Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

--- utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba451h [2021/03/08 17:34] – added video balleyne
+++ utsfl:classroom:seminars:pba451h [2023/05/08 23:43] (current) – mmccann
@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
     * Cooperation with Evil / Appropriation of Evil / Ill-gotten Gains
     * Guidance
+FIXME useful resource?
+  * https://s27589.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/09/09.17.20-Fetal-Cell-Line-Fact-Sheet.pdf
 ===== Science =====
@@ Line 24: / Line 27: @@
 ==== Fetal Cell Lines ====
+FIXME have clipped a 2m30s section of this video with a good explanation of what cell lines are (but don't play the rest - the ethical analysis is pretty bad)
+https://www.christiansandthevaccine.com/episodes/intro
 [[wp>HEK 293 cells]]
@@ Line 62: / Line 68: @@
 Pro-lifers all agree that we need ethical alternatives to these tainted cell lines. However, given an understanding of how it is they work, there are two possible answers:
   - Some pro-lifers refuse to use such vaccines. This is an ethical stance, a boycott to pressure companies to stop using them. And people should have the right to refuse vaccines with links to unethical sources. (People should also understand that Tylenol, Advil, Aspirin, etc have made use of the same cell lines.)
+    * While boycott is a defensible position for pro-lifers to take, the obligation for all pro-lifers to boycott is not a consistent position to take.
+      * Using Facebook, Google, Microsoft products, buying from Starbucks all have far more direct connections to millions of ongoing abortions - Google, Microsoft, Starbucks donate to Planned Parenthood directly((https://familycouncil.org/?page_id=14547)). Also, Zoom, Netflix, Pepsi, Shell, United Airlines, etc etc. What if your mechanic donates to the local abortion clinic?
+      * Nevermind the rest of medicines or processed foods that have connections to HEK cells
+      * It's simply an inconsistent position for all but the truly ascetic, and vaccines would be much further down the list than other things (e.g. Starbucks: coffee is less essential than medicine, and Starbucks is connected to thousands of ongoing abortions versus a vaccine that has a distant link to one abortion 50+ years ago - if boycott is an obligation for everyone, we wouldn't start with vaccines)
+    * Pro-lifers who boycott vaccines have an additional moral obligation to take extra steps to protect children and their community from disease in place of vaccination
   - Many pro-lifers believe it is morally permissible to use such vaccines, when there are no ethical alternatives available, because the cooperation with evil is remote and there is proportionate reason to do so, while making the objection known and calling for ethical alternatives
 Ultimately, this is a matter of prudential judgment, but there are many important things to consider in making this judgment.
+(Prudential judgment: A man is convicted of theft and his wife doesn't want him to go to prison, judgment to send him to prison or not (more than one legitimate position).)
+=== Principles ===
+In a broken world where it is impossible to be 100% disconnected from evil, pro-lifers and Christians have traditionally turned to the concept of cooperation with evil to determine when it is morally permissible and when it is not — that is, when //we// are morally responsible for cooperating with evil, and when we are //not// - when that responsibility belongs to someone else and is not shared by us.
+Examples:
+  * e.g. paying a mechanic who supports abortion
+  * e.g. driving a friend to an abortion clinic
+  * e.g. God giving us free will
+  * e.g. parent giving teenager things that they use for evil
+Clearly, simplistic answers don't make sense.
+How can we think systematically and consistently about this?
+  * FIXME cooperation with evil, explain the concept
+But then, are vaccines really cooperation? How can you cooperate with something that already happened? Can you cooperate with the Holocaust or the British slave trade in 2021?
+FIXME Maybe cooperation applies to producing a vaccine, but appropriation of evil, or benefitting from ill-gotten gains, is perhaps a better category when it comes to people //taking// a vaccine
+FIXME examples
+  * e.g. Indigenous land
+  * e.g. Nazi research on hypothermia
+FIXME Most challenging analogy I've heard: What if the cell lines were derived from Holocaust victims?
+https://secularprolife.org/2013/05/a-bioethical-question/
 === Janet Smith ===
@@ Line 205: / Line 245: @@
 FIXME summary of the position
   * https://eppc.org/news/statement-from-pro-life-catholic-scholars-on-the-moral-acceptability-of-receiving-covid-19-vaccines/
+FIXME get the illustration of what a cell line is from one of these videos (but only that part)
+https://www.christiansandthevaccine.com/episodes/intro
 FIXME Lists of vaccines
   * https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/
-  * https://cogforlife.org/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf
+  * https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf
+FIXME integrate insights from this article -- it's tracing the actions/intentions not the cell lines that matters morally
+https://churchlifejournal.nd.edu/articles/does-the-origin-of-the-cell-lines-used-to-test-covid19-vaccines-make-any-difference/
 And therefore:
 {{youtube>6EV4hQzCbJA}}
-Maybe helpful (evangelical theological take on COVID-19 vaccine hesitancy among pro-lifers - though I don't like the impact/guilt distinction):
+FIXME HeLa cells taken without consent from Henrietta Lacks (difference in that taking the cells didn't physically harm her--but still an issue of cells obtained in an unethical way) https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henrietta_Lacks
-{{youtube>rBNptN9D9jU}}