Mandatory vaccinations vs moral objection

[ShrodingersCat]

And yet, babies are being harvested. If you had read the thread we stressed this earlier

I did read the thread. China harvests organs from people it has executed for being part of a religion the don’t like and sells the organs. In some cases, there are reports of organs being harvested prior to death. China is hardly a bastion of medical ethics.

I tried to answer your question as best I could. There are millions of babies aborted every year. No one is being forced to have an abortion to create a vaccine (at least not in the West - in China they only recently stopped the one child policy, so who knows what they are still doing).

I see absolutely no reason for the church to revise its moral stance given the current state of things. I also have no problem with people being excluded from religious exemptions if their religion does not ban vaccines, but I think it should be consistently applied across all religions.

 

[ShrodingersCat]

Catholics Schools don’t represent the Church as a whole.

Exactly.

 

[Thorolfr]

I am implying that vaccines come with risk and mandating them is placing faith in a product that is causing harm. How many children are we permitting to be harmed by the vaccines meant to help by removing the choice?

I might not agree, but do I understand why someone might have ethical reservations about using vaccines made with cells from aborted fetuses. But I still don’t understand what harm these vaccines are supposedly doing to children.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

Smoking is a public health issue. We have not banned it.

Where on earth do you live? You mean you can smoke in restaurants, in your office, on the subway or in airplanes? Really? And if you do smoke, you pay prohibitively high taxes.

More children die in swimming pools and from dog bites than vaccine preventable disease and we are filling them in or euthanizing the dogs.

It must be late, that’s all I can think. People die in all sorts of ways. But you know what? We try to minimize deaths. It’s illegal not to wear a seatbelt. It’s illegal to use certain drugs. It’s the law (at least where I live…) that you have to get your dog vaccinated against rabies. These are all reasonable precautions.

vaccines come with risk and mandating them is placing faith in a product that is causing harm. How many children are we permitting to be harmed by the vaccines meant to help by removing the choice?

Life is a risk. Crossing the street is a risk. Driving a car is a risk. Every time you get in your car you are “placing faith in a product that is causing harm”–if not you today, than someone in your city. Same with vaccines. It’s like saying “I have a right NOT to use a seat belt.” Um, no, you don’t. At the very least, you will drive up everyone’s health insurance premiums to care for your paralysis when you crash. I’m sure you could dig up a case or two where WEARING a seat belt caused a death. Does that mean we shouldn’t wear seat belts?

Again, the cell lines are finite. Either the manufacturers stop producing, find an alternative, or harvest more babies.

So you’re telling me you’re worried about some “possible” moral dilemma in the future? Really? If this is the case, how do you sleep at night? There are infinite “possible” moral dilemmas in the future. Me? I worry about today.

So it appears that the Vatican has not issued a new statement

I realize you are thinking about converting to Catholicism. But it looks like you have a common pre-conception that is false: the Church, even when it speaks authoritatively, never is 100% absolutely, positively authoritative. There are all sorts of exceptions, allowances, etc. To take a simple example, “Do not kill.” Except…in a just war, in self defense, etc. etc. Abortion is a mortal sin. Except…if you really, truly, believe in your conscience that it’s not. And so on. If you’re seeking 100% authority, the Catholic Church is not the place for you. Take almost any recent document: say, the document you keep citing about vaccines. Is the Church ever going to say “Using such-and-such vaccine is a mortal sin…”? No. Not going to happen. The Church loves ambiguity, and for a good reason. But that’s another issue.

 

[thistle]

There are no credible studies to show vaccinating is a higher risk than the benefit. They are simply spread by scaremongers who are doing a grave injustice to their children and those of others.

The benefits of vaccinating against childhood diseases far outweigh the risks.

https://www.who.int/features/qa/84/en/

 

[ewohdrol]

Smoking is a public health issue. We have not banned it. More children die in swimming pools and from dog bites than vaccine preventable disease and we are filling them in or euthanizing the dogs. I in no way have argued for the right to spread the disease. Let’s not go down that rabbit hole as those vaccinated against pertussis can be asymptomatic carriers.

Well of course. But better to be a asymptomatic vaccinated carrier than an unvaccinated host surely? Still safer to immunise considering the disease is incredibly hard to erradicate naturally.

