Cell lines from aborted babies

[TradGranny]

It's clear from the video, which included court testimony from a mass murderer of babies, that his 70+ murders of LIVE babies laid the FOUNDATION  for ALL subsequent research on fetal cell-lines.

Your vaxx would not be possible without the grotesque "research" of this mass murderer.

[tradical]

It's clear from the video, which included court testimony from a mass murderer of babies, that his 70+ murders of LIVE babies laid the FOUNDATION  for ALL subsequent research on fetal cell-lines.

Your vaxx would not be possible without the grotesque "research" of this mass murderer.

Hi Trad Granny,

I want you to understand that this isn't "Tradical's moral theology", this is "Catholic Moral Theology". 

I've done my homework and concluded that both Rome (even a broken clock is right twice a day) and the SSPX's analysis, principles and conclusions are consistent with pre-conciliar Moral Theology texts.

The receipt of a tainted vaccine constitutes remote cooperation, that is the uncomfortable truth of the situation. You may not like it, it may even cause mental pain, but it is the reality.



So the question is will you adjust your belief to align with the pre-conciliar principles of Catholic Moral Theology???



This problem has been around for decades and as the world continues its death spiral to post-christian civilization the moral dilemmas will just proliferate.

[matt]

Tradical said:

That is incorrect, even if  Hydroxychloroquine, Ivermectin and Remdisvir were effective they would be used therapeutically (after you've contract COVID-19).

Actually HCQ has been used prophylactically (+ Zn and Vit. D3) with great success. I don't want to rehash arguments here that have been explored on other threads but the use of the COVID vaccine for a proportionate cause of a disease that has a .26% death rate (and that is probably greatly overestimated) is a flaw in your arguments, in my opinion.

Just my two cents,

Wenceslav

You realize that these alternatives treatments have only come about after testing on the HEK 293 cell line. So there still exists a remote material cooperation in their use.

[diaduit]

Yes but the Vatican say that only where there are no other treatments available can "remote cooperation " be moral.

There are other treatments for covid.

[tradical]

Yes but the Vatican say that only where there are no other treatments available can "remote cooperation " be moral.

There are other treatments for covid.

'Available' doesn't mean 'existing', it means available to the person seeking a solution. 

Having a source and quote to put it in context would be helpful ... but since you are quoting the Vatican ...

3. The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent[3]--in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.

5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.

Source: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_en.html

[Vetus Ordo]

Yes but the Vatican say that only where there are no other treatments available can "remote cooperation " be moral.

There are other treatments for covid.

'Available' doesn't mean 'existing', it means available to the person seeking a solution. 

Having a source and quote to put it in context would be helpful ... but since you are quoting the Vatican ...

3. The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent[3]--in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.

5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.

Source: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_en.html

Thanks for sharing this, Tradical.

The Church has been consistently clear about this issue, as we had already discussed last year. "He who hears you hears Me." (Luke 10:16).

[Christe Eleison]

Yes but the Vatican say that only where there are no other treatments available can "remote cooperation " be moral.

There are other treatments for covid.

I agree with you, Diaduit. There are other treatments for COVID.


Japan approves treatment for COVID:

https://pharmaceutical-business-review.com/news/japan-roches-ronapreve-covid-19-treatment/

Roche has received Japan's Ministry of Health, Labour and Welfare (MHLW) approval for its Ronapreve to treat mild to moderate Covid-19 patients.

Designed to block SARS-CoV-2 infectivity, Ronapreve is a combination of two monoclonal antibodies, casirivimab and imdevimab.

Being jointly developed by Roche and Regeneron, the antibody cocktail was granted a Special Approval Pathway under article 14-3 of the Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Act.

The approval is based on data obtained from the Phase III REGN-COV 2067 trial performed on high-risk, non-hospitalised Covid-19 patients.

[tradical]

Yes but the Vatican say that only where there are no other treatments available can "remote cooperation " be moral.

