Army Matt is a priest, and a fine one at that. Maybe try to have some respect?
I do not doubt his pastoral abilities. Clerical ordinations however do not confer magical ability to understand all situations and come up with the right answers. So while I respect his priesthood, that does not mean I need to agree with him on everything nor pamper him with "respect" if he is in thew rong.
Let's run back the discussion about the abortions in this thread:
1) It was asserted by Brighid that vaccines are made of aborted fetuses and that vaccinations fuel the " the abortion industry". According to this antivaxxer theory, babies are right now being aborted and placed in vials along with "toxins" to manufacture vaccines. This provides financial gain to the evil plotters, and as a bonus they get to rejoice in the deaths of innocent children.
2) JSRG rightly pointed out that there are "zero vaccines used with tissue taken from abortions. There are, however, vaccines that use a cell line that was derived from fetal tissue taken from two abortions performed decades ago--but those cell lines do not contain fetal tissue". This is true; a
few vaccines are grown on cell lines derived from a foetus that was aborted years ago, because viruses grow better on the type of cells that they normally infect. The vaccine is then washed, eliminating all but a trace of the growth medium. So no, there are no dead babies in any vaccine, and no new babies are aborted to make vaccines.
3) Armymatt asserted that since in the military people are granted religious exemptions in regard to vaccinations, there _must_ be vaccinations made by the "use of fetal tissue" because otherwise there would be no religious exemption. He persists with this view, despite having been clearly told it is way too simplistic and does not correspond to actual reality. There simply are not any vaccinations made from aborted fetal tissue.
I think his interventions in the discussion are harmful, because they can cultivate the truly harmful views such as Brighids, which if they were common, would result in the deaths of millions of people annually. In failing to comprehend the distinctions and treating the matter in a very simpleton way, he is not helping the discussion.