12-15-2009, 05:04 PM
(12-15-2009, 04:01 PM)Bring4th_Monica Wrote: I do understand your point but I perceive an implication (perhaps unintended) that anyone who pursues knowledge of why certain substances or practices are unhealthy/toxic, is somehow playing the victim. I don't think that just because someone digs a bit and then shares his/her findings with others, they are necessarily playing the victim (though they might be). It could be an act of awareness and service.
Hi Monica,
No, I do not think that pursuing knowledge and sharing it with others is playing the victim. But it is can be a complicated situation. The difference is all about how the knowledge is presented and what the recipients of the teach/learning later view as the reason for their (or others) eventual disease(s).
Educating people about the possible negative side effects of taking a vaccine seems noble to me (even though I personally think that the vaccines are immaterial to what eventually happens to an individual), but it certainly must be done within the constraints of other people's free will. Claiming that the vaccines are intended to poison people and that they are created by self-serving individuals, working at corrupt corporations though, seems outright irresponsible to me, because the assertions cannot be proven, and seem intended to incite negative emotions like fear and helplessness. (Note that I am not saying that you do this, but there are certainly posts on this thread that DO).
On the one hand I agree with you that a vaccine can exploit distortions that exist in someone's mind/body/spirit, allowing it to manifest sometimes serious conditions (typically other than the virus the vaccine was intended to treat) and that these offer them opportunities to learn life lessons. I also see how not taking a vaccine could cause them to manifest the virus that the vaccine was intended to prevent, thus offering them an opportunity to learn a life lesson. In either case, if a disease results, then the issue is: "What is the lesson?" Not: "Who did this to me?". If an individual gets the disease and begins asking the second question, due to what they were told by well intentioned people, then ultimately those that informed them have done them a disservice not a service.
So, to me it is the individual that gets sick (and their friends and family) that will be acting as victims, not the well intentioned soul that seeks and disseminates the knowledge. If people begin thinking like victims because of the information that was provided though, then ultimately the education was a disservice and may have infringed upon their free will.
As such, I take the position that our role as servants in this discussion is to (without attachment to a given result), educate people about the pros and cons of both actions (being vaccinated or not) and advise them to make their own decisions. It seems to me that doing this encourages people to make informed decisions for which they have already taken responsibility.
Does that clarify my position?
3D Sunset