Pfizer, Moderna, AstraZeneca, Johnson & Johnson, Novavaxab, Sanofi, and Inovio use aborted human cells to test the covid vaccines.  AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson used aborted human cells in the development and production of the vaccine. ¹https://s27589.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2020/12/06.02.21-warp-speed-vaccines-June.pdf. Therefore, we have to ask if we should benefit from vaccines developed using aborted human tissue. CARM’s position is that abortion is sinful. Life does not begin at the womb. It continues. The egg and the sperm are both alive, and they come from human parents. The egg and sperm are not from dogs, cats, fish, or birds. They are from humans. Therefore, the life that continues in the womb is human by nature. Biblically, we have an obligation to protect human life, not kill it for the convenience of others, and certainly not to be experimented on for the benefit of others.

Biblical Ethics

Biblically speaking, we are to help the weak, not experiment on them for our personal gain.  Though medical experimentation is not a topic covered in Scripture, the principles of ethical behavior are there.

1. “Vindicate the weak and fatherless; Do justice to the afflicted and destitute” (Psalm 82:3).
2. “Learn to do good. Seek justice. Reprove the ruthless. Defend the orphan. Plead for the widow” (Isaiah 1:17).
3. “Thus says the LORD, ‘Do justice and righteousness, and deliver the one who has been robbed from the power of his oppressor. Also, do not mistreat or do violence to the stranger, the orphan, or the widow; and do not shed innocent blood in this place” (Jeremiah 22:3).
4. “He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?” (Micah 6:8).
5.  “This is My commandment, that you love one another, just as I have loved you” (John 15:12).

Now, some may immediately bring up the issue of slavery in God ordering the destruction of entire nations as they combat the word of God. To those issues, I request that you examine CARM’s information on them: slavery and destruction of nations so that you would be more informed.

The Nuremberg Code

As a Christian, the Bible is the final authority. But the Nuremberg Code is worth examining. It was formed by the Nuremberg military tribunal after World War II which dealt with the trials of war criminals. They were held in Nuremberg Germany from 1946 to 1949.

“The Code was formulated 50 years ago, in August 1947, in Nuremberg, Germany, by American judges sitting in judgment of Nazi doctors accused of conducting murderous and torturous human experiments in the concentration camps (the socalled Doctors’ Trial). It served as a blueprint for today’s principles that ensure the rights of subjects in medical research. Because of its link with the horrors of World War II and the use of prisoners in Nazi concentration camps for medical experimentation, debate continues today about the authority of the Code, its applicability to modern medical research, and even its authorship” https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/nejm199711133372006, written in 1997.

The experiments done on people were against their will, dangerous, painful, and often resulted in death.

“All of the experiments were conducted with unnecessary suffering and injury and but very little, if any, precautions were taken to protect or safeguard the human subjects from the possibilities of injury, disability, or death. In every one of the experiments the subjects experienced extreme pain or torture, and in most of them they suffered permanent injury, mutilation, or death, either as a direct result of the experiments or because of lack of adequate follow-up care.” https://www.ushmm.org/information/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/special-focus/doctors-trial/nuremberg-code

The following are the Nuremberg Codes.  I’ve underlined parts that are relevant to vaccination experimentation today.

