Bioethical Dilemma: Researchers Demand Fetal Tissue Access for COVID-19 Treatment

Status
Not open for further replies.
If anyone were to make a fairy story about witches who get their powers from dead babies, even if they use it for “good” like being able to heal, I think most people would see they are doing wrong. Replace magic with science and witches with doctors, and suddenly…
 
blackforest said:
If a treatment comes out for COVID-19 based on embryos recently killed - or at least tissue recently acquired - for said purpose, would you accept it?
Click to expand...
No, with conditions. I wouldn’t judge someone if it was the only way to save their life though or the life of a loved one. As it is I have no spouse or dependents and my life is not worth increasing demand for aborted embryos and fetuses, in principle. The risk of me spreading covid19 “downstream” to vulnerable people however, may make it sinful not to accept treatment, even if it was illicitly acquired.
 
Last edited:
blackforest said:
If a treatment comes out for COVID-19 based on embryos recently killed - or at least tissue recently acquired - for said purpose, would you accept it?
Click to expand...
NO. But you know it may be that we won’t be invited to get a vaccine but be demanded to do so. And also consider that claiming that phoetus cells are part of the vaccine is still ‘conspiracy theory’ in most countries and the vaccine producers claim this is not true.
So you will never be asked if you want a vaccine with phoetus cells in it. You will be asked or demanded to have a vaccine and be told everythibg is in order with it and it is endagering others not to do it.
So what do you do then? Fight secular powers? Challenge their authority?
 
I gave an example above. Roars of approval at the DNC (2004) for federally funded ESC research.

Just because no one says it, doesn’t mean it’s not there… it probably died away since then because ESCs are less stable and adult stem cells are proving to work much better.
 
Annie said:
I gave an example above. Roars of approval at the DNC (2004) for federally funded ESC research.

Just because no one says it, doesn’t mean it’s not there… it probably died away since then because ESCs are less stable and adult stem cells are proving to work much better
Click to expand...
Ummm - isn’t it more likely that the DNC participants supported the plan itself? You really think they would not have applauded a similar plan to reduce suffering and prolong lives if the base material was sourced from bananas? Both sides in the abortion debate, IMO, are less effective in their arguments because they misunderstand their opponents. May I suggest, with respect, that you experimentally rethink your belief in the attitude of DNC participants and consider that they may overwhelmingly be people who are genuine in their belief that their policies will lead to a happier and healthier world, especially for the vulnerable. And no, don’t immediately say ‘unborn children are vulnerable and should be happy and healthy too’. The DNC people who support abortion access for women genuinely don’t see that. If you want to change their minds you have to accept that a part of reality is that their beliefs are genuine.
 
FiveLinden said:
You really think they would not have applauded a similar plan to reduce suffering and prolong lives if the base material was sourced from bananas?
Click to expand...
No.

I have been looking around to see if I can find a video of the speech so you could hear it.
 
What you are describing would (I believe) be considered heroic virtue: going above and beyond. The others did not sin, but she showed a supernatural level of virtue.
 
She followed her conscience, which is objectively good. The Church does not say one must cannibalize to save one’s life.
 
Last edited:
This is their latest convenient excuse to indulge their Trump Derangement Syndrome - what’s the cure for that???
 
There is no dilemma here. None. Just a lack of knowledge. There are other ways to approach this problem without using fetal tissue. A few may be hoping the average person doesn’t do a google search. A small sample of infected tissue from live patients is all that’s required. Multiple samples. Viruses are not discussed over dinner by most and then usually over a newspaper article or some other reasonably credible source. How was Ebola dealt with or SARS? This isn’t the first time a virus like this has been dealt with. And dramatic examples of unrelated events only cloud what should be a search for knowledge.
 
I can’t remember the term, something like not to the point of undue hardship. In her case her conscience, I presume here, prevented her from it. People can refuse medical treatments also.
 
I don’t follow what all the hype indicates might possibly come from fetal tissue - to the contrary, it seems that much has been found resorting to adult stem cells. But the issue at hand is our currently friendly dose of a china virus; news to me that stem cell research could possibly be an answer; I am only aware of vaccines for viruses.

So maybe I missed a post; but what everyone else seems to be focused on are vaccines - are there some researchers now projecting that “if they could just get enough fetal tissue” they could answer the scourge of this virus?
 
A lack of knowledge is the only problem. Why guess when you can find out? This virus is like others. A google search should do it. A vaccine would be nice but there are a few other ways to treat this.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top