Prove it, hospital asks unvaccinated employees claiming religious exemption

beckers hospital review ^ | 9/16/2021, 1:41 PM | Kelly Gooch

[VAFreedom]

A hospital system in Arkansas is making it a bit more difficult for staff to receive a religious exemption from its COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The hospital is now requiring staff to also swear off extremely common medicines, such as Tylenol, Tums, and even Preparation H, to get the exemption. "Thus," Troup went on, "we provided a religious attestation form for those individuals requesting a religious exemption," he said. The form includes a list of 30 commonly used medicines that "fall into the same category as the COVID-19 vaccine in their use of fetal cell lines," Conway Regional said.

The list includes Tylenol, Pepto Bismol, aspirin, Tums, Lipitor, Senokot, Motrin, ibuprofen, Maalox, Ex-Lax, Benadryl, Sudafed, albuterol, Preparation H, MMR vaccine, Claritin, Zoloft, Prilosec OTC, and azithromycin.

[Mercat]

I checked the list and I don‘t use anything on there. And I don‘t plan to. I also have a certificate that says I‘m a member of the Confraternity of Our Lady of Fatima. I think I can get a letter from Bishop Atanasius Schneider saying that I cannot receive the jab for religious reasons.

[RushIsMyTeddyBear]

Ty.

[Mozzafiato]

An attestation form from Conway (Ark.) Regional Health System asks employees requesting a religious exemption from the hospital's COVID-19 vaccine mandate to confirm they will not use certain everyday medications, such as Benadryl, Sudafed and Tylenol, in alignment with their sincerely held religious belief.

I would say, "ok, fine, I don't use those products anyway". How are they going to know what products I take at home, lol. As long as I get my religious exemption.

[T.B. Yoits]

And federal law (as though we were not already in a dictatorship) forbids an employer demanding strict adherence to a religion in order to qualify for such an exception.

Yeah, the employer is breaking the law and needs to be hauled into court.

And while Totalitarians can buy off clergy hierarchy, they can't pervert a religion; just because a minister sexually abuses boys, it doesn't make it part of the religion.

[fidelis]

I would say, in all honesty, I don’t buy, take, or use any of those products and don’t plan to in the future. Give me my exemption.

[Dr. Sivana]

The MMR vaccine certainly belongs in the list, as the Rubella portion definitely used fetal cells directly, and not just in post-development testing.

[Dr. Sivana]

For most of these I use store brands anyway.

[Fury]

...may, in fact, have been derived...

That's pretty thin gruel.

[Dr. Sivana]

Uh those have been around a lot longer then Roe v. Wade and their formulation has nothing to do with germ cell lines of any kind.

Their reasoning is that their manufacturers have been using fetal cell lines in testing more recently, and that some of the serums developed only used fetal derived cells in testing, not in the development proper. I would make the distinction that the product was not sold until after its developer had decided to use fetal derived testing, whereas the other products (as you note) have been around for generations. We would do well to reconsider these other brands however, as the Arkansas hospital is simply asserting that fetal cell based testing is just part of normal modern life that all are obliged to accept.

[grey_whiskers]

It's sophistry.

At least one source I ran across, was an article by a Catholic priest who asked a doctor to give a list of all medicines tested using fetal cell lines.

The doctor gave a list, but let the cat out of the bag.

They Goolaged for "medicine name" + "HK293" (one of the most prevalent fetal cell lines).

But a lot of the medicines were invented in the 1800s long before there WAS either abortion or fetal cell lines; the experiments were done long after the medicine was here, and (for example) were experiments on using the medicine as a carrier for something else, on fetal cell lines.

For example, with Tums:

One example of this is a link given here, where a reference is given supposedly "proving" that Tums was tested on Fetal Cell Lines. The title will suffice.

"Protamine sulfate-calcium carbonate-plasmid DNA ternary nanoparticles for efficient gene delivery"

That's not exactly what Tums were invented for, now is it?

There might be more of a gray area when they have fetal cell line cultures as a step in systematic testing (e.g. toxicity, hormonal responses to a drug, pharmacokinetic studies); but that's not exactly the same thing as incorporating actual fetal DNA (at however many removes from the original abortion) into a vaccine.