There are other treatments for covid.

'Available' doesn't mean 'existing', it means available to the person seeking a solution. 

Having a source and quote to put it in context would be helpful ... but since you are quoting the Vatican ...

3. The fundamental reason for considering the use of these vaccines morally licit is that the kind of cooperation in evil (passive material cooperation) in the procured abortion from which these cell lines originate is, on the part of those making use of the resulting vaccines, remote. The moral duty to avoid such passive material cooperation is not obligatory if there is a grave danger, such as the otherwise uncontainable spread of a serious pathological agent[3]--in this case, the pandemic spread of the SARS-CoV-2 virus that causes Covid-19. It must therefore be considered that, in such a case, all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective can be used in good conscience with the certain knowledge that the use of such vaccines does not constitute formal cooperation with the abortion from which the cells used in production of the vaccines derive. It should be emphasized, however, that the morally licit use of these types of vaccines, in the particular conditions that make it so, does not in itself constitute a legitimation, even indirect, of the practice of abortion, and necessarily assumes the opposition to this practice by those who make use of these vaccines.

5. At the same time, practical reason makes evident that vaccination is not, as a rule, a moral obligation and that, therefore, it must be voluntary. In any case, from the ethical point of view, the morality of vaccination depends not only on the duty to protect one's own health, but also on the duty to pursue the common good. In the absence of other means to stop or even prevent the epidemic, the common good may recommend vaccination, especially to protect the weakest and most exposed. Those who, however, for reasons of conscience, refuse vaccines produced with cell lines from aborted fetuses, must do their utmost to avoid, by other prophylactic means and appropriate behavior, becoming vehicles for the transmission of the infectious agent. In particular, they must avoid any risk to the health of those who cannot be vaccinated for medical or other reasons, and who are the most vulnerable.

Source: https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20201221_nota-vaccini-anticovid_en.html

Thanks for sharing this, Tradical.

The Church has been consistently clear about this issue, as we had already discussed last year. "He who hears you hears Me." (Luke 10:16).

Agreed and given the outcry it was consoling to see the Vatican and SSPX are both founded on good principles of moral theology.

Cheers!

[Wenceslav]

Tradical said,

So we need to understand the nuance here.

Proposal A: Many murders are involved in cell line research.  - I agree.
Proposal B: Only one murder is involved in the specific successful cell line labelled HEK-293

This is important because we only benefit directly from the murder of HEK-293.  There is a remote moral connection between the vaccine used in inoculations and that single murder.  The others are not related.

To assert that those being inoculated with morally tainted vaccines is to descend into scrupulosity. Deforming the principle to that degree would create an impossible situation where there is practically no action that Catholics can take without committing sin by cooperation with evil.

Examples: Coke uses tainted cell lines to test new flavours. The massacre of indians creates of cooperation with evil for those deriving a benefit from those lands. 

The best analogy I could come up with is that if a person is a serial killer and sells you one of his victims watches, you have benefited from the murder of that specific person. Not all of his victims.

So abortionists are, in principle, serial killers. Generally, their intention is to end the life of a baby, not to kill the baby in order to create a vaccine.  I am aware of at least one possible exception, but it is not relevant in the context of COVID-19 vaccines.

There is a moral link to the specific individual murders for HEK-293 and PER-C.6.   This link does not exist with the preceding and post murders.  Why?  From what I've read, they are separate actions from which are are not benefiting in a knowable manner.

Note, above emboldened by me, Wenceslav.

Tradical, thanks for that succinct explanation. The problem I have with the bolded  statement in the quote above is that each experimental run is related to the next experiment. The experimenter tweaks the parameters (concentration, methodology, different medium, different tissue etc) in the experiment based on information he learned in the previous run until he achieves success i.e. an immortalized cell line.

