As more and more Americans are being forced to get the COVID-19 vaccine, religious exemptions are on the rise, given the various vaccines’ connection to the use of aborted fetal cell tissue in their development and/or testing. This article will investigate this issue in depth, and explain the truth about the use of aborted fetuses in COVID-19 vaccine production.
First of all, let’s get this out of the way first and foremost – right up front, so those who are looking to discredit this piece will be disarmed immediately. There is no evidence that any of the COVID-19 vaccines contain any human DNA, fetal cells, or any other component acquired from aborted fetuses or any other human origin. This is a baseless argument, and a complete falsehood that severely damages our credibility as vaccine skeptics. If you see any source making such claims, please correct them and do your part to stop spreading this misinformation that frankly makes us look ill informed and silly. Let’s focus on the real issues at hand, and how exactly cells derived from aborted fetuses are in fact used in the production, testing, and manufacturing of these vaccines – and the moral implications and objections inherent therein.
The Discovery of Aborted Fetal Cell Lines Being Used
As reported by Dr. Richard Zimmerman, in an article published in June of this year, cell lines that were derived from aborted fetuses were used in the testing or development of certain COVID vaccines:
The HEK 293 cell line was developed in Holland in the early 1970s from embryonal kidney tissue from a supposedly therapeutic abortion that was transformed by adenovirus type 5. The PER.C6 cell line was developed in 1995 from retinal tissue from an abortion in 1985 that was transformed by adenovirus type 5. The University of Oxford/AstraZeneca vaccine ChAdOX1 nCoV-19 is developed in the HEK 293 cell line and the Janssen/Johnson & Johnson vaccine Adenovirus 26 vaccine Ad26.COV2.S is developed in the PER.C6 cell line; however, the final products do not contain fetal cells. The mRNA vaccines are not manufactured in cell lines, although testing of mRNA vaccines reportedly uses cell lines. (SOURCE)
Although the uses of these aborted fetuses were different in the production of the traditional vaccines and the mRNA vaccines, the truth is that all of them used aborted fetal cells at some point for some direct purpose whether in the developmental or testing phases of the vaccine production.
The truth about the use of aborted fetuses in the production of the COVID-19 vaccines has not been a forthcoming fact from the pharmaceutical companies, the CDC, or any other agency – ostensibly because of the P.R. nightmare that this would create for the proponents of the vaccine. In fact, Project Veritas has reported on the existence of emails leaked from a whistleblower at Pfizer about specifically wanting to keep a lid on their use of fetal cell lines in the development of the vaccine, because of the inconvenience such a revelation would present the company with. The Project Veritas video is fascinating, and completely revealing as to where the priorities of the Pfizer executives lie.
The blowback of these revelations has resulted in a major uptick in people seeking religious exemption from vaccine mandates in the workplace and government agencies. This is a problem for those in power who are determined to get as close to 100% vaccination status among citizens as possible. Part of government-pharma power cabal’s response to this issue is to recruit from among various faith leaders, those willing to be a government mouthpiece and rationalize the use of the vaccine despite an internal moral conviction not to do so.
When the whole world is running towards a cliff, he who is running in the opposite direction appears to have lost his mind. – Attr. C.S. Lewis
A simple Google search, “moral objection to COVID vaccine” presents one with an array of religious arguments in favor of the vaccine, and none (anywhere near the top of search results) presenting an opposing view against vaccination. As of this writing, the top Google result is courtesy of Oxford University, which takes direct aim at those who would oppose the vaccine on moral or religious grounds, and attempts to force them into submission through ridicule and appeal to the masses:
We argue that religious or personal moral objections to vaccine research are unethical and irresponsible, and in an important sense often irrational. They are unethical because of the risk of causing serious harm to other people for no valid reason; irresponsible because they run counter to individual and collective responsibilities to contribute to important public health goals; and in the case of certain kinds of religious opposition, they might be irrational because they are internally inconsistent. All in all, our argument translates into the rather uncontroversial claim that we should prioritize people’s lives over religious freedom in vaccine research and vaccination roll out. (emphasis added) (SOURCE)
The emphasized passage above is quite telling in what the powers that be think of an individual’s right to religious freedom, expression, and conviction. Moreover, the idea that one should deprioritize one’s own religious conviction over that of what those in power deem is better for the masses is considered an “uncontroversial claim” to these researchers. In truth, nothing is more insulting, demeaning, or offensive to the idea of personal religious or moral conviction.
