The cells from aborted healthy babies have been used in the development of vaccines and medicines for about 80 years. The argument has been made that since the cell lines are significantly unrelated to the act of the abortion of the baby it is morally justifiable for a Christian to receive vaccines that used such cells in their development and manufacture.
However it is argued that it would be morally wrong if the babies were aborted for the express purpose of using their parts to develop the vaccines and other medicines. I agree. But even if these babies weren’t aborted for the purpose of using their body parts, it would still be morally wrong to use them to develop vaccines and other medicines. But as it stands, the aforementioned argument relies on the notion that the cell lines used are so old, coming from aborted babies back in the 1960s, that there is now little connection to them.
Jonathan Sarfati of CMI wrote in an online letter defending their use:1
“No new embryos are being generated for the purpose of culturing vaccines (this is immoral). The vaccine makers had nothing to do with the abortions.”
Using aborted babies 50 days or 50 years after being killed does not make it morally right. Additional time cannot make something morally right. And whether the researchers had anything to do with the abortions is irrelevant to the argument whether it is morally right to use aborted baby parts. Furthermore is that premise really true in vaccine and other medical research today?