Michael Westhead | The Daily Knight
The following letter of exemption is nothing of the sort. It is a resistance, an indictment, and a categorical rejection of the dictates of the ruling class. It is not an exemption because we claim no exemption. As Saint Augustine of Hippo famously stated: unjust laws are no laws at all. To play into this hand would be the gravest of errors which is sure to perpetuate the gradualist agenda, which, by the smallest acceptable increments, comes to engulf all. Furthermore, to claim exemption to a law is to acknowledge its legitimacy as law. Otherwise, what are you exempt from? Rather, we should demonstrate in the clearest possible terms the unscientific and inhumane basis for the vaccine mandates which violate even their own standards. The letter below aims towards that just end.
Resistance is the only solution- resistance that is stern, valiant, and uncompromising to their face! You have the love of Christ in you and for His sake do not back down. Assert your rights in true Christian dignity and character with humble deference and charity. As Cardinal Raymond Leo Burke once said in regard to the contemporary Christian struggle, “It’s what it means to be a sign of contradiction. We just have to accept that and we have to remain tranquil in proclaiming the truth with charity, but insisting on the truth.” Resist now while it is still relatively easy, and with the truth. Do not wear the mask, do not get vaccinated, do not get exemptions, and do not give ground. “Be instant in season, out of season: reprove, entreat, rebuke in all patience and doctrine.” (2 Tim. 4:2) Make those employers who have so emboldened themselves play their hand and when they say you work for them, correct them. You work for the King of Angels. And He is coming.
The words of the great Father Alban Butler may do us well here:
How noble is it to see integrity and virtue triumphing over interest, passion, racks, and death, and setting the whole world at defiance! To see a great man preferring the least duty of justice, truth, or religion, to the favor or menace of princes; readily quitting estate, friends, country, and life, rather than consent to anything against his conscience; and at the same time meek, humble, and modest in his sufferings; forgiving from his heart and tenderly loving his most unjust and treacherous enemies and persecutors! Passion and revenge often make men furious; and the lust of power, worldly honor, applause, or wealth, may prompt them to brave dangers; but these passions leave them weak and dastardly in other cases, and are themselves the basest slavery, and most grievous crimes and misery. Religion is the only basis on which true magnanimity and courage can stand. It so enlightens the mind as to set a man above all human events, and to preserve him in all changes and trials steady and calm in himself; it secures him against the errors, the injustices, and frowns of the world, is by its powerful motives the strongest spur to all generous actions, and under afflictions and sufferings a source of unalterable peace and overflowing joy, which spring from an assured confidence that God’s will is always most just and holy, and that he will be its protector and rewarder. Does religion exert this powerful influence in us? Does it appear in our hearts, in our actions and conduct? It is not enough to encounter dangers with resolution; we must with equal courage and constancy vanquish pleasure and the softer passions, or we possess not the virtue of true fortitude.1
1. The Lives of the Saints. Fr. Alban Butler 1903. 22 September, Feast of Saint Eustachius and Companions.
Vaccine Mandate Refutation Letter
To Whom It May Concern:
There exists sound moral, ethical, and above all, scientific reasons to refrain from vaccination at this moment, and these reasons should be respected along with the autonomy and free choice of the individual. As outlined in the United Nations Universal Declaration on Bioethics and Human Rights:
"Human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms are to be fully respected... The interests and welfare of the individual should have priority over the sole interest of science or society."1*
What we outline are prudential and reasonable judgements that stand firmly upon a robust scientific and ethical approach, but which are above all matters of human rights essential to the flourishing individual. Thus, the U.N. proclaims: "the importance of cultural diversity and pluralism should be given due regard. However, such considerations are not to be invoked to infringe upon human dignity, human rights and fundamental freedoms, nor upon the principles set out in this Declaration, nor to limit their scope."1
Furthermore, the novel mRNA vaccine, it’s delivery and development, and many additional considerations fall subject to the sound demands that, "The impact of life sciences on future generations, including on their genetic constitution, should be given due regard."1 You may not, for any reason, coerce individuals into accepting novel treatments which transgress the boundary of their person thereby altering their interior environment, nor infringe upon their ability to set the course of their own destiny insofar as such is the manifestation of the sum total of their actions, choices, beliefs, responses, and social interactions.
It would appear that the precepts of this Declaration, unanimously ratified by 191 countries, have either been violated or ignored, usurping the rights of persons to bodily autonomy and the freedom of conscience that dwells in the heart of liberty. Furthermore, the full spectrum of current information demands that priority be given to sagacious examination over the haste and coercion of the popular mindset in our efforts to secure the continued proliferation of humanity.
