Wednesday, 30 September 2009

Vaccination And Abortion evil in the UK

from -

PLEASE NOTE: the website this article is taken from may not be completely pro-life, therefore any such statements I view are seperate to the issue at hand.


The Vaccine and Abortion Racket.

It shocks many parents and even professionals alike when I mention that certain vaccines are cultured on aborted human foetal remains. The immediate response seems to be stunned silence followed by an incredulous ‘what?’ or just sheer disbelief. Even my health visitor exclaimed
‘Oh no, that can’t be right, you must have got that wrong!’
When I pointed out to her that the MMR vaccine she was promoting had aborted human baby in it.
It is a fact that to grow a virus or bacteria one must have an unclean medium on which to propagate the virus. To do this they would either use animal tissue, human blood products, genetically engineered yeast or aborted foetal tissue.

Why Medics Don’t Like Animal Tissue

Foetal tissue is the preferred choice for many vaccinologists as it avoids potential contamination with animal diseases and cross-transfer of animal DNA into humans.
According to Dr. Philip Brunel, Chief Medical Editor of ‘Infectious Diseases in Children’, March 2003, ‘About 40 years ago, cells from human embryos were grown in tissue culture…These strains, in contrast to the malignant cell lines that were existent at the time, retained their normal chromosome number and did not produce tumours. It was soon found, moreover, that they would support the growth of many viruses. Varicella virus and hepatitis A viruses were propagated in these cells, whereas it was difficult if not impossible to grow them in other types of cells. They provided an almost ideal substrate for the production of some of the vaccines we now use. Before the discovery of these cells, some vaccines were grown in avian eggs or cells derived from avian embryos. Other vaccines (eg, polio) were grown in kidney cells obtained by killing monkeys. In contrast to the human diploid cells, each time cells were required, a monkey had to be killed to obtain their kidney to produce cell cultures. This not only put a drain on the monkey population but also carried the risk of harbouring monkey viruses, eg, SV40, which is known to be oncogenic in some species. Also, some of the monkey’s bit handlers and infected them with herpes B virus, which was often fatal.’

Vaccines That Use Foetal Tissue

Currently, the following vaccines in the UK contain aborted foetal tissue: MMR II, MMR (Priorix), MR, Rabies (Imovax), Hepatitis A (Havarix and Avaxim brands). Old style single rubella vaccines contained foetal tissue, as well as some brands of single measles vaccines and the Medeva polio vaccine which was withdrawn for safety reasons.
In the USA, there is also an inject able polio vaccine by Connaught Labs which contains foetal tissue, as does the Varicella (Chickenpox) vaccine.

This practice began in the 1960’s when lung tissue was taken from an aborted female foetus, for use in the rubella vaccine, after she was terminated for mental health reasons by the mother. They also took tissue from a 14 week old male foetus, aborted for the same reason.

Newer cell lines from fetal tissue includes PER.C6 cell line from Merck, which used tissue from an 18 week old baby whose mother aborted it because she didn't know who its father was. They also used tissue from a 21 week baby and this line is being used in flu and TB vaccines as well as experimental vaccines that researchers are still working on, including maleria and rabies vaccines, cancer and HIV vaccines. The tissue used was from both babies eyes.


It states in this PDF document on page 77, that:

'The PER.C6 cell line was made by Ron Beut and Frits Fallaux in 1995 from embryonic retina cultures that were made from fetal tissue' (part of the eye of the unborn baby). I have a copy of this document should anyone want me to email it to them.

And here is the glossy brochure advertising the PER.C6 cell line from aborted baby, including all the new vaccines in the pipeline that they are developing from it:

An Ethical Minefield

Miscarried babies cannot be used in the production of vaccines since most miscarriages are due to chromosomal abnormality and therefore renders the tissue too dangerous to use in case there is any transference of disease into the vaccinated person. Early embryonic cells can also not be used as they are not large enough to take a tissue sample from, therefore all unborn children used in vaccine production must be over the age of 12 weeks gestation and without any genetic abnormality.

Even for those who are pro a woman’s choice, may find this disrespectful use of human remains challenging.
It also raises the question of how we as a society value human life and whether in fact we have the right to place more importance on one baby’s life than another baby? Is it right to inject one baby with MMR to protect him from measles, using the body parts of a dead baby? Should one baby die to save another and what makes the child who receives MMR more important than the child who was used to make the drug? Would mothers even want it if they knew they were injecting their child with human remains?


There are also many religious groups who are opposed to abortion who would find the use of foetal tissue in vaccines, unacceptable. At the Catholic Bishops conference of England and Wales 1994, religious leaders prepared a report on the subject which called vaccine use of aborted foetal tissue ‘a kind of evil which is widespread in biomedical research and which people rightly think they should combat when they can…the practice of medicine is being made parasitic on the evils of abortion and foetal experimentation.’
They add that ‘refusing vaccination is one way of seeking to turn medicine from a course which will increasingly subvert people’s confidence in it.’
According to Ethical and Religious Directives for Catholic Health Care Services (4th edition, 2001), ‘"Catholic health care institutions should not make use of human tissue obtained by direct abortions even for research and therapeutic purposes" (Directive 66).
Other religions such as Mormons, Jehovah’s Witnesses and fundamentalist Christians are all opposed to abortion and see it as anti-scriptural so getting any foetal containing vaccine would be against their philosophy.

rest of the article here:

Monday, 21 September 2009

Did you know that certain pills also contain abortive agents?