This writer may ask, whatever happened to one’s own autonomy over one’s body? How perfectly ironic it is that the same crowd that proclaims the virtues of having a pro-choice position in matters of abortion, eschew the pro-choice mantra for those who choose to not participate in being forcefully subjected to a medical procedure that was developed in part through abortion!
As for the nature of the vaccine’s development, and the use of aborted fetus cells in its production, this reality alone would preclude this writer from choosing to receive it purely on religious grounds. For a human baby to suffer the injustice and indignity of abortion, only to have multinational hundred-billion-dollar-a-year pharmaceutical conglomerates utilize his or her body parts as some sick commodity with which to further enrich themselves, is a bridge too far. So-called “faith” leaders who are weakly attempting to shill for the government-pharma machine by asking those of faith to deny their convictions and just “get the jab” have chosen their true allegiance to the god of this world, rather than the Lord of heaven.
The Vatican’s Statement
In a meandering statement that seems to both recognize the moral dilemma at hand, and completely dismiss it as invalid, the Vatican’s Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith stated the following, “when ethically irreproachable Covid-19 vaccines are not available… it is morally acceptable to receive Covid-19 vaccines that have used cell lines from aborted fetuses in their research and production process”. How can it be that the Vatican admits the vaccine is “ethically reproachable”, and then condone it as “morally acceptable”? Are there no moral absolutes in the Catholic faith anymore? It’s almost as if they are saying, “don’t do anything immoral… unless it is just too inconvenient not to – in which case it is morally acceptable to do so”.
The statement continues:
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–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’s almost as if the CDC provided its talking points to the Vatican prior to their issuing of this statement with the use of terms such as “all vaccinations recognized as clinically safe and effective” and their characterization of the pandemic. Again, there are no moral absolutes according to those who authored this statement and condone it. The act of abortion whether directly or indirectly made the formulation of these vaccines possible – yet due to the government claiming they are safe, and really really wanting you to get injected with them – there is no valid moral objection anymore, according to the Vatican.
And then there’s this gem:
…the licit use of such vaccines does not and should not in any way imply that there is a moral endorsement of the use of cell lines proceeding from aborted fetuses. Both pharmaceutical companies and governmental health agencies are therefore encouraged to produce, approve, distribute and offer ethically acceptable vaccines that do not create problems of conscience for either health care providers or the people to be vaccinated.
Why would pharmaceutical companies and governments be encouraged to produce “ethically acceptable” alternatives, if they just got finished telling us that these vaccines are indeed ethically acceptable?
Finally, they conclude with something very interesting:
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… 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. (emphasis added) (SOURCE)
This is interesting. This statement in defense of the vaccine from the Vatican has been referred to by all manner of governments and other agents as an answer to those with a moral objection, as if telling them to go ahead and get the shot because the Vatican says it’s ok. Yet they conveniently ignore the part in this directive that pronounces that all vaccination programs must be voluntary. It will be interesting to see if the Vatican steps up and issues a direct repudiation of vaccine mandates being put into place by western governments, especially the U.S. But it’s clear that without any defense of moral absolutes from this current Pontiff, such a statement will most likely not be forthcoming.
However, some credit is due to Rome for at least recognizing the natural right of any individual to be led by their own conscience, and make their own decisions in matters of moral implication, and not to be coerced by any government to do that which they personally find to be ethically or morally repugnant.