The Ten Nuremberg Codes

1. The voluntary consent of the human subject is absolutely essential. This means that the person involved should have the legal capacity to give consent; should be situated as to be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, over-reaching, or other ulterior forms of constraint or coercion, and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision. This latter element requires that before the acceptance of an affirmative decision by the experimental subject there should be made known to him the nature, duration, and purpose of the experiment; the method and means by which it is to be conducted; all inconveniences and hazards reasonably to be expected; and the effects upon his health or person which may possibly come from his participation in the experiment. The duty and responsibility for ascertaining the quality of the consent rests upon each individual who initiates, directs, or engages in the experiment. It is a personal duty and responsibility which may not be delegated to another with impunity.
2. The experiment should be such as to yield fruitful results for the good of society, unprocurable by other methods or means of study, and not random and unnecessary in nature.
3. The experiment should be so designed and based on the results of animal experimentation and a knowledge of the natural history of the disease or other problem under study that the anticipated results will justify the performance of the experiment.
4. The experiment should be so conducted as to avoid all unnecessary physical and mental suffering and injury.
5. No experiment should be conducted where there is an a priori reason to believe that death or disabling injury will occur; except, perhaps, in those experiments where the experimental physicians also serve as subjects.
6. The degree of risk to be taken should never exceed that determined by the humanitarian importance of the problem to be solved by the experiment.
7. Proper preparations should be made and adequate facilities provided to protect the experimental subject against even remote possibilities of injury disability or death.
8. The experiment should be conducted only by scientifically qualified persons. The highest degree of skill and care should be required through all stages of the experiment of those who conduct or engage in the experiment.
9. During the course of the experiment, the human subject should be at liberty to bring the experiment to an end if he has reached the physical or mental state where continuation of the experiment seems to him to be impossible.
10. During the course of the experiment, the scientist in charge must be prepared to terminate the experiment at any stage, if he has probable cause to believe, in the exercise of the good faith, superior skill, and careful judgment required by him that a continuation of the experiment is likely to result in injury, disability, or death to the experimental subject.

Ethical Questions

Without the word of God as our guide, people justify all kinds of evil. The Bible is our ultimate standard of truth because it comes from God. But, the secularists don’t have an ultimate standard. They look to 1) themselves, 2) the majority opinion, 3) “common sense,” or 4) reducing harm to determine what is right and wrong. Of course, I could expose the huge problems with each of these, but, that is not the scope of this article.  Nevertheless, even from the secular perspective, we can raise ethical questions, such as…

1. Is it ethically permissible to use data derived from Nazi medical experiments?  Why or why not?
2. Should we ignore the information gained by the Nazi’s experiments on subjects, even though we could use the information to help others?   Why or why not?
3. If we use the information gained by the Nazis in their medical experiments on prisoners, does that give credence to their methods?  Why or why not?
4. Do we owe an ethical debt to the victims of the experiments and use the data gathered, so their sacrifices are not wasted?   Why or why not?
5. Should the data gained be used but with a note of condemnation on the methods in which the information was achieved?   Why or why not?
6. If a notice of condemnation of the method of arriving at information is attached so that the information can be used to help others, are we inadvertently encouraging others to behave as the Nazis did?  Why or why not?

These questions are not so simple to answer. Some people think we should use the information gathered by the Nazis so that the sacrifices of the subjects would not be in vain. Others want nothing to do with that information and prefer to derive knowledge through more ethical means. The Nuremberg Code, listed above, was developed to help guide future medical research and experimentation. As far as a secular document goes, it makes a lot of sense.

But again, don’t make the mistake of thinking that I approve of the ultimacy of the Nuremberg Code. I don’t. Only the Christian, Trinitarian God is the ultimate source of all truth as revealed in Scripture. There is nothing beyond Him to which He must submit. But, the Nuremberg Code is good insofar as it agrees with Scripture which is the final revelation of God. It can help shed some ethical light on the issue of deriving benefits from aborted human cells.

Covid Vaccines, Aborted Human Cells, and Christians

As a Christian, I oppose abortion. Furthermore, I oppose medical experimentation done on aborted individuals in order to gain medical knowledge and vaccines. I do not want to take the medicine derived from experimentation on the aborted human cells.  Otherwise, I will be benefiting from deadly experimentation done on others.

If you’re a Christian and have taken a vaccine, please understand I do not judge you. Different people have different levels of awareness and intention regarding covid vaccine development and usage. Some people want to take the vaccine in order to retain their jobs, to keep family members safe, and to comply the governmental requirements. Those are personal choices. The scope of this paper is not intended to deal with those issues. Each person must be fully convinced in his own mind (Romans 14:5). But for me, I do not want to take a vaccine developed from aborted human cells.

 

Please read the CARM disclaimer about this information.

Resources

• https://research.unc.edu/human-research-ethics/resources/ccm3_019064/
• https://www.ushmm.org/information/exhibitions/online-exhibitions/special-focus/doctors-trial/nuremberg-code
• https://www.ncbcenter.org/making-sense-of-bioethics-cms/column185-must-catholics-refuse-a-covid-19-vaccine-made-with-a-cell-line-from-an-abortion