Ivermectin was tested using aborted fetal cells!

[GiftOfGod]

You read that correctly. So, morally-speaking, ivermectin is the same as the COVID vax, ivermectin users are the same as COVID vax users, and ivermectin promoters are the same as COVID vax promoters.

On March 25, after it had long been established that [tests] for using ivermectin on COVID involved HEK-293, Trasancos posted that we should use ivermectin to treat COVID. The tests that even suggested ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine might work for COVID were done on HEK-293 cells. Sure, if one were using these drugs for things they were approved for decades ago without fetal cell lines, one could claim those tests are more indirect than on the vaccine. But there is no discernable difference between the connections to these as COVID treatments and the use of Moderna or Pfizer vaccines.

He claims this is "ethically uncompromised," but this does not hold water. The basic research on P2X4 receptors and ivermectin in 2004 & 2006, which is the basis for using it against COVID, relied on HEK-293. Prior to COVID, this drug was used almost exclusively on non-viral pests so it would not be something a doctor would have suggested using on a virus were that research not done. Plus, multiple studies directly about using ivermectin to treat COVID used HEK-293, and human clinical trials for a new use for this drug with significant negative side effects would require lab tests (such as those tests done on HEK-293) showing it was at least moderately effective there. Sure, this specific organization did not do any tests on HEK-293, but that would be like saying that if the US government lifts patents, all of a sudden it would be ethical to take the exact vaccine currently used so long as made by a generic pharmaceutical company. One can argue against companies based on other practices, as one person has told me they sought out Moderna over Pfizer because of some other things Pfizer has done unrelated to testing this vaccine, but that is a separate concern.

The reality is that using ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine is connected to abortion almost identically to the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines. I cannot see any reasonable argument to avoid the vaccines but not these two drugs based on a connection to abortion. On the other hand, I can see reasons to prefer the vaccines as they are more effective (even the most optimistic tests for the others don't reach 95% effectiveness) and prevent transmission better (ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine are more for treating one once infected, not mainly preventing infection).

(I leave questions about the effectiveness or prudence of using ivermectin or hydroxychloroquine for COVID. This is a medical question to be answered by experts in that field not moral theologians like myself. Nonetheless, it is worth noting that the FDA recommends against using ivermectin for COVID.)

https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2021/06/anti-vaccine-catholics-break-moral-theology-principles/

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

[Gardener]

You're retarded. About as retarded as Fr. Matthew whatever his name is, of the Legionaries of "Christ". The question is if it was developed using such things: so far as we know, the answer is no.

ETA: hilarious. This is an article by that grifting Legionary Novus Ordo  son of a bitch Schneider? Amazeballs.

If I develop traction control by testing different configurations on piles of dead babies, that's a problem in the same vein as medications being developed with immoral testing means as essentially part of the project.

If I develop the traction control and then I or some 3rd party decide, "Hrm, what happens if I drive on a pile of dead babies?" That has nothing to do with the development of said traction control.

[GiftOfGod]

You're retarded. About as retarded as Fr. Matthew whatever his name is, of the Legionaries of "Christ". The question is if it was developed using such things: so far as we know, the answer is no.

ETA: hilarious. This is an article by that grifting Legionary Novus Ordo  son of a bitch Schneider? Amazeballs.

If I develop traction control by testing different configurations on piles of dead babies, that's a problem in the same vein as medications being developed with immoral testing means as essentially part of the project.

If I develop the traction control and then I or some 3rd party decide, "Hrm, what happens if I drive on a pile of dead babies?" That has nothing to do with the development of said traction control.

I won't bother engaging with your infanticidal automobile fantasy. Come back when you're ready to talk like a normal person.

[Prayerful]

Some of Fr Schneider LC's stuff is not wholly factual. I'd have thought an autist would be fussy about this.

[LausTibiChriste]

You're retarded. About as retarded as Fr. Matthew whatever his name is, of the Legionaries of "Christ". The question is if it was developed using such things: so far as we know, the answer is no.

ETA: hilarious. This is an article by that grifting Legionary Novus Ordo  son of a bitch Schneider? Amazeballs.

If I develop traction control by testing different configurations on piles of dead babies, that's a problem in the same vein as medications being developed with immoral testing means as essentially part of the project.

If I develop the traction control and then I or some 3rd party decide, "Hrm, what happens if I drive on a pile of dead babies?" That has nothing to do with the development of said traction control.

Are we talking about who I think we're talking about? That poofy heretic who posts on Twitter all the time?

[diaduit]

So knowing that some Satanists remove the Eucharist specifically for sacrilegious attack does that stop you from taking communion Goggy?

[Gardener]

You're retarded. About as retarded as Fr. Matthew whatever his name is, of the Legionaries of "Christ". The question is if it was developed using such things: so far as we know, the answer is no.

ETA: hilarious. This is an article by that grifting Legionary Novus Ordo  son of a bitch Schneider? Amazeballs.

If I develop traction control by testing different configurations on piles of dead babies, that's a problem in the same vein as medications being developed with immoral testing means as essentially part of the project.

If I develop the traction control and then I or some 3rd party decide, "Hrm, what happens if I drive on a pile of dead babies?" That has nothing to do with the development of said traction control.

I won't bother engaging with your infanticidal automobile fantasy. Come back when you're ready to talk like a normal person.

I'm not sure what you find insufficient about it. It graphically demonstrates the principle at play. Fr. Schneider, LC doesn't get to just willy nilly invent moral theology and medical ethics to suit his argument, and he isn't engaging with the argument as posited by the anti-abortion-fetal-cell tainted vaccines milieu. He's building strawmen.

His argument's premise rests on, I believe, the "association" fallacy.

It's retarded.

[LausTibiChriste]

You're retarded. About as retarded as Fr. Matthew whatever his name is, of the Legionaries of "Christ". The question is if it was developed using such things: so far as we know, the answer is no.

ETA: hilarious. This is an article by that grifting Legionary Novus Ordo  son of a bitch Schneider? Amazeballs.

If I develop traction control by testing different configurations on piles of dead babies, that's a problem in the same vein as medications being developed with immoral testing means as essentially part of the project.

If I develop the traction control and then I or some 3rd party decide, "Hrm, what happens if I drive on a pile of dead babies?" That has nothing to do with the development of said traction control.

I won't bother engaging with your infanticidal automobile fantasy. Come back when you're ready to talk like a normal person.

I'm not sure what you find insufficient about it. It graphically demonstrates the principle at play. Fr. Schneider, LC doesn't get to just willy nilly invent moral theology and medical ethics to suit his argument, and he isn't engaging with the argument as posited by the anti-abortion-fetal-cell tainted vaccines milieu. He's building strawmen.

His argument's premise rests on, I believe, the "association" fallacy.

It's retarded.

Scneider is absolute trash

[lauermar]

 

[ChairmanJoeAintMyPrez]

I'd put that down if I were you.  It's beyond stale at this point - probably growing mold!