Comment on Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine by Sean Pitman.
No choice — Forbids SDA members from using the name Seventh-day Adventist in a religious conscience document — unless you call that a choice — “we want you as members, but do not mention that you are our member.”
This isn’t true. Those writing letters of personal conscientious objection as their reason for refusing to get vaccinated are free to mention that they are Seventh-day Adventists, or not. It’s just that the SDA Church, as an organization, while not inherently opposed to vaccinates, recognizes that conscience is always an individual matter, not a corporate matter.
Detail omitted: Attorney Zirkle was presenting for over 25,000 concerned SDA professionals who wanted to “reason together” about the experimental vaccine (for which the CDC had to change the definition of “vaccine.”). 25,000+ shut down.
Zirkle was representing a minority of the members of the SDA Church. The overwhelming majority of SDA Church members have no problem with vaccines – not even the vaccines against COVID-19. And, Zirkle’s motion was, in fact, seconded, and brought to a vote. It’s just that his motion was definitively voted down.
Detail omitted: Electronic voting was not working correctly. Seconds to Attorney Zirkle’s motion did not register with the moderators’ table. Also, comments during GC2022 where delegates asked if electronic voting, especially remote electronic voting, was working since the number of votes was much lower than the number of delegates. Request to investigate electronic voting ignored.
There were serious problems with the electronic voting system at the 2015 GC Session, so much so that it had to be abandoned in favor of voting cards. However, while there were some minor glitches, this wasn’t a significant problem for the 2022 GC Session (Link).
“Zirkle’s motion was made amid internet connection issues. At this GC Session, voting uses the ElectionBuddy system. Delegates are given unique, secure login credentials but then vote using their own electronic devices. For delegates attending in person, a specific Wi-Fi network is supposed to provide the required internet access on the floor. During the vaccination discussion, delegates rose to comment about internet connection issues and to question methods of voting. GC leadership instructed delegates who were present on the floor to log online with only one device that would be used to vote and receive information. Leadership representatives also requested delegates who could use cellular data to disconnect from the Wi-Fi to clear up the connection.” (Link)
In short, Zirkle’s motion did, in fact, receive “seconds” via electronic motions. And, because his motion was clearly seconded, it was brought to a deciding vote – which went strongly against his motion. Now, just because the vote was “much lower than the number of delegates” doesn’t mean that it wasn’t a valid vote as delegates often abstain from voting on various issues. There were 203 (11.4%) who voted in favor of the motion, while 1,579 (88.6%) voted against. The total number of votes cast here were 1782 – out of 2,671 voting delegates at the 2022 Session. As another example of this, consider that a total of A total of 1,715 votes were received regarding the motion for Elder Ted Wilson to be reelected to a third term as president of the General Conference (GC). That’s very close to the total who voted on Zirkle’s motion regarding the Vaccine Statements.
Details omitted: Concerns about the deceptions surrounding the experimental mRNA — DailyClout.io website publishes reports about Pfizer’s tests of mRNA hidden from the public including on pregnant women (study Pfizer promised still not released). Pfizer wanted test results hidden for 75 years — judge said “no” and required the test results in 8 months. DailyClout’s volunteers of 2,500 medical professionals and 200 lawyers analyzed the documents the judge ordered released. Very disturbing.
Come on now. DailyClout is the website of long-time conspiracy theorist Naomi Wolf (Link). She just isn’t a remotely credible source of information.
Details omitted: Concerns about adverse reactions and sudden death ignored. GC does not want to look.
The claims about “sudden deaths” due to mRNA vaccines, especially among athletes, aren’t valid. Again, you’re getting these false claims from conspiracy theorists who aren’t basing their sensational claims on valid scientific/medical investigations:
“To date, I am not aware of a single COVID vaccine-related cardiac complication in the professional sports,” said Matthew Martinez, a sports cardiologist who works with the National Football League, National Basketball Association, National Hockey League and Major League Soccer and who is the director of sports cardiology at Morristown Medical Center in New Jersey. (Link)
“There is no uptick in sudden cardiac arrest or death in athletes due to COVID-19 or from COVID vaccinations. This is total misinformation,” Dr. Jonathan Drezner told us in an emailed statement. Drezner is the director of the UW Medicine Center for Sports Cardiology at the University of Washington, editor in chief of the British Journal of Sports Medicine, and a team physician for the Seattle Seahawks, the OL Reign soccer team and the University of Washington Huskies.
More than 2,000 children and adolescents in the U.S. die from sudden cardiac arrest every year, according to the Children’s Hospital of Philadelphia, and two-thirds of the deaths “occur during exercise or activity.” Among young athletes, sudden cardiac arrest is the leading cause of death, according to CHOP. (Link)
This doesn’t mean that the mRNA vaccines are without all risk. They do have known risks. And, the GC is well aware that vaccines are not without risks. However, the risks associated with COVID-19 infections were far far greater than the risks associated with the mRNA vaccines against COVID-19 – with the benefits of vaccination far outweighing the risks. This was true for every age category and for every type of risk.
I know that people are becoming settled into their truth. Time of the church’s shaking is happening. Church as a family cannot even “let us reason together” as evidenced by GC2022 heavy-handed tactics in illegitimately and secretly producing the Vaccine Statement and attitude towards questions. So we are left with the fact that GC/ADCOM/Dr. Hart’s Vaccine Statement is non-negotiable since the tithe-employed patriarchs of the family have stopped their ears towards a large segment of the non-tithe employed church family.