Many more children have died from preventable disease over drownings. History would suggest nearly a quarter of the european population was wiped out at one point thanks to numerous diseases that are now preventable. In fact immunisations and penicillin have certainly wiped out many pathogens that were once feared.

Pandemics and epidemics have sprung up unexpectedly through populations over the course of history. We are blessed to have no had a major cases worldside for quite some time (assuming we are not including AIDS) Unfortunately this has made us complacent and completely unable to realise the reality of some very dangerous pathogens.

We do legislate over dangerous environmental factors that put society at risk. Smoking is banned in many areas (restaurants, school and hospital zones etc.), pools have a certain number of guards. The same should be applied to immunity within any institution with large bodies of individuals.

 

[Lemuel]

The fortunate thing is that vaccinations are still a choice and much to the dismay of others, I choose not to participate.

As it should be …

 

[ewohdrol]

Which is fine lemuel. I think it is perfectly acceptable to have that choice.

It does become problematic however when people want that freedom to not vaccinate and then get upset that a school has chosen a policy they think is safest.

The funny thing about choice is if you expect it - you also have to also accept alternative choices despite personal loss.

But I know you homeschool so this clearly doesn’t apply to you.

 

[Lemuel]

It does become problematic however when people want that freedom to not vaccinate and then get upset that a school has chosen a policy they think is safest.

Absolutely. You gotta choose.

 

[pnewton]

Smoking is a public health issue. We have not banned it. More children die in swimming pools and from dog bites than vaccine preventable disease and we are filling them in or euthanizing the dogs

But we have banned cocaine and heroin. Also, while smoking is not banned, one is not allowed to be in places where others are affected by smoking, like airplanes and restaurants. Also, we need to stop considering the danger of a disease that is controlled by immunizations today as if that program did not work. It makes no sense.

Let’s say I lived near a dangerous intersection where a dozen of people died every year. The city puts up a stop sign and there are no more deaths. So where is the logic in saying that I could now ignore that stop sign because no one is dying there anymore?

FYI - I actually have addressed the moral issue twice.

I do not accept that they create mandates in their own institutions.

If you are speaking of schools, why not? Do they not have the moral responsibility to keep all the children under them as safe as possible? You may not agree, but they rely on both Catholic moral teaching and current medical opinion to make these policies. What other source that medical profession and theologians could they use? I understand you have a moral dilemma, and it is a problem that theologians have considered a lot. I get it. But don’t you get that schools have to make policies in the best interest of all the children, like banning smoking and knives?

 

[F_Marturana]

The HPV vaccine isn’t mandatory.

Neither is influenza because many kids are allergic to eggs, and cannot receive the vaccine.

But other than that, unless there’s a medical issue precluding vaccination, children should be vaccinated.

 

[Lemuel]

children should be vaccinated.

If that’s what the parents choose.

 

[blackforest]

I will not bother to respond to any replies.

That worked out well, didn’t it?

Their letter is from 2005. That is nearly 15 years.

They supposedly crafted something two years ago about vaccines but haven’t yet released it. Remember that Catholics rely on Vatican documents that are centuries old so, unless something as changed since 2005, that’s your guideline.

You can’t claim a Catholic religious exemption, as vaccines are not banned by Catholicism.

A 2001 court decision in Wyoming (whose name escapes me) actually ruled that religious freedom applies to individual as well as collective beliefs. This is important to Catholicism, as a lot of matters are left to prudential judgment, prayer, and conscience. Remember that there is no Vatican mandate that Catholics follow the U.S./ACIP vaccine schedule.

No. It’s a public health issue. Say you had ebola…do you think you would have a “right” to wander around a city and spread the disease?

Hep B is not ebola. Some Catholic schools have determined that my children, not yet vaccinated for Hep B, will (apparently, somehow), wander around the school and spread Hep B.

By the way, ebola can’t be spread by just “wander[ing] around a city.” I would hope that as somebody who’s had a career related to infectious disease, you’d be aware of this.

As a related aside, the link posted by @Almostconvert indicates that the ebola vaccine was unfortunately developed from fetal tissue research. I realize you’re not pro-life, but this puts the majority of Catholics who are in a horrible ethical position.

