On the matter of vaccines and moral/ethical considerations

Please see the link from  the Pontifical Academy for Life when it drafted this document in 2005 that, IMNHO, it may have magisterial weight since it was approved by John Paul II.

The summary is notable, especially the first line, in light of the recent political discussions around vaccinations and those objecting to them, especially for religious and moral reasons. This hype in the drive by media  is a political tactic of the DNC and the left for the 2016 election (much like the “war on women” strategy of 2012), in an effort to demonize their opponents.

ESh thinks it offers an opportunity to re-visit a moral problem often ignored or misunderstood, even by pro-lifers and devout Catholics.

• More info on morally acceptable/unacceptable vaccines: http://www.cogforlife.org/vaccine-overview/
• 

• More info on Sound Choice Pharmaceutical Institute founded by researcher/pharmacist Dr Theresa Deisher: http://www.cogforlife.org/soundchoice/
• Why is there a measles outbreak? Look directly for vax maker Merck which refuses to make its MMR and varicella vax from anything BUT  aborted cells: http://www.cogforlife.org/2015/01/26/measles-outbreak-blame-merck-not-parents/
• Other Vatican documents on the topic: http://www.cogforlife.org/the-vatican-vaccines-from-abortion/

 

To summarize, it must be confirmed that:

• –there is a grave responsibility to use alternative vaccines and to make a conscientious objection with regard to those which have moral problems;
• – as regards the vaccines without an alternative, the need to contest so that others may be prepared must be reaffirmed, as should be the lawfulness of using the former in the meantime insomuch as is necessary in order to avoid a serious risk not only for one’s
• own children but also, and perhaps more specifically, for the health conditions of the population as a whole – especially for pregnant women;
• – the lawfulness of the use of these vaccines should not be misinterpreted as a declaration of the lawfulness of their production, marketing and use, but is to be understood as being a passive material cooperation and, in its mildest and remotest sense, also active, morally justified as an extrema ratio due to the necessity to provide for the good of one’s children and of the people who come in contact with the children (pregnant women);
• – such cooperation occurs in a context of moral coercion of the conscience of parents, who are forced to choose to act against their conscience or otherwise, to put the health of their children and of the population as a whole at risk. This is an unjust alternative choice, which must be eliminated as soon as possible.

---