Cruelty-free shampoo but not medicine
From the Unilever website (a company I chose at random):
Making sure our products are safe without testing on animals
Every product Unilever makes must be safe for people to use and safe for our planet. We believe that animal experiments should not be used to make sure that our products are safe.
****
We also work closely with researchers in the EU ToxRisk programme, which is driving changes in safety science away from animal testing.
Surely you have contemplated your bottle of shampoo during your morning shower, as I have done. You must have noticed a disclaimer: Cruelty-free shampoo -- no animal testing.
Why should we accept testing (not to mention development and production) using tissue derived from human babies, procured in abortion, for any product?
If this much effort can be put into preventing cruelty to animals, why cannot a commensurate effort be put into developing ways of bringing medical (and other) products to market without the taint of immorality?
Thou Shalt Not Kill refers to other human beings, not to animals. Let's get our priorities straight. If we can be delicate about animals, let's clear our consciences about babies.