But I still don’t understand what harm these vaccines are supposedly doing to children.

The federal government has acknowledged that rare but serious reactions occur.

 

[TheLittleLady]

In my job, I work with many undocumented immigrants. Assisting with access to everything from paperwork for legal processes to school to medical care is part of every day in my life. I’ve yet to meet a family who is not bowled over happy to get medical care for their kids, and if there were a clinic that offered titer testing for vaccines, in my own personal experience, these families would be as happy for this as they have been for help finding safe schools. The families I work with have braved so much to protect their kids, a needle stick is nothing compared to simply getting here or the threats from some people in the community.

This thread has encouraged me to talk the medical clinic about vaccines in our community.

When people immigrate, they often go to parts of the US where they have extended family or other people from the same communities. That can be the reason why my experience with immigrants differs than yours is similar to moving to rural South Dakota vs downtown Atlanta vs suburban Ohio.

 

[TheLittleLady]

I would highly, highly suggest you contact the National Catholic Bioethics Center. Aside from reading the articles, you may also contact them for a consultation, free of charge:

https://www.ncbcenter.org/resources/information-topic/vaccines/

Your Diocese will have a Bioethics expert on staff, call the Diocese office and ask for a phone call or meeting with this expert. If you don’t have the contact info for your Diocese, locate it here:

http://www.catholic-hierarchy.org/country/

In the end, Catholic schools may be under the Diocese, they may be independent.

If it is a Parish/Diocesean school, contact the Office of Catholic Education at your Diocese to talk about the vaccinaiton policy. As the official stand of the Church is that vaccines, even those derived from the cell lines that are problematic, are morally permissible at this time, you may find that you cannot get an exemption.

At that point, you can work to change policy at the Diocese level (do this in a calm manner, present peer reviewed evidence) and you can look for independent Catholic schools, private secular schools, public schools, home school, Catholic children are not required to attend Catholic school.

The kids who do not go to Catholic School will have classes through the parish for all of their schooling years. They will get to know their peers, form friendships and their faith in the community of believers.

Come home. Return to the beauty of the fullness of Faith. Trust God to work out the temporal things like vaccines.

 

[TheLittleLady]

More children die in swimming pools and from dog bites than vaccine preventable disease and we are filling them in or euthanizing the dogs.

There are regulations in many communities requiring fences around swimming pools, etc.

Dog bites? If your child is bitten by a dog, in the US, the ER is required to notify animal control. You must provide vet records of a current vaccine schedule, (farmers who give their own vaccines don’t have these records), if not there is a very expensive process you must pay out of pocket where the dog is held in isolation and tested. If you cannot afford that process, your dog is euthanized, it’s head is cut off and sent to a lab to be tested for rabies.

Even if your dog was vaxed and has no evidence of disease, you will most likely be sued by the victim. Your homeowner’s insurance can increase in premiums or even be cancelled.

No one is skipping around saying “so what, your kid was mauled by a dog”.

I do not accept that they create mandates in their own institutions.

See above, not every Catholic school is an institution of the Vatican. They are at most under the auspices of the Diocese. The Diocese makes the policy.

Talk to your Diocese about their policy. You may find that there is an exclusion but the admin staff at your local parish school is not aware of it. You may find that a few years ago a devastating outbreak of a preventable disease ran rampant through that school.

Comminicate, talk to them.

Lastly, when it comes to remote cooperation with abortion, if one so desired they could follow breadcrumbs to abortion support through the supply chain of every good or service produced/used in our world today and find abortion somewhere along that trail.

What we are called to do is to work to change hearts and minds.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

I will not bother to respond to any replies.

What can I say? I got sucked in.

Some Catholic schools have determined that my children, not yet vaccinated for Hep B, will (apparently, somehow), wander around the school and spread Hep B.

You’re right, it can’t be spread by “wondering around.” It can, however, be spread by blood, if, say your kid gets cut and comes into contact with another kid who has a cut. Is this likely in elementary school? How much do you want to bet? The health of your children?

By the way, ebola can’t be spread by just “wander[ing] around a city.”

