Well then you are swallowing a camel while straining a gnat. That device cooperates in abortion millions of times more than a COIVD vaccine.

If you obey God's magisterium, that would be the CDF who has said these vaccines are ethical.

Yes, you cannot consistently use a phone computer or tablet while objecting to this degree of extremely-remote cooperation.

Now you are making claims where you could not participate in society at all: the connection with flu or many other vaccines is so remote that you can't use anything produced by almost any government (like roads or sidewalks) or produced by anyone paying taxes to the government (like anything you can buy in any store in the USA). You would essentially need to be a completely off-grid subsistence farmer or hunter-gatherer making every tool you use from raw materials.

@Fr Mattehw P Schneider LC "Yes, you cannot consistently use a phone computer or tablet while objecting to this degree of extremely-remote cooperation."

...please provide examples where the software, materials or manufacturing for " a phone, computer, or tablet" is derived from aborted infants.

"Every one has parts made in China." @Fr Matthew P Schneider LC

Please list which Chinese-made parts are derived from aborted infants. i.e. which parts require aborted infants as a raw material or require aborted infants as a necessary component in their manufacturing.

I'm not being snide, Father.

If you can't, then you've made a classic post-hoc fallacy. Communist China's "One Child Policy" was already in place -before- a.) the growing ownership of personal computers in the mid 80s and b.) the massive relocation of manufacturing, first from the USA to Japan/ Taiwan and then to the more-competitive China during the 90s..

Additionally, consumers are not responsible for what the Chinese do with their funds AFTER a legitimate transaction.

Here's a simple example. If I pay you for a book, that's a lawful and moral transaction. I have not purchased anything contrarty to Catholic teachings.

My money was lawfully earned, the book I bought from you was a good one (and probably printed by the Benziger Brothers, :D) That's the end of our transaction and my legal claim over those funds.

If, after our sale is concluded, you take the proceeds and buy drugs, then your transaction would be contrary to Catholic teachings. I have no moral right to dictate what you do with the money you earned lawfully..

Western electronic components are not made using aborted infants as a raw material and they do not need aborted infants to be manufactured. The same can not be said of the more popular Covid vaccines.

That's an aspect of the discussion I will leave in the capable hands of @The New Knights Templar and @Ave Crux

Cooperation in evil is about causing or helping to cause, even in the slightest way current or future evil acts. Funding Chinese forced abortions does than FAR more than using a drug that was tested on a cell line that originated from a fetal corpse who was probably aborted.

The casual chain, not the physical chain is what is important for moral analysis .(Otherwise the US would need to hand most land back to native tribes.)

"Cooperation in evil is about causing or helping to cause, even in the slightest way current or future evil acts."

Buying electronic components does not cause future evil acts. Those are caused by the perpetrator.

"Funding Chinese forced abortions does..."

Again, GTV's users are not funding abortions. They're buying consumer goods from manufacturers who purchased electronic components. Those manufacturers did not fund abortions. They bought electronic components.

The Chinese then misused the funds afterwards. That fault is theirs, not the manufacturers or the end consumers.

"The casual chain, not the physical chain is what is important for moral analysis ."

I suspect you meant to write "causal chain", but I understand what you meant. A buyer of goods has no moral claim on or moral right to dictate how the seller chooses to spend the funds earned after a transaction.

Your causal chain would apply if you could show Chinese government abortions caused these electronic components to be manufactured or were involved in their manufacture in some way. They aren't.

To give another example. Suppose a man buys a bottle of whiskey, drives drunk, and kills someone. Happens often enough.

The victim's relatives can't sue Jack Daniels and Ford for causing the misuse of their products AFTER a legal transaction. The buyer misused a legitimate product AFTER the sale. This is why the "causal chain" reasoning does not apply here.

So you are saying that taking this abortion tainted jab is the right choice even though:

1) Other vaccines for the same purpose exist which are not abortion tainted? And other medical treatments exist. Note that the vaccines themselves are not preventive, all they claim to do is reduce your risk of dying if you do get the virus. But other medical treatments exist that claim to the same, because these were used prior to introduction of the vaccine. I fail to see how the abortion tainted vaccines are the right option here.

2) The harmful effects of the vaccine in the short term and long term are not known (well, for the sake of the argument let's assume they are not known). So it is possible that they may do more harm than good.

3) It is not known if the benefits outweigh the risks because it is now evident that some of those who are vaccinated are anyway getting infected and they say that one needs boosters for some of the variants. In any case, we do not see the Church promoting vaccines for other diseases. Why only this vaccine?

To call this vaccine "abortion-tainted" the device you posted this on is "genocide-tainted, abortion-tainted, slavery-tainted, and phonography-tainted." (genocide &abortion: China; slavery: rare earthmetals; pronogrpahy: lead the curve with several technological developments in your device.)

So on your genocide-tainted, abortion-tainted, slavery-tainted, and phonography-tainted device you decide to make a untrue statement: "The harmful effects of the vaccine in the short term and long term are not known." SHort term we have hundred of millions of cases to work with. Long-term, we have a pretty good idea as the vast vast majority long term effects would show up within a few months and we have tens of millions with 6+ months since vaccination.

Then on your genocide-tainted, abortion-tainted, slavery-tainted, and phonography-tainted device you decide to make another untrue statement: "we do not see the Church promoting vaccines for other diseases." Here's Pope Francis catholicherald.co.uk/…ope-francis-visits-mexico-city-childrens-hospital/
Plus we have Poeps back since the 1700s stating how vaccines are good and not one ever suggesting against vaccination. And we have Catholic hospitals promoting vaccinations, etc. Maybe you just missed that.

Well you accuse me of untruths. You do not know which device I am posting on so you cannot make untrue statements. My country has fought a war against China and has an ongoing border dispute. Sellers here, including Amazon are required to disclose the country of origin. As I said, there are other Covid 19 vaccines in the world that do NOT have an association with abortion. Why not promote those vaccines? The link you posted does not work but I googled it. Giving a single child the polio vaccine during a visit to a children's hospital where the primary purpose of the visit was not to promote vaccine can hardly be called promoting other vaccines. When we say the Church, we mean clergy. Catholic hospitals can promote any vaccine just as they can promote any medical treatment that they offer as part of their services. In this case dioceses, bishops, priests, bishop conferences have been encouraging priests to take these vaccines. Where I live, parishes have organised vaccination drives/camps on their premises. I have not said the Church is against vaccines. For the record, I have already taken the Covid vaccine which has no association with abortion so I am not anti-vaxx.
Since you do know the short term and long term effects, please provide links. Having a good idea is not enough.