CathInfo.com

The vague and ambiguous posing of  your questions makes me wonder what you are truly trying to prove. These are questions you already know the answer to, but you seem insistent on melding the definitions to somehow "catch" people to prove that it is "morally indifferent'  to use fetal cell lines in vaccines. You have used the cover of stem cells, human cells, placental cells and umbilical cells to diffuse the true object which is fetal (baby) cells which will never be morally indifferent.
If moral philosophy involves this type of  trickery, I'm glad I'm no scholar- you are just wrong.

This is why multi-volumed manuals of moral theology exist: because it is necessary to consider actions and their morality in se. For example, murder is wrong in se; therefore the act of murder can never be justified by double effect (i.e., since murder is wrong in se, there are no circuмstances under which it can be morally done). Morally indifferent or even morally good actions can be sinful based on circuмstances. For example, it is morally indifferent to mow the lawn, but to do so on Sunday would be morally wrong; nonetheless, even though it is wrong in that particular instance, the act of mowing the lawn is in se morally indifferent.
I ask these quetions and make these points because I believe they are relevant to the discussion at hand as to whether taking a vaccine in which fetal cells were used in the production can be justified as remote material cooperation in evil or not. Since taking a vaccine is morally indifferent and since using human cells to make vaccines is morally indifferent, it seems that the question is indeed one of cooperation in evil, cooperation in abortion after the fact.
You may dislike such discussion or find it distasteful, but there is along Catholic tradition of approaching moral problems in such a manner as this.

My statement was in answer to you saying

So no, I was a specifically responding to your insinuation.


I suggested that we need to accept whatever God sends us, or allows us to suffer, even through His enemies, and that we need to pray to accept whatever is our lot, not without a fight of course, but finally God is the arbitrator.  The point being that He will not send anything that we cannot withstand through His grace.

I am suggesting that, instead of the snide insinuations that we need to pray for each other.

You mean like this snide insinuation in post 118?
Well said. Ladi and PAT.  It's a shame indeed that some posters here insist on refusing to read the available literature, but choose to remain in their ignorance. One can only guess why. 

.
In any case, your arguments (and the vast majority of the arguments being made in this thread) are arguments about whether it is licit to use cells derived from aborted babies to produce a drug. That is an entirely different question to whether it is sinful to receive a drug made in such a manner. Thus, very little of this thread has any practical relevance to people reading it, or the people contemplating taking the vaccine, or the people who want to know if it is sinful to take the vaccine or not.

The lay folk's arguments on this board are trying to make a moral judgment about this topic without the guidance from and authority of the magisterium.  I am fine with that so long as they accept the fact that their arguments/conclusions are just that and not Church authority.  Therefore, they should not expect others to agree with them and accept them as if they were Church teaching since even orthodox traditional priests have come to different conclusions.