The “Anti-vaxxer” Debate
Contrary to the prevailing ideas of those in positions of enormous power within the four cultural pillars of government, media, entertainment, and academia – those of us who are skeptical and not willing to readily trust the government/pharmaceutical apparatus’ promises that the vaccines are safe and effective, are not “anti-vaxxers”. What you do to your own body is your business, and not of my concern. Someone who is anti-vaccine would actively campaign against the vaccine itself – not just simply being against a forced mandate to receive it. Those who are referred to as “anti-vaxxers” do not care if their neighbor chooses to get the vaccine – they themselves just simply choose not to. A more accurate description for these would be “anti-government-coercion”; or better yet, “pro-individual-autonomy”.
In addition to the moral objections concerning abortion’s role in COVID vaccine development, vaccine skeptics point to the number of health issues already being tied to the vaccine. The Pfizer/Moderna versions of the vaccine which utilizes mRNA technology, previously untested on humans, has the potential to be incredibly devastating according to Dr. Romeo Quijano, M.D.:
The fact that an entirely new RNA vaccine technology which has never been used before in humans is a danger signal that should not be ignored. Several of the US candidates (Moderna, Pfizer/BioNTech, and Arcturus Therapeutics) are using this never-before-approved technology. Exogenous mRNA is inherently immunostimulatory, and this feature of mRNA could be beneficial or detrimental. It may provide adjuvant activity and it may inhibit antigen expression and negatively affect the immune response. The paradoxical effects of innate immune sensing on different formats of mRNA vaccines are incompletely understood. Potential safety concerns include local and systemic inflammation, biodistribution and persistence of expressed immunogen, stimulation of auto-reactive antibodies, and potential toxic effects of non-native nucleotides and delivery system components. A mRNA-based vaccine could also induce potent type I interferon responses, which have been associated not only with inflammation but also potentially with autoimmunity. Another potential safety issue could derive from the extracellular RNA which has been shown to increase the permeability of tightly packed endothelial cells and may promote blood coagulation and pathological thrombus formation. (SOURCE)
The fact that the COVID vaccines all carry the FDA’s official A-OK, doesn’t give one much reassurance – especially given the speed in which these were approved, the political pressure that animates their distribution, and the FDA’s abysmal record of being forthcoming with medical products’ problems and lack of safety for public use.
As reported by Dr. Quijano, the pharmaceutical companies certainly cannot be trusted with having the best interest of the public in mind either:
For example, initial clinical trial results for the COVID-19 vaccine of Moderna reportedly showed that three of the 15 human experimental subjects in the high dose group suffered serious and medically significant symptoms. Moderna, however, concluded that the vaccine was “generally safe and well tolerated,” which the corporate-dominated media dutifully reported, covering-up the real danger from the vaccine.
Moderna further showed a compete disregard for the wellbeing of not only the public, but its own volunteer trial recipients:
In a brazen act of unethical behaviour, Moderna even used a volunteer vaccine recipient, Ian Haydon, to appear in many appearances on media promoting Moderna’s experimental COVID-19 vaccine. Moderna encouraged Haydon to appear on TV to deceive the public and its shareholders. Less than 12 hours after vaccination, Haydon suffered muscle aches, vomiting, spiked a 103.2 degree fever and had lost consciousness. The vaccine, pushed by Dr. Anthony Fauci, director of the US National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, and financed by Bill Gates, used an experimental mRNA technology that supposedly would allow rapid deployment, waiving the usual pre-clinical and animal studies. (SOURCE)
The rapid and non-transparent manner in which these vaccines were brought to market and foisted upon society should give one pause, or at least prompt one to conduct his or her own research in lieu of simply taking the word of the government as unadulterated truth. The ethical problems inherent in the development of the vaccines, specifically the use of aborted fetal cell lines, make for a legitimate moral and/or religious objection for people of faith at a deeply personal level.
The existence of those with personal objections to being forced by government mandate to be vaccinated aren’t sitting well with many however. MSNBC host Mehdi Hasan agreed with Noam Chomsky that those who refuse to be injected with the pharmaceutical cocktail should be “socially isolated”, and be denied access to basic goods and services. Once again, the left shows its true colors and their love for segregating those who are considered “other”, just as the Democrat party spent an entire century persecuting and denying civil rights to black Americans – even after they lost their beloved institute of slavery.
