Your Catholic source... lets analysis it shall we? You try doing the same. Pick out the lies here on this first page and read the rest to broaden your understanding
https://mailchi.mp/7742dd12483f/stateme ... conscience
https://www.crisismagazine.com/2021/def ... -with-evil
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploa ... nhagen.pdf
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploa ... ponse1.pdf
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/cong ... ae_en.html
https://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/cong ... id_en.html
The past year of suffering under the onslaught of COVID-19 has brought with it numerous ethical questions, and the advent of effective vaccines for COVID is no different. Foremost among the questions for those of us who are committed to defending the intrinsic equal dignity of all human beings from conception to natural death are these: in accepting any of the vaccines on offer, is one in any way endorsing or contributing to the practice of abortion, or is one in any way showing disrespect for the remains of an unborn human being?
given the practice has grown, the answer to this is yes it is endorsing and contributing to the practice.
While there is a technical causal linkage between each of the current vaccines and prior abortions of human persons, we are all agreed, that connection does not mean that vaccine use contributes to the evil of abortion or shows disrespect for the remains of unborn human beings. Accordingly, Catholics, and indeed, all persons of good will who embrace a culture of life for the whole human family, born and unborn, can use these vaccines without fear of moral culpability.
This isn't even what the Vatican has said for the official position, either way this is what they are setting out to prove.
Common to the four major vaccines, produced by Moderna, Pfizer, Johnson & Johnson, and AstraZeneca is some use of “immortalized” human cell lines. Ordinarily, cells taken from a body have a limited life span, undergoing only a fixed number of cell divisions before they arrest and die. For ongoing research, scientists prefer to use a “cell line,” or a population of cells derived from a single source that has been modified (typically by some form of genetic mutation) to divide indefinitely in culture. Such “immortalized” cell lines allow scientists to conduct many experiments on cells that are both genetically identical and routinely available in the laboratory.
This is false and I have pointed this out several times before but I'll leave you with this research article on China's new cell line to prove my statement.
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploa ... nceDoc.pdf
It is true that we have many immortalized adult cell lines and most of them due to cancer.
HEK293 is one such commonly used line.[1] The name “HEK” stands for “human embryonic kidney,” and “293” refers to the 293rd experiment conducted by the scientist who produced the cell line. The embryonic kidney cells were originally obtained from the remains of a deceased unborn child following what appears to be an elective abortion that took place in the Netherlands during the early 1970s. The exact circumstances of the abortion are not known, but the scientists producing the cell line were not directly involved and, crucially, the abortion was not performed for the sake of providing biological materials to researchers.
The scientist responsible for developing HEK293 testified in congress responding to some of these claims and he definitely was directly involved.
https://wayback.archive-it.org/7993/201 ... 0t1_01.pdf
HEK293 cells are particularly susceptible to the introduction of foreign DNA, and they rapidly became a standard scientific workhorse, that is widely used by both basic scientists and by industry. Although there are currently many modified versions of HEK293s that optimize these cells for specific purposes, all of the HEK293 cells available around the world today were derived from the remains of a single unborn child that was aborted a half a century ago. Importantly, there is no ongoing use of aborted tissue to generate HEK293 cells, to modify these cells, or to maintain them in the laboratory. Thus, the use of HEK293 (and similar immortalized lines) does not create future incentives for more abortions.
Also not without risks, specifically though, only a few versions of HEK-293 have been immortalized and carry some risks, see
https://www.liebertpub.com/doi/10.1089/ ... .29116.oxg
How widely used are HEK293 cells? They are commonly used for testing processed foods produced by companies such as Kraft, Nestlé, Cadbury and others. Indeed, the great majority of processed/packaged food products available for sale in the United States are likely to contain ingredients produced or tested in HEK293 cells.
https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploa ... ctsall.pdf
Feel free to produce facts to prove the statements they make, I don't disagree that this is a possibility but no proof exists because there would be backlash against these companies as what happened with Pepsi.
They are also used as an alternative to animal testing in the cosmetic and pharmaceutical industry. And their use in biomedical research is ubiquitous and has contributed to an enormous number of new medications and medical procedures developed over the last several decades. It thus seems fair to say that in addition to the use of HEK293 cells by the scientific community, nearly every person in the modern world has consumed food products, taken medications or used cosmetics/personal care products that were developed through the use of HEK293 cells in the food, biomedical and cosmetic industries.
To which the majority of people have been ignorant of. Its only been in the last 20 years that the FDA documents for approval are reaching the reach of the commoner.
The various vaccines have made different uses of the HEK293 cell line, with Johnson & Johnson and AstraZeneca using them for manufacture, Pfizer and Moderna for testing only. But these differences are irrelevant to the following questions:
Do any of the vaccines make more use than others of the mortal remains of unborn children from whom the cell lines were derived? The answer is no; as a matter of scientific fact, no fetal “body parts” are present in these immortal cell lines. The immortal cell lines are artifacts—biological products that have been modified and reproduced many times over, and they do not retain the natural function of the tissue from which they were derived. They are not “body parts” in any meaningful or morally relevant sense.
Johnson & Johnson uses PER-C6.
Of course there are no body parts in the vaccine... lets not be ridiculous. However, the fetal cell lines contain the DNA from the baby killed and still retain the function they were originally created for. Otherwise why bother identifying the organ the cells derived from?
The baby when aborted requires to hold the use of digoxin for quality of cells and requires the cells as fresh as possible leading to live dissection of some specimens for cell line production.
https://www.catholicworldreport.com/202 ... ch-part-2/
multiple links at bottom of page to actual proof documents.
Does the production and use of any of the vaccines contribute to, cooperate with, or promote any abortion? Again, the answer is no, for the abortions from which cell lines such as HEK293 were derived happened decades ago, and no further fetal tissue is used or needed for the maintenance of these lines.
Factually true, but try taking away fetal research being dependent on fresh abortions. Try halting the practice at any point and there is substantial pushback.
Common to all pro-life witness is recognition that the apparent elective abortion that led to the derivation of the HEK293 cell line was morally impermissible and involved the unjust taking of a human life. But to repeat, the HEK293 cell line currently used around the globe in scientific research and those like it do not contain the remains of any human being and so its use does not show disrespect for human remains, any more than the contemporary use of products, such as roads or train lines, that were constructed by unjustly enslaved human beings, or use of land unjustly taken, shows disrespect for those victims in the distant past.
So what are the cells then? How can it not possibly be human cells and thus remains of a human unless its not human cells which no professional would ever argue. The past slaves argument I could accept if we stopped further development and research dependent on fetal cells. As far as it goes, this person I'm sure has a smart phone and plenty of items made by slaves.
To be perfectly clear, we are not saying that people are justified in using and promoting these vaccines because the great goods they provide offset the evil of appropriating a prior wicked action. Rather, we believe that there is no such impermissible cooperation or appropriation here. The attenuated and remote connection to abortions performed decades ago and the absence of any incentive for future abortions offer little if any moral reasons against accepting this welcome advance of science.
The Vatican doesn't agree with this statement, see above links.
The rest of the article doesn't really say anything new.
Your turn Boot.
https://mailchi.mp/7742dd12483f/stateme ... conscience