In each run ( or every few runs at least) an innocent child is murdered. The last child he kills  is the one from which we directly benefit from - true. But to achieve final success the experimenter has killed hundreds of innocent children (certainly the case in the HEK293 experimentation). So, the successive murders used to produce the cell line are  all directly and morally linked because  although we benefit from the tissues of the last child killed, the death of the other children was a necessary ingredient.

To put it simply, we could not benefit from the tissues of the last child killed in HEK 293 series unless those other children were killed.

My 2 cents worth

Wenceslav

[TradGranny]

Tradical said,

So we need to understand the nuance here.

Proposal A: Many murders are involved in cell line research.  - I agree.
Proposal B: Only one murder is involved in the specific successful cell line labelled HEK-293

This is important because we only benefit directly from the murder of HEK-293.  There is a remote moral connection between the vaccine used in inoculations and that single murder.  The others are not related.

To assert that those being inoculated with morally tainted vaccines is to descend into scrupulosity. Deforming the principle to that degree would create an impossible situation where there is practically no action that Catholics can take without committing sin by cooperation with evil.

Examples: Coke uses tainted cell lines to test new flavours. The massacre of indians creates of cooperation with evil for those deriving a benefit from those lands. 

The best analogy I could come up with is that if a person is a serial killer and sells you one of his victims watches, you have benefited from the murder of that specific person. Not all of his victims.

So abortionists are, in principle, serial killers. Generally, their intention is to end the life of a baby, not to kill the baby in order to create a vaccine.  I am aware of at least one possible exception, but it is not relevant in the context of COVID-19 vaccines.

There is a moral link to the specific individual murders for HEK-293 and PER-C.6.   This link does not exist with the preceding and post murders.  Why?  From what I've read, they are separate actions from which are are not benefiting in a knowable manner.

Note, above emboldened by me, Wenceslav.

Tradical, thanks for that succinct explanation. The problem I have with the bolded  statement in the quote above is that each experimental run is related to the next experiment. The experimenter tweaks the parameters (concentration, methodology, different medium, different tissue etc) in the experiment based on information he learned in the previous run until he achieves success i.e. an immortalized cell line.

In each run ( or every few runs at least) an innocent child is murdered. The last child he kills  is the one from which we directly benefit from - true. But to achieve final success the experimenter has killed hundreds of innocent children (certainly the case in the HEK293 experimentation). So, the successive murders used to produce the cell line are  all directly and morally linked because  although we benefit from the tissues of the last child killed, the death of the other children was a necessary ingredient.

To put it simply, we could not benefit from the tissues of the last child killed in HEK 293 series unless those other children were killed.

My 2 cents worth

Wenceslav

Thank you Wenceslav for a clear explanation.

[TradGranny]

Those who put their own perceived well-being ahead of the evil of benefiting from multiple baby murders will be able to find rationalizations from the V2 church.

Others obey the eternal teaching of the Church, expressed here by Moral Theologian Father Ripperger.

December 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Prominent theologian and exorcist Father Chad Ripperger has issued a detailed warning about the immoral nature of vaccines, particularly COVID-19 vaccines, which are involved in any way with aborted babies.

In a video interview on Sensus Fidelium's "Resistance Podcast," Ripperger, who also holds a Ph.D., explained the morality of using vaccines, especially those made, tested on, or in any way connected to aborted babies.

. . . Ripperger then continued to quote Copenhagen: "While the original killing establishes the illicit character of using the remains, their possession and use becomes a distinct evil in itself. The circumstances of which do not cease as a form of theft, desecration, exploitation and refusal to bury, regardless of the customers distance in time from the abortion, or the number of cell divisions, or the merely sub-cell or fragmentary inclusion of the child's DNA and protein in the final dose."

. . . Fr. Ripperger commented: "in the case of the aborted fetal tissue, the fact that it's replicated from that means it's still part of his body in the end, and that's why, even though it happened in the past, it does not change the moral character of using the lines now."

"So the temporal distance at this point doesn't have any bearing. The physical distance from the abortion, that also doesn't have anything about the quality of the lines now." Any usage of such cell lines is consequently done "illicitly."