We find the hyperbaric atmosphere of conformity reminiscent of historical trials too baleful to recount. We find the enumeration of logical fallacies by those in positions of institutional power to be the sad portends that accompany a lack of intellectual discrimination and are the natural result of litigiously-minded sophistry. And, lastly, we identify these harbingers to be in contradistinction to the general welfare of persons and the good of mankind.
It is an incontrovertible fact that SARS and MERS viruses are notoriously difficult to immunize against. Since early 2012, modern medicine, citing historical and contemporary failures, advised the utmost, “Caution in proceeding to application of a SARS-CoV vaccine in humans.”2
Additional researchers have noted this challenge, writing in the Journal of Infectious Diseases this past December: “It has proved difficult to achieve robust vaccine protection against avian, bovine, porcine, canine, and feline coronaviruses, failures sometimes attributed to antibody-dependent enhancement.”3 Thus, they partly attribute the ubiquitous failures of this field to the well-documented case whereby vaccine-generated anti-bodies actually promote disease later in the animal’s life. This is known as antibody dependent enhancement.
Early in the COVID-19 scenario, Dr. Peter Hotez, of Baylor College of Medicine, testified before Congress about the dangers of accelerating coronavirus vaccine development, saying
“(The) unique safety problem of coronavirus vaccines” was discovered 50 years ago while developing the Respiratory Syncytial Virus (RSV) vaccine.” During that experiment with coronavirus vaccination, “80% of RSV vaccinees needed hospitalization.”16 He went on to register that this “‘paradoxical immune enhancement phenomenon’ means vaccinated people may still develop the disease, get sicker, and die.”4
Although the aforementioned researchers note that this might be unlikely to occur in the contemporary situation, another scenario is much less favourable:
“Several different SARS and MERS vaccines have been shown to elicit a post-challenge [vaccine hypersensitivity reactions] in laboratory animals. Ominously, when SARS-CoV-1–immune monkeys were challenged with homologous virus most animals had evidence of lung inflammation”3
Crucially, this study presented the characterization of a vaccine initiated Th2-Type immunopathology that results in chronic autoimmune disease. This immunopathology is particularly concerning because it will not manifest until later viral infections.
Additionally, this development can be fatal, as noted by scientists in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences from April 2020. “In previous studies of SARS [vaccines], aged mice were found to have particularly high risks of life-threatening Th2 immunopathology”.5 While some may object that these mRNA vaccines appear safe, this cannot be known for certain in regard to vaccine hypersensitivity and immunopathology which only develop over longer intervals and by secondary exposures. According to researchers at the Department of Microbiology and Immunology at The University of Texas Medical Branch and Baylor College of Medicine, “the evidence for safety is for a short period of observation. The concern arising from [our research] is for an immunopathologic reaction occurring among vaccinated individuals on exposure to infectious SARS-CoV, the basis for developing a vaccine for SARS.” 2 In short, experimental evidence demonstrated that SARS-CoV vaccines caused life-threatening autoimmune disease in mice upon reencountering the virus and it’s relatives.
This is not without precedence. Autoimmune disease did spike following mass vaccination for H1N1 (also a member of the Orthornavirae), and others, and this is well-documented in the scientific literature. 12,13, 14, 15
Developmental challenges aside, the current candidates include adjuvants and other components of concern, such as polyethylene glycol, which encases the lipid membrane used in mRNA delivery. Polyethylene Glycol has been shown to induce systemic allergic reactions (anaphylaxis) which, in at least one known instance, resulted in cardiac arrest. This can affect even very young people such as,
“a 29-years-old woman who developed several local and systemic type I hypersensitivity reactions including a severe anaphylactic reaction to different pharmacologic and cosmetic products whose excipients included [polyethylene glycol]”.7, 43
Over the last ten years, many scientists have begun objecting to the use of this petroleum derivative in pharmacological - especially injectable - research and product development because it is triggering widespread, but poorly characterized and potentially devastating, immune response. “In contrast to the accepted general assumption that polyethylene glycol (PEG) is non-immunogenic and non-antigenic, animal studies clearly showed that uricase, ovalbumin and some other PEGylated agents can elicit antibody formation against PEG (anti-PEG).”8 The prevalence of polyethylene glycol antibodies (anti-PEG) is growing, dangerous, and it’s incorporation into pharmaceuticals (PEGylation) is negatively impacting drug delivery:
“[T]he accumulating evidence documenting the detrimental effects of PEG on drug delivery make it imperative that scientists in this field break their dependence on PEGylation.”10
“numerous studies over the past decade have dem