Moral Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter goodcatholicman
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
G

goodcatholicman

Guest
I work for a major comapny that sells vaccines. About 40 years ago, there was research done on two sets of aborted babies for the purpose of creating vaccines. The first, according to the medical person, was an aborted baby “due to medical need.” I am not sure what that means and not sure I would agree with it even if I did. The second baby was aborted as an elected choice. Tissues from each were harvested and used as part of almost every vaccine known to man. These tissues are still being used today in a variety of vaccines and still harvested from the same source periodically according to the medical person. So, on the one hand you have a gravely sinful act of abortion and on the other, vaccines created that on a whole saved or are saving hundreds of millions of lives each year around the world. My question - Is it immoral to sell these vaccines as a profession? 🤷

Mother Mary Pray For Us
:signofcross:
 
I suggest you visit the Children of God for Life website and review their extensive information on this very topic:

cogforlife.org/

And, consult your priest on the matter. Personally, I would not want to be directly involved in the selling of vaccines created with murdered babies.
 
“These tissues are still being used today in a variety of vaccines and still harvested from the same source periodically according to the medical person.”

First, double check to see if this is indeed the case. Sometimes rumors get started that have little or no basis in fact.

But, assuming this is the case, that’s a tough question. I liken it to “Is it OK to use medical insights that the Nazis discovered in their torture and murder of concentration camp victims?”.

One of the considerations is highlighted in red…"…still harvested…". If the source is spontaneously aborted fetuses, no problem. If it’s from purposely aborted fetuses, then the question becomes, “Is it OK to kill an innocent to save the life of another (others)?” I believe the moral answer would be no, it would not be acceptable, unless that innocent voluntarily gave up his or her life (sound like anyone we know? 🙂 ) to save others, which, of course is not the case in an abortion.
 
My understanding is 1) any assistance to the voluntary abortion is considered immoral 2) The unknown medical abortion cannot be determined as moral or immoral without more knowledge of the event 3) The removal of tissues is probably immoral. 4) The vaccines are probably neutral. 5)The action of continued removing tissue is a large concern as it may causes repeated immoral action. However I would agree with others to pursue this issue and review the other issues with the National Catholic Bioethics Center or similar.
Hope that helps
 
I think it would be OK to use the tissue from both babies because
  1. not using it would in no way undo the first sin of the abortion.
  2. If this tissue is not used , scientist will just look for another source for the tissue , like another aborted baby or stem cells
  3. To some extent by using the tissue would give the life of the child some meaning ( in that he/she saved other lives)
 
The end does not justify the means!

:twocents: We could use ADULT stem cells! They would do just as good a job.👍
There is NO NEED to destroy an unborn person’s life to gain stem cells. and no justification for supporting this action.

If someone killed my baby (or wife or mother) and told me they had utilised her remains by developing a flu vaccine and asked if I would come work for them…

I’ll tell you what I would do to that person…:mad::crossrc:
 
DRIVING_BEAR said:
I think it would be OK to use the tissue from both babies because
  1. not using it would in no way undo the first sin of the abortion.
  2. If this tissue is not used , scientist will just look for another source for the tissue , like another aborted baby or stem cells
  3. To some extent by using the tissue would give the life of the child some meaning ( in that he/she saved other lives)
Click to expand...
Whoh. That is some very slippery ground, DB.
  1. and 2) :confused: If the tissue ***is ***used, will that not strengthen the case that aborted babies make good donor material?
  2. Like the information that was gained by the Nazis by the heinous “medical experiments” during WWII?
Using that logic, would it not be best to sacrifice more babies, to give their life meaning? It may be for every aborted baby, thousands suffering from disease X, Y and Z could be cured. So, the more babies we kill, the more people can be cured!

The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few? (I think that was a line in a Star Trek movie)

This kind of argument relativises the sin of abortion; if an abortion is performed and the baby discarded, that’s a sin. But if the baby’s tissues can be used to help someone, then it’s not as bad?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top