Name: Hannah R.

Palejaro

BSDC II

The world as we know it has been shattered by the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of us are worried
about the state of the economy, the unemployment rate, and the health of our families and loved ones.
Thus, it is unsurprising that many are growing hopeful about the possibility of a COVID-19 vaccination.
While one may appreciate the need for a rapid response to this worldwide pandemic, we as the
Church/people must be cognizant of the moral and ethical dilemmas raised by this vaccine, most
notably the exploitation of aborted fetal cells in vaccine development. As we all know, abortion is one of
the most contentious issues in the social circle. The pendulum of right and wrong, moral, and immoral,
swings back and forth, but the debate continues. This causes discomfort for pro-life advocates, as it
should. You cannot appeal to positive outcomes to justify the death of an unborn infant. From a moral
standpoint, abortion has a plethora of aspects this includes Virtue on Ethics, Natural Law Theory, and
Deontological.

It is almost difficult to provide a legal decision on abortion in a timely manner since the
discussion is very complicated and each sub-question and sub-part generates more sub-questions and
sub-parts. Nonetheless, there are pro-life advocates who are opposed to abortion and pro-choice
advocates who are either partly or entirely in favor of abortion. Thus, does the abortion debate have a
conclusion? Most likely not. However, as individuals, we may research and get a better understanding of
all sides of the issue before forming our views. In abortion discussions, it is usually prudent to maintain
an objective stance since this will enable you to reach a more informed conclusion. The covid-19 vaccine
and it is an issue with abortion is an unethical act to use against or fighting for the virus. This is deeply
connected to a theoretical framework, virtue on ethics which there can be little question that Thomson's
"A Defense of Abortion" has had a significant influence on the framework of the abortion debate in the
almost 40 years after its first publication. Thomson's pro-abortion case is strengthened by her admission
at the outset that she is prepared to concede (for the purpose of argument) that a fetus is a person with
a right to life. Natural Law philosophy, which regards law and morality as inextricably linked, if not
identical. Morality is concerned with what is right and wrong, as well as with what is good and evil.
According to natural law theorists, human rules are determined by morality, not by an authoritative
figure such as a king or government. As a result, our human nature directs us to determine what the
laws are and to act in accordance with them. The phrase 'natural law' originates with the idea that
human morality originates in nature. Everything in nature, including people, serves a function. According
to natural law theorists, our goal is to live a decent, happy life. As a result, acts that work against that
goal — actions that would hinder another human being from having a decent, happy existence — are
deemed 'unnatural' or 'immoral'. And the last framework that could support this issue is Deontological
Ethics standpoint would certainly say that abortions are wrong, for two main reasons: it is the duty of a
parent to care for their child, not abort it, and that we should treat everyone as an end in themselves,
not a means to an end.

Therefore, we can conclude that ethics or morals have always been an important part of our
cultures' faiths and codes of behavior. Abortion and even homosexuality have had a significant impact
on how society thinks and how unethical it is to use medication that supports taking away a human life.