Author Topic: How to do the Religious Exemption right: go straight to the primary argument (Read 303 times)

Mr G · « **on:** September 21, 2021, 10:26:11 AM »

From Ann: How to do the Religious Exemption right: go straight to the primary argument- IT IS POISON. | Barnhardt

Ok, folks. We’re all in agreement that the murdered infant argument is valid and binding, BUT it is secondary. Yes, SECONDARY. Hear me out.

The PRIMARY argument, which everyone should deploy from the beginning is that the injections are POISON, and thus a grave violation of the Fifth Commandment (Thou shalt not do murder) vis-a-vis self-harm. It’s Russian Roulette. The evidence here is irrefutable and grows stronger every day.

But Ann, But Ann! People take chemotherapy, and that is literally a form of “poison”!

To which I reply, “When cancer has a 99.98% natural survival rate, you get RIGHT back to me with this argument.”
See how that works?

Now the FDA itself is hosting a video presentation in which doctors testify that the DeathInjection “kills 2 for every 1 that it saves.”
And that “saves 1” is EXTREMELY dubious. Extremely.

So do you see that the murdered child organ harvesting, even from the 60’s, is wholly secondary to the fact that you CANNOT commit self-harm or even risk self-harm disproportionately? To do so is a species of ѕυιcιdє or suicidal mindset, like playing Russian Roulette.

All citations for Religious Exemption should revolve around DISPROPORTIONATE RISK OF SELF-HARM.

Carissima · « **Reply #1 on:** September 21, 2021, 10:48:31 AM »

..”Now the FDA itself is hosting a video presentation in which doctors testify that the DeathInjection “kills 2 for every 1 that it saves.”

And that “saves 1” is EXTREMELY dubious. Extremely.”

Now I gotta see this one.

Author Topic: How to do the Religious Exemption right: go straight to the primary argument (Read 303 times)

Mr G

How to do the Religious Exemption right: go straight to the primary argument

Carissima

Re: How to do the Religious Exemption right: go straight to the primary argument