Are abortion-derived vaccines obligatory (for salvation)? All opinions welcomed

[vz71]

Not at all, as I have already maintained and showed that vaccines prevent death.

Vaccines do not prevent death.
In some cases, they prevent disease.
In some cases, the disease is life threatening.

 

[vz71]

If you do not indicate you are an organ donor.your family is asked. How does this change the discussion here?

Considering permission was not asked for or given in the original abortion(s), it doesn’t.

 

[MiserereMei]

Vaccines do not prevent death.
In some cases, they prevent disease.
In some cases, the disease is life threatening.

If A=B
And B=C
Then A=C

You negated the conclusion.

Further participation in this conversation is unfruitful.

Have a nice day.

 

[IwishIknew]

One might present the following in response to this very well-thought question:
Taking and profiting from stolen DNA from a murder without consent is a copyright infringement of the most morbid kind for the greatest possible good (preventing disease/death across humanity). In this case, the industry is copying cells and DNA - the most precious, unique gift God grants to an individual human being. Is there any code more valuable than this owned by a single individual? If not - one may draw a conclusion that this is the most heinous act of theft there is to commit. So then we are at a terrible impass: the greatest type of evil, the murder-theft of an innocent has to take place in order for us to reap the greatest good for society (the eradication of diseases).

 

[MiserereMei]

Is there any code more valuable than this owned by a single individual?

Does a person who is not alive to possess anything rightly possess the DNA of their corpse?

Possession implies some form of agency.

Regardless, a person does not creatively make their own DNA, nor do parents intentionally create a specific DNA code, so I do not think it qualifies under most copyright protection laws. Even if they were, the argument could be made that such use of DNA fall under “fair use”.

It is an interesting argument, however.

 

[vz71]

Further participation in this conversation is unfruitful.

You are the only one I have seen advocating removing children from parents that are making a perfectly legal and moral decision.

Given the penchant towards flawed analogies and logic as well as the inclination towards trampling basic human rights, it would seem so.

 

[blackforest]

First, nothing you have stated is new to me.

It’s a salient and valid point. Whether or not you’re open to accepting that is beyond my control.

. I am also willing to propose mandatory parenting classes and monitoring, if removing children from the home is too unsavory to be accepted.

Very loving and capable parents make the decision to vaccinate children fully, selectively, on a delayed schedule, or not at all. The latter occurs especially following a vaccine-adverse event. Under these circumstances, exercising the Precautionary Principle is the best possible parenting.

Fourth, if there are problems with the State’s means of caring for those in its custody, that means reform is needed there regardless of any other debate we are having.

Sure. But in the meantime, the belief that they are better off facing an infinitely higher likelihood of being sexually and physically abused than they are dying of chicken pox indicates a belief that vaccine compliance is more important than children. This sort of utilitarian rigidity is beneath our faith.

quote=“MiserereMei, post:151, topic:575847”]
However, we have established that the principle itself exists that biological remains from a murder victim can be used morally.

(Please Note: This uploaded content is no longer available.) vz71:
[/quote]

We’ve also established - repeatedly - that using the remains of an unborn child without the mother’s consent, as well as turning said remains into a for-profit pharamceutical product, presents an entirely different and unethical situation.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

Your family loses its rights to donate your organs when they murder you

 

[vz71]

Oddly enough, we have seen each in that list advocated in this thread.

 

[IwishIknew]

Yes, and even more so in the world outside this small thread, this small voice buried under the millions of people and millions of $ that desperately desire the eradication of disease and all its terrible sufferings.

Yet watch in time, this little stone may be the very stone that kills Goliath - because it may be the stone of Truth - pure and solid. If it is the Truth - then all that needs to be done is for a David at the right time and the right place to throw it. And the Truth is God. As Micheal asked, “Who is Like Unto God?” to the mighty Lucifer. And with that stone, Lucifer was cast down.

