Send CathInfo's owner Matthew a gift from his Amazon wish list:
https://www.amazon.com/hz/wishlist/ls/25M2B8RERL1UO

« previous next »
Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab  (Read 3121 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline TKonkel

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 25
  • Reputation: +26/-7
  • Gender: Male
Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
« Reply #15 on: October 03, 2021, 12:31:41 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!1
    • Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin which the author and others here seem to highly recommend are as equally "abortion tainted" as the Moderna and Pfizer vaccine.  They too were tested on HEK 293 cells.

    Also, these four criteria, especially the claim that there must be a grave threat to health and a proportionate cause to take a vaccine tested using a fetal cell line really just begs the question of the sort of participation in the evil of abortion that taking the vaccine involves.  How remote is it?  That is the question and these criteria certainly do not answer that question.  Using these criteria, I could make many similar arguments and I wonder if the author would accept them.  I could list pretty much everything at Walmart and similar stores that support Planned Parenthood directly or carry products that support Planned Parenthood.  I could point out that China has a forced abortion policy and so any products I purchase from China go to support this policy.  In fact, the participation in abortion is even less remote here than it is in taking the Pfizer or Moderna vaccine.  
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
    « Reply #16 on: October 03, 2021, 11:29:21 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: TKonkel on October 03, 2021, 12:31:41 AM
    Hydroxychloroquine and Ivermectin which the author and others here seem to highly recommend are as equally "abortion tainted" as the mσdernα and pfιzєr vaccine.  They too were tested on HEK 293 cells.

    Also, these four criteria, especially the claim that there must be a grave threat to health and a proportionate cause to take a vaccine tested using a fetal cell line really just begs the question of the sort of participation in the evil of abortion that taking the vaccine involves.  How remote is it?  That is the question and these criteria certainly do not answer that question.  Using these criteria, I could make many similar arguments and I wonder if the author would accept them.  I could list pretty much everything at Walmart and similar stores that support Planned Parenthood directly or carry products that support Planned Parenthood.  I could point out that China has a forced abortion policy and so any products I purchase from China go to support this policy.  In fact, the participation in abortion is even less remote here than it is in taking the pfιzєr or mσdernα vaccine. 

    False: Another post (which I'm currently searching for) debunked the claim made in Fr. Schneider's article which claimed that the pharma companies marketing ivermectin are testing it on HEK-293.  Those scientists who are conducting their own experiments with ivermectin and HEK-293 have no relation to the pharma companies manufacturing/marketing it,  and are therefore morally irrelavent.

    Regarding your objection to the CDF's four criteria for remote material cooperation in evil, your opinion has no relavence or value in discussing the moral liceity of abortion jabs. 

    PS: Can anyone help me find that post?  It was in a thread about hospitals requiring people seeking religious exemption being required to sign an oath to avoid ibuprofen, tylenol, etc (for the same sophistic reason as adduced by Professor Konkel above: Someone tested HEK-293 on all those medicines.  Problem: None of those who did so had any connection to the pharma companies bringing them to market).
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
    « Reply #17 on: October 03, 2021, 11:52:49 AM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 03, 2021, 11:29:21 AM
    False: Another post (which I'm currently searching for) debunked the claim made in Fr. Schneider's article which claimed that the pharma companies marketing ivermectin are testing it on HEK-293.  Those scientists who are conducting their own experiments with ivermectin and HEK-293 have no relation to the pharma companies manufacturing/marketing it,  and are therefore morally irrelavent.

    Regarding your objection to the CDF's four criteria for remote material cooperation in evil, your opinion has no relavence or value in discussing the moral liceity of abortion jabs. 

    PS: Can anyone help me find that post?  It was in a thread about hospitals requiring people seeking religious exemption being required to sign an oath to avoid ibuprofen, tylenol, etc (for the same sophistic reason as adduced by Professor Konkel above: Someone tested HEK-293 on all those medicines.  Problem: None of those who did so had any connection to the pharma companies bringing them to market).

    Here's the article by Children of God which debunks the claim that ivermectin, ibuprofen, et al. currently on the market all use HEK-293 testing in the mfg. process (i.e., and are therefore also morally illicit):


    https://cogforlife.org/2021/05/12/lets-get-a-few-things-cleared-up-testing-cell-lines-and-fetal-tissue/ 
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline Prayerful

    • Full Member
    • ***
    • Posts: 1002
    • Reputation: +354/-59
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
    « Reply #18 on: October 03, 2021, 01:27:04 PM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • Quote from: SeanJohnson on October 02, 2021, 11:11:54 AM
    OK, I figured it out:

    I found the article at this link, which references another article at the top by a Dominican, who I somehow took as the author of the article in question:

    https://www.preciouslife.com/news/998/priests-analysis-of-vatican-docuмents-its-mortally-sinful-to-take-or-facilitate-coronavirus-vaccine/

    Not sure why, since that Dominican is obviously not αnσnymσus, but...

    The author of the refutation in question was writing αnσnymσusly as “Fr. Elias,” and there is nothing provided which would indicate he is a Dominican.

    Apologies for my confusion.
    Fr Elias could be obviously a Carmelite, named after OT St Elias.
    Logged

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
    « Reply #19 on: October 03, 2021, 04:13:15 PM »
  • Thanks!1
  • No Thanks!1
    • Quote from: Patricia on October 03, 2021, 03:49:15 PM

    Fr. Schneider has responded to Jose Trasancos’ commentary here:
    https://www.patheos.com/blogs/throughcatholiclenses/2021/06/anti-vaccine-catholics-break-moral-theology-principles/

    The shill has no better luck here, as Fr. Schneider conspicuously fails to demonstrate the one thing which could win him the argument:

    That there is a direct connection between the pharma company marketing/producing the ivermectin (or other medicine), and the scientist peforming the experiments/testing on HEK-293.

    On the contrary, COG vetted Fr. Schneider's list, and determined that experiments on 13 of the medicines listed therein had no connection to the pharma companies marketing them.

    Essentially, the shill wants you to believe that if I were somehow to test Coca-Cola on HEK-293, then the use of Coca-Cola somehow becomes immoral/illicit (worldwide, and forevermore), despite my "research"/testing having no connection to the Coca-Cola Company.

    All this aside, it is only smoke and mirrors to get you to "reconsider" what the "REAL" criteria for remote material cooperation "should" be, so as to open the door for the SSPX argument in favor of liceity of the death jab.  But once again, he is impeded in this dishonest mission by the very docuмents upon which the SSPX relies upon to claim liceity:

    The 2008 docuмent lists 4 specific criteria or standards to meet, for which the COVID19 jab fails (epicly) on 3 counts, and no amount of distraction can hids that fact.

    But as usual, whenever the shill appears, you can be sure the arrows are hitting the mark, and people are waking up.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."

    Offline SeanJohnson

    • Hero Member
    • *****
    • Posts: 15064
    • Reputation: +9980/-3161
    • Gender: Male
    Re: Dominican Destroys "Remote Material Cooperation" Justification for Abortoin Jab
    « Reply #20 on: October 24, 2021, 10:39:47 AM »
  • Thanks!0
  • No Thanks!0
    • I understand this article is circulating among some SSPX priests, and has recently rolled up to Fr. Fullerton and the US District Office.
    Logged
    Rom 5: 20 - "But where sin increased, grace abounded all the more."
    Pages: 1 [2]
    « previous next »