The 2015 Vaccine Statement and the 2021 Reaffirmation Statement were not produced in secret nor were they “illegitimate”. And, if the GC, in Session, had wanted to revise or remove these statements it could have done so during the 2022 Session. The fact that the GC voted down the motion to add these Vaccine Statements to the agenda means that the GC, in Session, effectively endorsed these Vaccine Statements. That’s the reality of the situation for the SDA Church as an organization. It’s not that the GC leadership has stopped their ears to your concerns. This was the vote of the GC delegates themselves, not the church leadership. It simply indicates that the GC delegates, representing a broad spectrum of church members, doesn’t agree with you…
Enjoy your “truth” settlement. I am settled elsewhere.
Like me, I’m sure that you’re just trying to help people. There are a lot of just-so conspiracy theories flying around, and it can be hard to sort through them all, especially for someone without a medical background. Just ask yourself if this or that claim is subject to testing with the potential of falsification. If not, it really isn’t a useful “truth”.
Sean Pitman Also Commented
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
I fail to see where you have convincingly supported your claim that the GC leadership contributed to the harm of anyone’s personal religious liberties? – given that the GC leadership does not and could not override personal religious liberties in this country, nor substantively change the outcome of those who lost their jobs over various vaccine mandates. That’s just not how it works here in this country. Religious liberties are personally derived. Again, they simply are not based on a corporate or church position, but rely solely upon individual convictions – regardless of what the church may or may not say or do.
Yet, you say, “Who cares if it is written into law”? You should care. Everyone should care. It’s a very important law in this country. The idea that the organized church could have changed vaccine mandates simply isn’t true – particularly given the nature of certain types of jobs dealing with the most vulnerable in society (such as health care workers for example).
Beyond this, the GC Leadership did, in fact, write in support of personal religious convictions on this topic – and there are GC lawyers who have and continue to write personal letters in support of personal religious convictions (even if these personal convictions are at odds with the position of the church on a given topic). Just because the GC leadership also supports the advances of modern medicine doesn’t mean that the GC leadership cannot support individual convictions at the same time. Both are possible. This is not an inconsistency.
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
Thank you for this update. I really appreciate it and the courage it took to post this…
Review of “The Naked Emperor” by Pastor Conrad Vine
Again, it wasn’t Ted Wilson nor the members of ADCOM who voted down Zirkle’s motion – nor did they force or unduly coerce the vote of the delegates in Session. Also, it isn’t true that the vaccine issue hadn’t been adequately discussed for the benefit of the delegates – or that the delegates didn’t have already enough information to make an informed decision. I’d say that they were much more informed on this topic than Pastor Vine gives them credit for.
Now, I’ve very sorry you feel like you do and I can understand your honest confusion since what you’re hearing from anti-vax conspiracy theorists is truly scary stuff. However, the voices that you’re referencing truly are misleading you – telling you things that simply aren’t true. Your latest example of this, from Dr. James L. Marcum, is no better than Dr. Peter McCullough. He makes many claims that are simply false or misleading. Now, Dr. Marcum certainly comes across as very caring and kind, and I’m sure that he is. The only problem here is that he’s wrong – flat out wrong in what he’s telling you. And, this has resulted, no doubt, in a great many long-term injuries and deaths that could have been avoided. Kindness and sincerity isn’t enough here. True kindness will take the time to carefully investigate the actual weight of currently available scientific evidence and present it in an honest even-handed manner. That’s not what Drs. McCullough and Marcum have been doing – not at all.
In short, when your health and life are on the line, would you rather have a doctor with a wonderful bedside manner who isn’t giving you the best available information, or a doctor who may not be as smooth or delicate with his/her words, but who is actually giving you the best available information?
You see, I’m not trying to be mean or harsh here. I’m just truly trying to save lives and prevent long-term injuries. That’s what I’m trying to do. And, I’m sure you’re trying to do the same thing, and I appreciate that. It’s just that you don’t have good scientific evidence to back up your position…
Recent Comments by Sean Pitman
After the Flood
Thank you Ariel. Hope you are doing well these days. Miss seeing you down at Loma Linda. Hope you had a Great Thanksgiving!
Thank you Colin. Just trying to save lives any way I can. Not everything that the government does or leaders do is “evil” BTW…
Only someone who knows the future can make such decisions without being a monster…
Pacific Union College Encouraging Homosexual Marriage?
Where did I “gloss over it”?
Dr. John Campbell: mRNA Vaccines Cause Lethal Encephalitis?
Dr. Roger Seheult does make some money from his YouTube Videos, but not nearly what Campbell makes. The fact of the matter is, Campbell started making much more money once he switched from presenting mainstream medical science to promoting conspiracy theories. Promoting conspiracy theories is far more profitable it seems… unfortunately.
As far as your posts, I haven’t blocked any of them thus far. I do find it interesting, however, that you don’t address any of the counterarguments forwarded by Dr. Seheult. Why do you choose to believe a retired nurse, like Campbell, over a practicing pulmonologist who was fighting on the front lines during the height of COVID-19, like Seheult?