Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Nov 09, 2021 9:23 am
That's neither true nor fair. I have consistently said that I am weighing the life of a child killed in the 1970s against lives that can be saved today, also considering whether I am encouraging anyone to kill children in the name of medical research. I cannot save the life of the child whose cells were used to start the HEK-293 line, I might be able to save the lives of people who are currently living. I think that's a clear ethical stance, it's different from yours.
!!! SNIP !!!
I am directly referencing fetal cell testing, not a broader stance on abortion. You two are quite outspoken (Ken and Boot) about how a stance on fetal cell testing seems inconsistent.
i think I was regularly saying that I thought your position and mine were both consistent. Until I realized that you do use some drugs tested with fetal cells. That's what seemed inconsistent to me.
Maybe it seems consistent to you. We may simply have different ways of understanding these things.
Bootstrap wrote: ↑Tue Nov 09, 2021 9:15 pm
i think I was regularly saying that I thought your position and mine were both consistent. Until I realized that you do use some drugs tested with fetal cells. That's what seemed inconsistent to me.
Maybe it seems consistent to you. We may simply have different ways of understanding these things.
I can't stop someone from going out and testing everything under the sun on fetal cells. I could buy an order of fetal cells ya know... Ultimately a line has to be drawn somewhere but if they are tested by fetal cells by the company manufacturing it and I am aware, I wouldn't be using that product. The simple fact is, its quite difficult to get information past the initial approval FDA document.
I expect they were both tested using fetal stem cells (as are virtually all such drugs these days). So I would assume that anyone who opposes the Covid vaccines on religious grounds would also be opposed to both of these two therapies as well.
Yes. Do you have a problem with that?
That’s why some of us prefer older, safe therapies like ivermectin.
The problem is that Ivermectin, Remdesivir, and Hydrodcychloroquine also all have had fetal cell line HEK-293 used in their testing (as have virtually every modern medicine including aspirin, Tylenol, ibuprofen, Sudafed, Benadryl, Lidocaine, Pepto Bismol, Maalox, Tums, Lipitor, Toprol, etc., etc., etc.). To be consistent on this point, you'd have to reject almost any medicine that has been developed or tested over the past 50 years. The use of aborted fetal cell lines is a societal wrong for sure (hopefully pressure for more ethical testing methods will grow), but at this point in history, it is virtually impossible to morally disentangle modern medicine from fetal cell line usage. [At a larger level, it is a reminder of the complexity of life in a fallen world]
Perhaps, Josh, in the end, this is an argument for Old Order folk remedies and homeopathic treatments.
People keep repeating this.
Dan,
Do you really think all these drugs wouldn’t exist today without HEK-293?
If you do believe that, what is your moral position in fetal stem cells? Because if all modern medicine rests upon fetal stem cells (which you are claiming), then a person who is opposed to abortion necessarily must reject modern medicine.
Josh wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 6:01 pm
Do you really think all these drugs wouldn’t exist today without HEK-293?
Is using HEK-293 moral after the drug is first brought to market, and immoral only if it was used before the drug was on the market? I don't understand that reasoning. If you are morally opposed to HEK-293, do you want to be a customer of companies that use fetal cells for all kinds of research? Do you want to use drugs tested with HEK-293?
Josh wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 6:01 pmIf you do believe that, what is your moral position in fetal stem cells? Because if all modern medicine rests upon fetal stem cells (which you are claiming), then a person who is opposed to abortion necessarily must reject modern medicine.
I oppose murder. I would accept a heart transplant from a murder victim - unless the person was murdered in order to harvest his organs. I feel the same way about abortion and fetal cells. I can't save that baby who died in the 1970s, but lives can be saved today.
Are you claiming that taking an aspirin or Tums means I’m “accepting” fetal stem cell research?
No. It means you are buying a product from a company that used fetal stem cells to test the product you are buying.
Whether you choose to “accept” that fact is irrelevant. And whether that testing occurred before or after the product is brought to market is also irrelevant.
0 x
A fool can throw out more questions than a wise man can answer. -RZehr
Josh wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 6:01 pm
Do you really think all these drugs wouldn’t exist today without HEK-293?
Is using HEK-293 moral after the drug is first brought to market, and immoral only if it was used before the drug was on the market? I don't understand that reasoning. If you are morally opposed to HEK-293, do you want to be a customer of companies that use fetal cells for all kinds of research? Do you want to use drugs tested with HEK-293?
Josh wrote: ↑Wed Nov 10, 2021 6:01 pmIf you do believe that, what is your moral position in fetal stem cells? Because if all modern medicine rests upon fetal stem cells (which you are claiming), then a person who is opposed to abortion necessarily must reject modern medicine.
I oppose murder. I would accept a heart transplant from a murder victim - unless the person was murdered in order to harvest his organs. I feel the same way about abortion and fetal cells. I can't save that baby who died in the 1970s, but lives can be saved today.
What is your end goal here Boot? to be justified in your own position? to find holes in a stance? to convince us we need to not use any vaccines or medications? Seems to me that you have had this explained a few times yet you still don't seem to understand. I find it hard to believe you look at all these sources and understand them better then most of the people here but can't understand the distinction I made. Perhaps Josh has different reasons but I would hazard a guess he agrees with me.
The logical end for my position would eventually either change the course science to more ethical stances if enough people care, make the research more hidden so less people know, or become faith healers as it continues to get more involved.
Those who have already compromised multiple times will find it hard to take a stand as it becomes more involved with their medical care. The cell lines of tomorrow's medication are being made now.
Boot your position is as long as the mother doesn't know about the research/use prior to choosing to abort, you don't care what is done with the organs/tissues/cells. Is that accurate? would you also feel the same about getting replacement organs from abortion? Do you have a line?
Dan what is your line?
Ken do you have any line on abortion developed treatments for anything?