Human vaccination is an increasingly controversial topic. In 2019, the Oregon Legislature considered removing the religious and philosophical and even parental discretion exemptions from the requirement to vaccinate, and the House passed HB 3063. Parents may choose to not vaccinate based on a medical experience of the child or of a sibling. Despite this, Oregon has a 93% vaccination rate, and even that is lower than the national average. Lower even than Mississippi.

The ever-growing list of vaccines routinely administered to children have been suspected of a wide range of side-effects, and that's why requiring them is controversial. As government agency cry "pandemic" many people think that makes the requirement of a COVID-19 vaccine inevitable, and therefore even more controversial. As if that wasn't enough, the development, testing and production of the COVID-19 vaccine has included the use of aborted human tissue, and for some, that is a bridge too far. Many people think it's simply not ethical to use the leftover human remains of an abortion to develop or -- worse -- to produce a vaccine. If agreement can't be found on that, at least we can agree that forcing a person who thinks that abortion is morally wrong shouldn't be forced to take a vaccine that contains leftover human remains of an abortion.

This is easy ethics. At least it should be. Let's see if the Oregon Legislature and the Oregon Health Authority think so.

Founded in 2011 and named for Dr. Charlotte Denman Lozier -- a contemporary of Susan B. Anthony -- the Charlotte Lozier Institute is, according to their website, "committed to bringing the power of science, medicine, and research to bear in life-related policy making, media, and debates to promote a culture and polity of life." They've taken on the task of an ethical scrutiny of the various attempts at a COVID-19 vaccine. COVID-19 Vaccine Candidates and Abortion-Derived Cell LinesThey say,

"Accurate information about the development and production of COVID-19 vaccines is essential, especially because many proposed candidates use newer molecular technologies for production of a viral vaccine. One concern regarding the ethical assessment of viral vaccine candidates is the potential use of abortion-derived cell lines in the development, production or testing of a vaccine. This analysis utilizes data from the primary scientific literature when available, along with data from clinical trial documents, reputable vaccine tracking websites, and published commercial information. It is the hope that by providing accurate data, recipients can make well-informed decisions regarding vaccine choices."

They've developed an interesting document describing the science of vaccine production in general, packing a great deal of scientific knowledge into a ten page document and shedding light on the current development of a COVID-19 vaccine. Of real interest is the AstraZeneca and Johnson & Johnson vaccines, which are nearing the end of development. Both use abortion-derived cell lines for development, testing and production.

This is part of the reason why we have legislative processes that are cumbersome and tedious. When everyone is running around frenzied, with their hair on fire, exclaiming "pandemic," we tend to make poor legal, constitutional, ethical and scientific decisions. Let's hope the legislature can take a breath and let freedom govern.


--Staff Reports

Post Date: 2020-12-06 12:54:14

Last Update: 2020-12-06 16:04:54