Again, it’s not the wandering. Can it be spread by sneezing, for example? Why yes, it can. What if I blow my nose and get some snot on my hand and contaminate a handrail on a stairway? Oops…

Trust God to work out the temporal things like vaccines.

Trust God, but keep your ammunition dry… We’re not Christian Scientists. We believe in science. God gave us minds–we need to rely on them.

This is from a PBS article discussing the need for fetal tissue in vaccine research: “Fetal tissue was “absolutely critical” to the development of a potential Ebola vaccine that has shown promise, said Dr. Carrie Wolinetz, an associate director at NIH.”

I don’t know where Dr. Wolinetz gets her information. Merck’s ebola vaccine does NOT use human fetal tissue; vaccines from Johnson & Johnson and Glaxo Smith-Kline DO. The Merck vaccine was developed in Canada (Winnipeg), by the way. rVSV-ZEBOV vaccine - Wikipedia It’s the Merck vaccine that’s being currently used in the Congo.

 

[GiftofMercy]

Dog bites? If your child is bitten by a dog, in the US, the ER is required to notify animal control. You must provide vet records of a current vaccine schedule, (farmers who give their own vaccines don’t have these records), if not there is a very expensive process you must pay out of pocket where the dog is held in isolation and tested. If you cannot afford that process, your dog is euthanized, it’s head is cut off and sent to a lab to be tested for rabies.

The only way to test for rabies is from brain tissue. A dog will have to be killed and tested to determine if rabies is present if there are any doubts the vaccines have not been administered appropriately. Rabies cannot be administered at home, a vet must give this vaccine.

 

[Erikaspirit16]

OK, I’ve gone back and actually read the Vatican letter from 2005 (my boy Ratzinger!) as well as an opinion from the National Catholic Bioethics Center. If you’re looking for answers, it seems to me it’s pretty clear:

2005 Vatican statement (towards the end): " As regards the diseases against which there are no alternative vaccines which are available and ethically acceptable, it is right to abstain from using these vaccines if it can be done without causing children, and indirectly the population as a whole, to undergo significant risks to their health. However, if the latter are exposed to considerable dangers to their health, vaccines with moral problems pertaining to them may also be used on a temporary basis. The moral reason is that the duty to avoid ‘passive material cooperation’ is not obligatory if there is grave inconvenience." [i.e., green light for using vaccines from fetal tissue if there’s no alternative–it’s a matter of proportionality, it goes on to say. As always, the Vatican is on the side of common sense.]

National Cathlic Bioethics Center: “One is morally free to use the vaccine regardless of its historical association with abortion. The reason is that the risk to public health, if one chooses not to vaccinate, outweighs the legitimate concern about the origins of the vaccine. This is especially important for parents, who have a moral obligation to protect the life and health of their children and those around them.” https://www.ncbcenter.org/resources/frequently-asked-questions/use-vaccines/#assocAbort
Couldn’t have said it better myself!

And as a bonus, ebola vaccine: “An investigational vaccine called rVSV-ZEBOV, which has shown to be safe and protective against the Zaire strain of the Ebola virus, is recommended by the Strategic Advisory Group of Experts on Immunization (SAGE)1 for use in Ebola outbreaks caused by the Zaire strain of the virus, in the event where there is no licensed vaccine. The vaccine consists of a vesicular stomatitis virus (VSV), which is an animal virus that causes flulike illness in humans. The VSV has been genetically engineered to contain a protein from the Zaire Ebola virus so that it can provoke immune response to the Ebola virus.” https://www.who.int/ebola/drc-2018/faq-vaccine/en/

Just a thought: I suspect that ultra-scrupulous anti-vaxers will dismiss the official pronouncements of the Vatican and feel justified. But (just a wild hunch…) I suspect these are the same people who, when confronted with people who take issue with the Church’s position on abortion, call them heretics, evil, etc. etc. Me? I always look for consistency in anyone’s position. You can’t have it one way when YOU disagree with the Vatican and then take the opposite approach when you AGREE with the Vatican.

 

[GiftofMercy]

OK, I’ve gone back and actually read the Vatican letter from 2005 (my boy Ratzinger!) as well as an opinion from the National Catholic Bioethics Center. If you’re looking for answers, it seems to me it’s pretty clear:

Thank you for taking the time to do that.