A passage in the Dostoevsky’s Brothers Karamazov explores the problem of evil. In the passage, Ivan, an atheist puts the problem to his brother Alyosha, a monk. It’s a long, harrowing passage where Ivan describes the death of an 8-year-old boy who has hurt the paw of one of his master’s dogs. The master, on discovering who the culprit is, locks the boy in the outhouse overnight. The boy cries out to God who, seemingly, doesn’t listen. In the morning, the boy is stripped naked, made to run and the hounds tear him to pieces in front of his mother.
Even if at end of history cosmic harmony is somehow achieved in spite of the prevalence of such abhorrent evil, Ivan wants no part of it. He says:
Besides, too high a price is asked for harmony; it’s beyond our means to pay so much to enter on it. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket.
My summary hardly does the section justice; if you haven’t read the book, you should do so. I first read it in my late teens when I was an atheist. I found Ivan’s point persuasive.
The passage ends this way:
Tell me yourself, I challenge your answer. Imagine that you are creating a fabric of human destiny with the object of making men happy in the end, giving them peace and rest at last, but that it was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature—that baby beating its breast with its fist, for instance—and to found that edifice on its unavenged tears, would you consent to be the architect on those conditions? Tell me, and tell the truth.”
“No, I wouldn’t consent,” said Alyosha softly.
You can read the whole passage here.
My 19-year-old atheist self found this most convincing. Later on, once I came to grips with the idea that another innocent being was willing to die to set the universe to rights, I changed my mind, although there is still a part of me that resonates emotionally with Ivan’s protest.
What do vaccines have to do with this, you may be wondering. Read on.
Much of what I have to say applies to many vaccines but the vaccines that are on most people’s minds at the moment are the COVID-19 vaccines which are being injected into all and sundry.
The currently available vaccines in North America and Europe rely on either the HEK-293 or PER.C6 cell lines for their production or testing, both of which were grown from babies aborted in 1973 and 1985, respectively.
Both cell lines have been “immortalised” – a Frankensteinian tribute to the resurrection – so HEK-293’s use in vaccine production required only one murdered baby girl. And she was not murdered, we are told, specifically so her organs could be harvested. But we are not told how she was murdered.
Here is an excerpt from the Canadian Journal of Medical Science dated 1952 that describes ideal conditions for harvesting foetal organs (my emphasis):
Human embryos of two and one-half to five months gestation were obtained from the gynaecological department of the Toronto General Hospital. They were placed in a sterile container and promptly transported to the virus laboratory of the adjacent Hospital for Sick Children. No macerated specimens were used and in many of the embryos the heart was still beating at the time of receipt in the virus laboratory.
Yes, 1952. Many of the babies were vivisected. When lab animals are dissected alive, they are anaesthetised; not these babies.
This procedure is not an exception, it is routine, continues today and is mostly ignored by the secular press and, to our eternal shame, by the church and by Christians.
There are many documented examples: this recent one is from the University of Pittsburgh:
The University states the fetal organs do not undergo ischemia—lose their blood supply—until “after the tissue collection procedure”. This means the organs are still receiving blood supply from the fetal heartbeat during the “tissue collection”.
In 2015 in China, scientists on behalf of the vaccine industry aborted 9 babies “intact” so their organs were alive when removed:
WALVAX 2 is taken from the lung tissue of a 3 month gestation female who was ultimately selected from among 9 aborted babies. The scientists noted how they followed specific guidelines to mimic WI-38 and MRC-5 in selecting the aborted babies, ranging from 2-4 months gestation. They further noted how they induced labor using a “water bag” abortion to shorten the delivery time and prevent the death of the fetus to ensure live intact organs which were immediately sent to the labs for cell preparation.
I could go on. The point is, as I said, this process is routinely used by abortion mills and the vaccine industry.
No-one knows how the baby girl who gave us HEK-293 met her end. She most probably would have been removed “intact”. She could have been dissected while still living. What we do know is, for her kidneys to be useful for the vaccine industry, they had to be “fresh”.
For my part, then, I must borrow from Ivan:
To save mankind from a particularly nasty disease, imagine it was essential and inevitable to torture to death only one tiny creature, a baby girl. Would you consent to be the architect on those conditions? Tell me, and tell the truth.
No, I wouldn’t consent.
Too high a price is asked; it’s beyond our means to pay so much to enter on it. And so I hasten to give back my entrance ticket, and if I am an honest man I am bound to give it back as soon as possible. And that I am doing. It’s not the scientists that I don’t accept, only I most respectfully return them the ticket.