Burying the remains of the fetal tissue or cell lines is "the only way to fulfill justice," Ripperger repeated.

. . . The recipient is an immediate participant in the commission of the continuous theft of human remains obtained through deliberate killing. their desecration through exploitation and trafficking, as well as ultimate omission to respectfully burying them."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exorcist-priest-abortion-tainted-vaccines-are-ongoing-theft-of-babies-bodies

[matt]

Those who put their own perceived well-being ahead of the evil of benefiting from multiple baby murders will be able to find rationalizations from the V2 church.

Others obey the eternal teaching of the Church, expressed here by Moral Theologian Father Ripperger.

December 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Prominent theologian and exorcist Father Chad Ripperger has issued a detailed warning about the immoral nature of vaccines, particularly COVID-19 vaccines, which are involved in any way with aborted babies.

In a video interview on Sensus Fidelium's "Resistance Podcast," Ripperger, who also holds a Ph.D., explained the morality of using vaccines, especially those made, tested on, or in any way connected to aborted babies.

. . . Ripperger then continued to quote Copenhagen: "While the original killing establishes the illicit character of using the remains, their possession and use becomes a distinct evil in itself. The circumstances of which do not cease as a form of theft, desecration, exploitation and refusal to bury, regardless of the customers distance in time from the abortion, or the number of cell divisions, or the merely sub-cell or fragmentary inclusion of the child's DNA and protein in the final dose."

. . . Fr. Ripperger commented: "in the case of the aborted fetal tissue, the fact that it's replicated from that means it's still part of his body in the end, and that's why, even though it happened in the past, it does not change the moral character of using the lines now."

"So the temporal distance at this point doesn't have any bearing. The physical distance from the abortion, that also doesn't have anything about the quality of the lines now." Any usage of such cell lines is consequently done "illicitly."

Burying the remains of the fetal tissue or cell lines is "the only way to fulfill justice," Ripperger repeated.

. . . The recipient is an immediate participant in the commission of the continuous theft of human remains obtained through deliberate killing. their desecration through exploitation and trafficking, as well as ultimate omission to respectfully burying them."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exorcist-priest-abortion-tainted-vaccines-are-ongoing-theft-of-babies-bodies

From the article you link to:

"However, he did add that in "extreme cases, that is on a case by case basis," certain people "might" be permitted to receive the vaccination ... "

But the problem with this theft/desecration/manipulation etc. line of argument - and it's probably best summed up in Dom Pietro's 'Chains of Evil' and his list of 'ten great evils', is that half his list would also apply in the case of a miscarriage.

In which case the real issue isn't about abortion and raises the question: What is it really about?

[tradical]

Tradical said,

So we need to understand the nuance here.

Proposal A: Many murders are involved in cell line research.  - I agree.
Proposal B: Only one murder is involved in the specific successful cell line labelled HEK-293

This is important because we only benefit directly from the murder of HEK-293.  There is a remote moral connection between the vaccine used in inoculations and that single murder.  The others are not related.

To assert that those being inoculated with morally tainted vaccines is to descend into scrupulosity. Deforming the principle to that degree would create an impossible situation where there is practically no action that Catholics can take without committing sin by cooperation with evil.

Examples: Coke uses tainted cell lines to test new flavours. The massacre of indians creates of cooperation with evil for those deriving a benefit from those lands. 

The best analogy I could come up with is that if a person is a serial killer and sells you one of his victims watches, you have benefited from the murder of that specific person. Not all of his victims.

So abortionists are, in principle, serial killers. Generally, their intention is to end the life of a baby, not to kill the baby in order to create a vaccine.  I am aware of at least one possible exception, but it is not relevant in the context of COVID-19 vaccines.

There is a moral link to the specific individual murders for HEK-293 and PER-C.6.   This link does not exist with the preceding and post murders.  Why?  From what I've read, they are separate actions from which are are not benefiting in a knowable manner.