But it's a moot point, according to Federal Law and settled court decisions:

“29 CFR § 1605.1: In most cases whether or not a practice or belief is religious is not at issue. However, in those cases in which the issue does exist, the Commission will define religious practices to include moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right and wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views. This standard was developed in United States v. Seeger, 380 U.S. 163 (1965) and Welsh v. United States, 398 U.S. 333 (1970). The Commission has consistently applied this standard in its decisions. The fact that no religious group espouses such beliefs or the fact that the religious group to which the individual professes to belong may not accept such belief will not determine whether the belief is a religious belief of the employee or prospective employee. The phrase “religious practice” as used in these Guidelines includes both religious observances and practices, as stated in section 701(j), 42 U.S.C. 2000e(j).”

[Jane Long]

Do no harm....

Unless paid off by BigPharma/CCP.

😩

[Grampa Dave]

What religions have such “denial of medical treatment” abilities Christian Scientists do, are there others?

Do you have to be a member of such a religion to claim the exemption?

It isn’t necessary to tie your conscientious objection to the vaccine to a particular religion, denomination, or sect. In fact, it’s probably better if you don’t. Simply say it conflicts with your personal religious and ethical beliefs, and with your own informed weighing of the pros and cons in a personal medical decision. That’s all they need to know.

9 posted on 9/14/2021, 12:05:31 PM by fidelis (Ecce Crucem Domini! Fugite partes adversae!

[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies | Report Abuse]
To: fidelis

That worked at USC.

10 posted on 9/14/2021, 12:19:15 PM by Jaded

[piasa]

Aspirin has been around a lot longer than the practice of using fetal cell lines so it appears this hospital is lying.

[Brian Griffin]

Dear Administrators:

It is my understanding that you are permitting all staff members to place their lives (and that of our beloved patients) at risk from Covid by eating out at restaurants and shopping at grocery stores.

I suggest that you stop these dangerous practices at once. They are far more dangerous than continuing to put me to work.

I also suggest that you:
1. run or contract for private schools for the children of staff
2. start up a commissary for staff members or contract for safe shopping hours & cashiers with local stores
3. check to see that spouses of staff members have been vaccinated from Covid
4. offer incentives for spouses of staff members to get vaccinated from Covid if not currently vaccinated.

[texas booster]

I would say, "ok, fine, I don't use those products anyway". How are they going to know what products I take at home, lol. As long as I get my religious exemption.

No, do not go down that path.

Once you sign on the dotted line you have signed a form that can be used against you in a HR action.

Think of this as another way that the authorities inflict papercuts by the thousands.

They are not looking for honesty but rather a way to gain a new power over one. I'll recommend that you review the federal rules on religious exemptions and the battles previously fought.

[TexasGurl24]

Most of those items predated the HEK293 and PER.C9 lines.

Unlike the Covid vaccines, which used cell lines in the testing and development phase, these items developed independently, although immoral and demonic “scientists” are now testing those substances on the HEK293 lines as well.

I think a meaningful distinction can be made against items that were not tested in their development and things that were.

[Fury]

I think I can get a letter from Bishop Atanasius Schneider saying that I cannot receive the jab for religious reasons.

I am concerned that employers are essentially arguing with employees about requesting a religious exemption.

What happens if your employer replies back that the Pope encourages the vaccines and he is "higher" in authority than a Bishop?

There was a local attorney (well, local = ~200 miles) on the radio a few days ago talking about the sorts of criteria that some employers are taking to determine if they will grant religious exemptions. His practice area is employment law. He said some employers are exposing their company to legal challenges by attempting to make judgements on "how religious" (his phrase) an employee may be who is requesting an exemption, and in effect arguing with employees regarding their degree of their faith.

Pinging TG24 as I believe she has commented on this previously.

[Don W]

Well, considering aspirin is on this list, but acetylsalicylic acid has been used since time immemorial (willow bark is the original source) I find this list somewhat suspect.

[SamAdams76]

I don't take any of those things on that list.

I'm glad beer and wine wasn't included.

[Fury]

Re: 57 - CORRECTION. He did not use the word “arguing” - that was my conclusion and it is presumptuous.

He used the world “challenging” (I made as many notes as I could - while driving! and re-read what I scribed) as in:

“...and in effect “challenging” employees regarding the degree of their faith.”