other members will stop here and anymore will be deleted and if kept up you will be removed from the thread.
[/ACMP]
 
When it comes to medical data and information, links are very useful.
JLB put on a very important link a few days ago and I commented how good it was and thanked him for putting it up for all to read.
But no one else on this forum commented on it, instead just cited their own beliefs.
So what good are links?
 
Did you click the link to read the article which has links embedded in it?
Yes I did and I did click and read a link also . The only real numbers in the whole sentence was the age group . I mean come on , " mainly " , "mostly" ?
That is because this is the 21st century and is how media is now done. The links are also to sources. Which is the mark of a good article when it includes its sources.
Maybe , I have seen a sources that were an opinion from a blog .
 
JLB put on a very important link a few days ago and I commented how good it was and thanked him for putting it up for all to read.
But no one else on this forum commented on it, instead just cited their own beliefs.
So what good are links?
It's good for those that care to look.
 
Yes I did and I did click and read a link also . The only real numbers in the whole sentence was the age group . I mean come on , " mainly " , "mostly" ?

Maybe , I have seen a sources that were an opinion from a blog .

Not sure how to help you then. They cite they got the info from the hospitals in the state, maybe they didn't give them the info you're looking for?
 
There are doctors who strongly advise against the vaccine, and there are doctors who strongly promote it.
This, too, is very misleading. There are many many more doctors who promote it than advise against it.
 
Can you provide me the evidence that the Covid vaccine will not harm me and my family?


Where do your "facts" come from?
Of course I cannot guarantee what you are asking.

But what you are asking is based on a skewed framing of the problem - you focus on the harm that the vaccine might cause while remaining entirely silent on the other side of the story - the harm that covid can cause.

I will not tire of repeating the inconvenient truth: based on what is presently known, the overwhelming majority of the relevant trained experts recommend the vaccine.
 
No thanks.

If I decide to study the history of vaccines, I will do my own research.
You are free to do so of course. Just as I am free to express my opinion that this a dangerous and irresponsible way to approach this matter.
 
Perhaps it’s more about respecting the others opinions than it is about entitlement.
I politely suggest that it does not make sense for anyone to "respect" an opinion that is demonstrably incorrect and, if acted upon, threatens the welfare of society.

Are you you asking to say its "OK" if you believe something, and actively encourage others to do so, that is both demonstrably incorrect and poses a material threat to the welfare of others?
 
Back
Top