Note, above emboldened by me, Wenceslav.

Tradical, thanks for that succinct explanation. The problem I have with the bolded  statement in the quote above is that each experimental run is related to the next experiment. The experimenter tweaks the parameters (concentration, methodology, different medium, different tissue etc) in the experiment based on information he learned in the previous run until he achieves success i.e. an immortalized cell line.

In each run ( or every few runs at least) an innocent child is murdered. The last child he kills  is the one from which we directly benefit from - true. But to achieve final success the experimenter has killed hundreds of innocent children (certainly the case in the HEK293 experimentation). So, the successive murders used to produce the cell line are  all directly and morally linked because  although we benefit from the tissues of the last child killed, the death of the other children was a necessary ingredient.

To put it simply, we could not benefit from the tissues of the last child killed in HEK 293 series unless those other children were killed.

My 2 cents worth

Wenceslav

Hi Wenceslav,

From my reading, all I know is that the chain of 'Acts' derives its taint from the murder of the single baby.  The others are independent and separate acts. 

For example, if a scientist read journals about the morally tainted research and thereby developed a successful method to create a fetal cell line based on morally obtained cells (placenta, miscarriage) then there would be no moral taint.

The taint comes from that single act.

[tradical]

Those who put their own perceived well-being ahead of the evil of benefiting from multiple baby murders will be able to find rationalizations from the V2 church.

Others obey the eternal teaching of the Church, expressed here by Moral Theologian Father Ripperger.

December 22, 2020 (LifeSiteNews) – Prominent theologian and exorcist Father Chad Ripperger has issued a detailed warning about the immoral nature of vaccines, particularly COVID-19 vaccines, which are involved in any way with aborted babies.

In a video interview on Sensus Fidelium's "Resistance Podcast," Ripperger, who also holds a Ph.D., explained the morality of using vaccines, especially those made, tested on, or in any way connected to aborted babies.

. . . Ripperger then continued to quote Copenhagen: "While the original killing establishes the illicit character of using the remains, their possession and use becomes a distinct evil in itself. The circumstances of which do not cease as a form of theft, desecration, exploitation and refusal to bury, regardless of the customers distance in time from the abortion, or the number of cell divisions, or the merely sub-cell or fragmentary inclusion of the child's DNA and protein in the final dose."

. . . Fr. Ripperger commented: "in the case of the aborted fetal tissue, the fact that it's replicated from that means it's still part of his body in the end, and that's why, even though it happened in the past, it does not change the moral character of using the lines now."

"So the temporal distance at this point doesn't have any bearing. The physical distance from the abortion, that also doesn't have anything about the quality of the lines now." Any usage of such cell lines is consequently done "illicitly."

Burying the remains of the fetal tissue or cell lines is "the only way to fulfill justice," Ripperger repeated.

. . . The recipient is an immediate participant in the commission of the continuous theft of human remains obtained through deliberate killing. their desecration through exploitation and trafficking, as well as ultimate omission to respectfully burying them."

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/exorcist-priest-abortion-tainted-vaccines-are-ongoing-theft-of-babies-bodies

Those who put their own perceived well-being ahead of the evil of benefiting from multiple baby murders will be able to find rationalizations from the V2 church.

You have missed the point in its entirety.

This is not V2 church rationalization. This is completely consistent with pre-conciliar Catholic Moral Theology.

With respect to Fr. Ripperger: Rome,SSPX, a number of moral theologians who've been dealing with the cooperation-in-evil issue for decades and little ole me disagree.

Either this (below) summarizes pre-conciliar Catholic Moral Theology or it doesn't.  If it does, there is no further argument to be made. If it doesn't please show me where - with references.

[Wenceslav]

Thanks Tradical,

I see what you are trying to say but those "acts" in the creation of cell lines are not independent. The murder of successive children before the last one are intrinsically necessary and causally linked in the process to create a successful cell line.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

Wenceslav