Posted on 09/05/2021 4:26:46 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
There’s a legal threshold that religious people must achieve in order to be exempted from a vaccine, or any other mandate by the government. It’s the “sincerely held belief” threshold and government and public health officials are preparing to challenge that by basically saying that those people who invoke the “sincerely held belief” standard are lying.
Others believe that there is danger in stretching the meaning of a religious exemption by not questioning those who seek to use it.
Admittedly, the standard is vague. But in addition to a reasonable definition of “sincerely held,” most supporters of the exemption think that abusing the standard to make a political, anti-vax statement would be unethical and immoral.
Thomas Berg, a self-described “strong supporter of religious exemptions” and a religious liberty advocate who teaches law at the University of St. Thomas in St. Paul, Minnesota, said he believes that there is a strong case to deny many of the religious claims and to test religious sincerity.
“In cases where you’ve got a lot of potential insincere claims — and I think there’s evidence that is what’s happening here in which people are raising religious objections when they’re motivated by fear of the vaccine or political opposition to it — testing sincerity makes sense,” he said. “We have to test sincerity or else we have to accept them all or deny them all, so I think the courts will provide room for testing that.”
We know that none of our rights are absolute, that there are limits to even our most sacred rights. But who creates the religious exemption “test”? It should be a matter of grave concern because no major religion has a moral objection to vaccines ”
(Excerpt) Read more at pjmedia.com ...
The Christian argument for religious exemptions follows two tracks typically:
first, that the vaccine shots at some point in their production used aborted fetal cell lines.
The second argument cites a Bible verse that claims that the human body is God’s temple of the Holy Spirit and argues that for that reason receiving the vaccine would be a sin.
Johnson & Johnson did use a replicated fetal cell line in the production of its vaccine, but Pfizer and Moderna did not. They did, however, use replicated fetal cell lines to test the effectiveness of their vaccine. Those cell lines, however, were isolated from two fetuses in 1973 and 1985 and then replicated numerous times over the ensuing decades. They are commonly used in the pharmaceutical and biotech industries to test and create medications.
The fetal cell argument is categorically rejected by some. “There’s a lot more drugs, vaccines and medicines you should not be taking and protesting if you’re really worried about these fetal cells being used,” said Arthur Caplan, a bioethics professor at New York University. “I don’t think most of this is sincere. I think it’s just a way to get out of having to take a vaccine.”
Of course, it doesn’t matter what the “ethics” professor “thinks.” What matters is what a defendant can prove. And since the average person has no idea how his drugs, vaccines, or other medicine is manufactured and tested, the notion of vaccine objectors are lying because they don’t object to how their medicines are manufactured and they just want to get out of taking a vaccine is ludicrous.
The constitution is all I need.
HEK 293 was also used for testing medications.
The danger with this argument is that it effectively commits someone to reject any and all vaccines. That means you "surrender" this right as soon as you get a booster shot down the road.
"... I think there’s evidence that is what’s happening here in which people are raising religious objections when they’re motivated by fear of the vaccine or political opposition to it ..."
He's right about this. However, these other objections should be more than sufficient for anyone to refuse a vaccine.
“My body, my choice” is my reason for either taking or not taking it.
This exemption is no longer being offered for travel...
No,,,
Revelation 13:17
Why do people keep ignoring that prophecy ???
We’re there...
I am with you! How can they not see and hear? They have heard Rev 13:17 their whole lives. They know and they still reject God! Just my observation, we seem to be knocking on the door of the Tribulation any time soon.
You know, I can’t remember any other time when ‘they’ said
‘they’ could judge the sincerity of my beliefs.
Is there any other setting where we are allowed to question the beliefs and sincerity of a religious group or sect?
If I sincerely feel that willingly taking this “vaccine” would be suicide, is that enough? I know my religion is definitely against that.
not ignoring it, but we are not “there” yet. plenty of places to buy and sell without a jab or masks etc.
EVERY generation since Jesus lived, thinks they are the last before Jesus comes.
People need to stop trying to play God, and just live according to what God said.
Also, the occurrences of the past 18 months are close approaching what would be required for me to honestly convert to Mennonite.
there’s nothing in this article that i agree with as a Christian.
the basic argument (of which the one cited is only a small special case) is one that applies to an individual under the declaration and the potential illegality of any health mandate under the 1st amendment to the constitution.
forgive me if i get it wrong, but i’m going to cite the critical provision from memory,
“We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal and they are endowed with certain unalienable rights. That among these are life....”
it goes on,
“that to secure these rights, governments are instituted among men deriving their just rights from the consent of the governed.”
that’s enough for any true Christian to deny the gov’t a right to inject their body with anything. i can cite whole sections of the Bible to support that position. period.
Sodomites and abortion.
But only if you are not mohammedan.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.