 

[Anrakyr]

If the above is true - is there no realistic human solution to the fall ahead? Can we reverse our direction? Is it inevitable without an act of God? Is this it, is this the end for our age?

Yes because we simply use the culture we already have.

 

[vz71]

Let’s take this one step further - Wouldn’t this person now dead and in God’s hands wish that at the very least his or her body could help humanity is such a wonderful way?

Since we cannot answer for the dead, we cannot assume a yes or a no.
Default being no action, I am afraid that is what must be.
Further, the parents were neither asked or told about this procedure, and permission was not granted.

Without an expressed yes or nay, we must assume we have no rights to the product of these aborted children.

 

[vz71]

But what if this were simply one baby sacrificed for the benefit of 20-30 billion people? Isn’t the evil to good ratio almost nothing?

God dying for us shows every human life is of infinite value. We cannot compare a single human life, an infinite value, to 20 or 30 million of these same infinities.

Math fails for this matter of morality.

 

[IwishIknew]

Agreed - another strong case for infinite values. Adding additional perspective:

Further, because Jesus’ life on earth was of infinite value and He gave us His Body and Blood freely (esp considering that this was done the night before His murder) for the primary purpose to save each of us, by default - each of us have been paid for with an infinite price thereby in any market our value is infinite.

 

[vz71]

Life is better

But life is not better.
Life and freedom are valued less.

However, it is not easy to determine how that will manifest itself.

Hindsight is 2020.
Foresight…not so much.

 

[Pattylt]

Just to set the record straight…
The two fetuses were obtained from medical waste. The parents did not choose to keep the bodies for burial. It does seem true that they were never specifically asked if the bodies could be used for research but permission was assumed from the fact they were to be disposed. This took place when abortions were illegal except in the case of maternal life making for the necessity to abort. I know most Catholics still oppose abortion in those cases. I just wanted to point out that the procedure in these two cases were legal. The cell lines from these two continue to be used for medical research beyond just vaccine development. The researchers had tried using cell lines from placentas, mice kidneys and monkey kidneys. None of these work to develop virus cultures.

Carry on, it’s an interesting discussion!

 

[vz71]

Will society try to kill us? Highly unlikely, it needs people for survival. We are its life.

It seems to me that the aim is to depopulate the earth.
At least of all that do not believe the same as the rest of the world.

 

[adamhovey1988]

There are legitimate reasons not to use vaccines, but the problem is that the argument that people make against them is that they cause autism, which has been debunked, the problem is, not so much that people don’t want to use vaccines or get their kids vaccinated, but that they use an illogical, invalid, and spurious argument against it. I should know, I’m one of those people they’re afraid their kids are going to become.

 

[vz71]

If people argued the morality, the various companies making the vaccines may cease, and make the moral argument a moot point.

 

[commenter]

commenter:

In NY State, we are not talking about boycotting safe vaccines that prevent Polio, but rather, uncertain vaccines that might reduce spread of Genital Warts.

It’s a bit more than that. HPV is also a primary cause of cervical cancer.

12 SCIENCE-backed reasons to say “NO” to the Gardasil vaccine – NaturalNews.com

Well-meaning parents around the world have been bringing their children to get Gardasil, the HPV vaccine, for more than a decade now. The vaccine claims to help prevent cervical cancer and other conditions that are related to the human papilloma virus, or HPV. Although it was initially targeted...

www.naturalnews.com

Take this, like all health websites, with caution, but at least consider it.
Remember, people in NY State aren’t trying to ban the vaccine, they object to the State using the power of the educational establishment to impose its will.

The State repealed the religious exemption, both for religious parents and religious schools. (They are trying to repeal all religious exemptions in health care).

The issue is not whether the shot is good, but whether the mandate is good. Supporters of the mandate are putting out on social media the pictures of Iron Lungs, etc, to equate the opponents of this particular vaccine mandate with crazy cult types who want a return to Smallpox.