Posted on 08/13/2021 2:19:19 PM PDT by ebb tide
That's why they follow El Popa, just like Catholics.
Are you drunk, addled, or just trolling?
J&J, Moderna, and Phizer developed using aborted fetal cells is not the same thing as made from. There is substantial differences in rational thinking.
DR doesn’t understand the moral elemental questions.
When you deal with differences in subject, you differ substantially in the nature of an action.
Stop trolling.
You think I’m trolling but you simply don’t know Moral Theology.
You’re trolling because you don’t know about the jabs.
I thought I sent you a link from an MD discussing them.
Developed using is still strong enough for most Christians;
and you might be surprised to find out how little moral authority the homosexual ephebophiles running the Vatican actually have for anyone outside of Catholicism.
And therefore, by extension, their talking Commie sock-puppet Karl I.
BTTT!!!
Interesting.
Would Moral Theology not prohibit vaccination of a vaccine developed and tested using aborted fetal cells?
“they have a serious duty to protect others by masking”
When the mask boxes admit to preventing the transmission or reception of covid or any other viral pathogen then your statement will be taken seriously.
Let me re-ask the question:
Would Moral Theology permit declining a vaccination of a vaccine developed and tested using aborted fetal cells, via moral impossibility?
Looked at the Video, it doesn’t change my response that the Doctor in question doesn’t make a good argument.
There’s a difference in manufacture between J&J and Moderna and Pfizer.
These differences represent substantial changes in the nature of the moral actions. The Video itself doesn’t make a compelling argument.
“Would Moral Theology not prohibit vaccination of a vaccine developed and tested using aborted fetal cells?”
There is a substantial difference when we’re talking about some form of cannibalism, re: “made from,” and “tested upon.”
You might recognize that a lot of Medical anatomy and knowledge itself comes from human testing which is not moral, but we use the knowledge and techniques anyway.
For example using cadavers “however obtained” for anatomy research. But everyone uses the knowledge obtained.
A Drug company that tested a vaccine is morally responsible for that testing, but this is a clear example where remote cooperation of evil applies to someone who gets a vaccine.
Remote and Proximate or formal cooperation with evil is a specifically thought out thing. We do this all the time btw. Take for example, our profit from slavery by purchasing products produced in places of the world where virtual slavery is the norm. Are we responsible for the modern world slavery?
No, they don't. None of the three were developed without the results of the deliberate murder of babies.
And since they were developed, what does that have to do with taking them now? You didn't complete the argument. Does everyone who takes the shot murder the child? No.
Thanks. Well put and thought out.
Babies are still being murdered to this day and used for medical research.
By accepting these deathvaxxes, one is condoning on-going murder. He is participating in accepting genocide for the sake of his own health.
Most cadavers were not humans murdered for anatomy research.
J&J, Moderna, and Phizer developed using aborted fetal cells is not the same thing as made from
killing a baby is wrong no matter what stage of the vaccine process it happens.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.