How can one be Pro-Life AND Pro-Vaccine??

Half of the U.S. adult population is simultaneously both against abortion and for a vaccine schedule that uses induced abortion derived fetal cells. How can such an extreme form of moral hypocrisy be maintained by millions without virtually any discussion?  

It is an extremely cognitively dissonant fact that at least half of Americans polled consider themselves to be against abortion (i.e. "pro-life"), yet the vast majority of Americans support a vaccine schedule that requires the induced abortion of a fetus (and the subsequent harvesting of aborted fetal cells) for the production of vaccines injected into their loved ones.  

Induced abortion-derived fetal cells are used in the production of a range of medical products, but primarily biologicals like vaccines. Their use was first innovated by Dr. Leonard Hayflick, in the 1960's, working at the Wistar Institute located in Philadelphia, PA. Dr. Hayflick found them an ideal substrate for the growth of viruses to be used in live vaccines.  It has been estimated that, "One aborted baby can be the source of a cell strain with a potential yield of about 20 million metric tons of cells, which can be stored frozen for many years."¹ Clearly their utility for the mass production of vaccines is one reason why they were chosen despite the moral controversy. 

You can view an extensive list of fetal cell derived products here, along with the particular fetal cell line used, the manufacturer of the product, and what if any 'ethical' non-fetal cell products exist as an alternative. Below is a diagram of the vaccines in the U.S. and Canada vaccine schedules that contain aborted cell line derived vaccines (in red):

We should also note that one of our readers pointed out that there are plenty of pro-choice persons in the U.S. that are also pro-mandatory vaccine, or at least complicit with the removal of philosophical and religious exemptions -- another glaring example of the hypocrisy. 

The Ignorance or Immorality of Pro-Vaccine/Pro-Lifers?

While it may not be possible to reconcile the inconsistent moral logic operative within a population of millions of pro-life and pro-vaccine individuals, we can at least try to better understand how such an extreme form of hypocrisy could have arisen.

A lack of scientific literacy combined with a lack of full disclosure from the medical profession may be at the root of the problem. Because cells from aborted fetuses are labeled "diploid cells" in the ingredients lists of vaccines that contain them, the reality of their origin can become obscured by technical language. Diploid simply means a cell that contains a nucleus with two complete sets of chromosomes, one contributed by each parent. Were the colloquial term "aborted fetus cells" used, and if medical professions considered it their ethical responsibility to inform patients that they are unknowingly violating their own religious principles, it would be far harder to evade the obviously untenable moral incongruity implied by their use.

Ethically speaking, it is doubtful that ignorance alone would fully absolve one from the moral obligations and imperatives of one's religion and one's God. But even if this were the case, vaccines are products that get directly injected into infants and children and whose ingredient lists are publicly available. Why are parents not doing their due diligence by reading the ingredient lists on vaccines in the same way that they are now with reading food labels? The problem with vaccine ingredients, of course, is not just one of morality, but toxicology. The fact that aluminum, mercury or formaldehyde, are still being used in them should be reason alone to question their safety. But the fetal DNA itself that contaminates vaccines is also a concern as far as contributing to autoimmunity and the increase in autism spectrum disorder. 

The Pro-Vaccine/Pro-Life's Faith In the God of "Science" over Religion

Let's look a little deeper at the underlying psychology here. Whether consciously or not, the illogical and immoral behavior of millions of avowedly pro-life and pro-vaccine parents reveals at least two other possibilities.

First, they are making a utilitarian decision on some level. Practically speaking, they are willing to disregard one of their religion's most fundamental moral precepts because they believe by doing so these abortion-derived vaccines will protect themselves and their children from life-threatening diseases. Clearly here the health of the body is being prioritized over the health of the soul.

Second, it reflects a lack of authentic religious faith. Clearly, for this population, the religion of Modern Medicine and its supposedly Science-Based scriptures trumps that of religious tenets that forbid support of abortion and/or complicity with it.

Where the American public places their faith -- not in theory but as actually practiced -- is at the heart of the issue. Most Americans believe it a foregone conclusion that the "science on vaccine safety and efficacy is settled," when, in fact, nothing could be further from the truth when the actual, non-industry funded published literature is taken into account. Given the uncritical and unquestioning faith the general populace has in the media and government on vaccine issues (The CDC's authority, for instance, being eminence-based and not evidence-based), their assumption that their children's lives will be in dire peril if they don't vaccinate clearly overrides supposedly God-ordained moral precepts that must be obeyed to ensure their souls won't be in dire peril. What does this say about modern religious beliefs and their waning strength?