Did you know that certain pills also contain abortive agents? (abortifacients) click here for more information. Make sure you know / find out what you put in your body.

(to the left is a recent photograph of our son, Tobias Paul Williams, he is the child pictured above in the womb at 12 weeks)

If you have considered or have had an abortion, or even taken a pro-choice stand in life, please read the following with a humble heart and listen to your conscience. here

Wednesday, 16 September 2009

Women who have just one abortion face 35% increased risk of having a premature baby


Women who have abortions could be posing a risk to future children, according to research published today.

A Canadian medical study found that those who abort a pregnancy could run the risk of giving birth to premature of low-weight children in subsequent pregnancies.

It discovered that women who had undergone more than one abortion had a 72 per cent increased risk for low birth weight and 93 per cent risk of prematurity.

It also found that women who had an abortion in the first or second trimester had a 35 per cent increased risk of giving birth to a low-weight birth baby and a 36 per cent increased risk of having a premature baby,

The study was set up to investigate why babies are born premature and underweight.

The researchers looked at 37 studies around the world carried out between 1965 and 2001 to determine whether previous abortion may be one of the factors.

Read more:

If you have considered or have had an abortion, or even taken a pro-choice stand in life, please read the following with a humble heart and listen to your conscience. here

Sunday, 13 September 2009

What makes a non-religious College of Pediatricians say human life begins at conception?

quote from here:

The American College of Pediatricians concurs with the body of scientific evidence that human life begins at conception—fertilization........

............In the words of the ethicist RenĂ©e Mirkes: “At the completion of the process of fertilization when the male and female pronuclei of the human progenitors’ sperm and ovum are indistinguishable and lose their nuclear envelopes, the human creature emerges as a whole, genetically distinct, individuated zygotic human organism. This individuated human organism actually has the natural capacity for the person-defining activities of reasoning, willing, desiring, and relating to others. The human individual also possesses the actual, natural capacity to develop continuously into the mature (maximally differentiated) organism of a functional adult human being, the organic structural development of which is under the control of a sequence of primordial centers which begin with nuclear DNA or the genome, and eventually develops into the central nervous system, especially the fully developed brain with its cerebral cortex…The new zygote, a member of the species homo sapiens, with its particular (that is, genome-specific) bodily “matter” unified and organized, that is, formed or enlivened by means of its life principle—the soul and all of its person-defining natural powers---is a whole, living, human person. The difference between the individual in her adult stage and in her zygotic stage is not one of personhood but of development.”

Click the link above to read more.


if you have considered or have had an abortion, or even taken a pro-choice stand in life, please read the following with a humble heart and listen to your conscience. here

The SUPER MODEL who went from pro-choice to PRO-LIFE

if you have considered or have had an abortion, or even taken a pro-choice stand in life, please read the following with a humble heart and listen to your conscience. Here

Wednesday, 9 September 2009

Infanticide in Britain where children of similar gestation have known to survive...

It does not take long to find cases on the internet where a premature baby has survived a very early birth. For example, here we find one that hit the national news recently and in an article on this website fairly recently (here). Yet current laws in 'great' Britain state: "(f) Below 22 weeks of gestation, no baby should be resuscitated." from here But what I have recently discovered is that this law has lead to the clear infanticide and murder of innocent children. HERE we see a website set up to fight this legislation. And HERE is another account.

How can anyone leave a child to die when they are clearly alive and not administer help especially when cases of survival can be easily found like those above?

To fight this, the website above has a link to a petition which I would encourage you not only to sign, but to have others sign also. Click here to sign the petition. THIS IS OPEN TO NON UK RESIDENTS BY DOWNLOADING THE FORM ON THE LINK.

Photo above of child at 20 weeks gestation (with permission from

If you think this is bad, or if you have considered or have had an abortion, please read the following with a humble heart and listen to your conscience. Here

Monday, 7 September 2009

What is this a photo of?

PRENATAL 8 WEEKS ( with permission)

What is this a photo of?

PRENATAL 7 WEEKS ( with permission)

"Whats the big deal? Abortion is just a simple five-minute procedure."

from (with permission)

So what? A criminal can hold up a convenience store and gun down everybody in the place in less than five minutes. A drunk driver can kill an entire family in a split second. In five minutes, a woman can be raped and murdered. These are just a few examples of “simple procedures” that only take a short time to accomplish. So what is the significance of how long an abortion takes?

Imagine that a baby girl is about to be aborted, but instead of doing it inside the womb she is taken out alive and placed on a table. Then, her arms are pulled off, her legs are pulled off, her chest is crushed, her skull is collapsed causing her brains to pour out, etc. There will also be a monitor hooked up to her so we can see her heart race as this simple procedure begins.

The only difference between this ex-utero abortion and the other 3,000 in-utero abortions happening today, is that this one is going to be shown live on national television. The question is, would the public’s reaction to what they saw be swayed by the fact it only took five minutes?


For those of you who have had an abortion in the past or are considering one now, PLEASE know that forgiveness can be found by getting right with your Creator. Visit here for more details.