Several public figures and celebrities like NBA star Kyrie Irving, singer Nicki Minaj, model Doutzen Kroes, comedian Rob Schneider, rapper Offset, and many others have openly expressed their choice to refrain from taking the vaccine due to various personal reasons. In response, a full media assault on all fronts has been launched against them – and by extension all Americans choosing to not get jabbed – shaming them for their positions, and to try and persuade them to get in line with the status quo, or else.
The liberal left who used to pride itself on things like defending personal choice, free speech, liberty, and individuality have abdicated their “Question Authority” signs, and have volunteered themselves to be the willing pawns of the Big Government/Big Pharma cabal hellbent exploiting any opportunity to acquire as much power and wealth as possible. “My body, my choice” only seems to ring true when the political capital is favorable for them.
The Moral Objection
For You formed my inward parts;
You covered me in my mother’s womb.
I will praise You, for I am fearfully and wonderfully made;
Marvelous are Your works,
And that my soul knows very well.
My frame was not hidden from You,
When I was made in secret,
And skillfully wrought in the lowest parts of the earth.
Your eyes saw my substance, being yet unformed.
And in Your book they all were written,
The days fashioned for me,
When as yet there were none of them. – Psalm 139:13-16
The Bible tells us that we are all formed by the hand of God Himself, in our mother’s womb; created in His image, and that He even knows our days and years before we even exist. It is clear that we are all precious in God’s sight, and created with a purpose. Abortion interferes with God’s original purpose for that tiny life inside the womb, and completely destroys the most precious gift that God gives all of us – life. While we believe that those who choose to have an abortion can be forgiven as we all can for our sins through the blood of Christ, it is completely morally repugnant to endorse or participate in any activity that is designed to profit off of, or use the products of abortion (i.e. human tissue) as a commodity or vehicle of trade or revenue.
The 1st Amendment of the United States Constitution guarantees that individuals are free to practice and express their religious convictions without interference or persecution from the state. This most basic liberty enshrined in the very fabric of our society is rapidly being threatened. Many Americans are invoking their right to religious liberty and to not participate in acts that violate their moral conscience, and yet are being denied exemptions from vaccine mandates – which is completely unconstitutional, and a violation of one’s civil rights. Those who are granted exemptions are forced to comply with exhaustive litmus tests to “prove” that their religious beliefs are sincerely held and legitimate. If one truly had autonomy over one’s body and conscience, such ridiculous measures wouldn’t be necessary.
Currently, there are those who pine for a society where no one has any right to religious liberty at all, and blindly follow all government directives – regardless of personal conviction, ala Orwell’s 1984. Again, this sentiment is proudly vocalized by the same left who dares you to advocate against a woman freely choosing to abort the child growing in her womb at her leisure.
The main argument of the “everybody get vaxxed regardless” proponents is that what’s good for the whole trumps that of the individual. The implication being that forcing someone to get vaccinated supposedly prevents spreading the virus to those around them. But even the CDC itself says that this isn’t the case. Fully vaccinated individuals can still carry and transmit the virus to others, as well as get sick and even die from the virus itself. The long-term effects of the vaccine is still completely unknown as well. Already, we have seen reports of myocarditis and other serious cardiovascular issues arising as a direct result of vaccination. So it is no wonder that millions of Americans are hesitant or unwilling to inject themselves.
Since we know that vaccination doesn’t prevent the spread of COVID; and mandates aren’t allowing for negative COVID test results to be submitted in lieu of vaccination; and someone cannot choose natural immunity due to their recovering from the virus in the past – then what gives? It seems the push is simply to move as much product as possible, regardless of one’s own conscience or choice. We know that pharmaceutical companies are making record profits off of taxpayers due to this pandemic, and they have the benefit of the power of government doing their marketing for them to further enrich themselves. Armed with fear tactics and false narratives, one can expect it to only get worse as more and more mandates crop up – despite the Biden administration promising not to employ them. Now more than ever, it is critical for people of faith to steel themselves and refuse to be coerced to do that which violates their conscience. Freedom of religion, conscience, and bodily autonomy are cornerstones of a free society, and losing them would be catastrophic and unrecoverable.