|
SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> Religious exemption? /cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1633033645 Message started by Eegore on 09/30/21 at 13:27:25 |
|
Title: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 09/30/21 at 13:27:25 My understanding of the 1st Amendment is to create a legal equality between various religions, and non-religious. It seems to me the argument can be made that if the US Government requires Government employees and only Government employees with the exemption of all other known humans, to be vaccinated specific to Covid-19 - but allows for religious exemption - they are favoring religious employees over non-religious ones. Complete religious freedom does not exist, for instance human sacrifice for religious reasons is not Constitutionally protected. But prosecution for the belief, without actions, just belief would be wrong. However actions or negligence that is harmful to others is not protected, even by the 1st Amendment. So is a "religious exemption" technically favoring one over another by law? |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by oldNslow on 09/30/21 at 15:50:54 Quote:
I think one could make that argument. But only specifically with respect to Amendment 1. Quote:
Refering to the Covid vaccine specifically however, I'm not convinced that an unvaccinated person is any more likely to cause harm to others than a vaccinated one. None of the vaccines seem to be very effective at actually preventing infection or transmission. Otherwise the CDC, WHO,etc. wouldn't' still be insisting that folks still need to wear masks in many situations regardless of their vaccination status. If that is , or even might be, the case, an exemption on any grounds, religious or otherwise is justified, and forcing someone to get vaccinated (with these specific drugs}is not justified, regardless of any one particular individual's reason, religious or anythig else. The "religious exemption" is a bit of a red herring IMO. Arguing about that with respect to the Covid shots completely misses the point, Sort of like most of the legal decisions that use the 1st Amendment to allow or disallow some religious practice or other, misses or deliberately distorts the purpose of the amendment, which was to prohibit the establishment of a state sanctioned religion. Nothing else. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Serowbot on 09/30/21 at 15:54:14 Where in the bible or any religious text does it say though shalt not get vaccinated? They should have to prove they don't eat pork or shellfish, or wear blended fabrics. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by MnSpring on 09/30/21 at 17:36:07 6076617C64717C67130 wrote:
Wait, if a religion says; (to the effect) “ Don’t Eat Pork “ You want the people of that religion, to PROVE they don’t eat Pork ? Yet when asked; “ Do You Believe, that all people of your religion, should KILL , anybody who is not of your religion “ It is a, ‘phobic…’ of some sort ?????? Cheese and Rice, Just like the, Mush For Brains POTUS. Flip/Flop, Flop/Flip. OBTY, when ya gonna send that GUN, You know, the one you have absolutely, NO NEED for ! |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by MnSpring on 09/30/21 at 17:44:05 0B2B29213C2B4E0 wrote:
Lots of, ‘Exemptions’, when one jumps through all the hoops. Masks/C-19 Vaccine/Other Vaccines/Jury Duty/Fasting/ paying Taxes, and on and on. Quote:
Could be, the standard for, Religious reasons, is already set. Don’t know the numbers, yet I believe, ( That is I, and only I, referring to just I) that signifant numbers of people are on, Social Security Disability, who are NOT disabled ! Seems like the standard, for that, is also 'set'. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 09/30/21 at 19:39:54 "Refering to the Covid vaccine specifically however, I'm not convinced that an unvaccinated person is any more likely to cause harm to others than a vaccinated one. None of the vaccines seem to be very effective at actually preventing infection or transmission." Yeah I agree that there isn't much evidence unvaccinated infect vaccinated at a higher rate etc. If anything it just reduces potential for medical care overcrowding. This whole thing reminds me of my first job where the smokers went out 2 or 3 times an hour to smoke. If I went out and stood around for 5 minutes 3 times an hour I'd be disciplined. So if you smoke you can go outside whenever and get 2 official breaks + lunch. But if you don't smoke you get 2 breaks and a lunch only. I always though it was weird that you had to be a smoker to get extra personal time. I'd just stand outside, with the smokers, hold an unlit cigarette and the shift supervisor got on me about it. Weird. So now if you have a religion you don't have to be vaccinated, but if you are not religious you lack the justifications to opt-out. Weird. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 09/30/21 at 19:47:22 "Lots of, ‘Exemptions’, when one jumps through all the hoops. Masks/C-19 Vaccine/Other Vaccines/Jury Duty/Fasting/ paying Taxes, and on and on." Sure but they aren't covered in the 1st Amendment like religion is. So having a jury duty exemption, to me, is not connected to the 1st Amendment. "Could be, the standard for, Religious reasons, is already set." Could be, but why apply it? Why if one has a religion they can be exempt, but non-religion can not be? I was just thinking that the 1st would not apply well to the US Government giving certain privilege's only to people of faith instead of applying it equally to all US citizens. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by WebsterMark on 10/01/21 at 04:35:11 Religious institutions are exempt from taxes in part because of the work they do in society as is the case with some other non-profits. But in general, for most of this nation’s history, religion was an integral part of the lives for the vast majority of the population so yes, religious institutions were given, and I think, still deserve special deference in certain cases. I think we’ve correctly ruled the State has a duty to step in and protect minors for example from religious actions that are harmful. But a vaccine against a disease that targets a narrow demographic doesn’t seem to fit the description of a dangerous religious action (refusal to get the vaccine) so if someone wants to claim an exemption from a vaccine mandate, sure, why not? |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Serowbot on 10/01/21 at 09:10:56 Pretty sure you can opt for weekly testing. Is there any religious exemption for being tested? This makes religious exemption a moot point. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by WebsterMark on 10/02/21 at 06:18:47 Mandatory vaccination or testing for a disease that seriously impacts a very narrow demographic is about control, not medical care, not science. If Ali, a boxer who hits to cause injury (and potentially could kill someone) in a pursuit for money, can win a consciousness objector case based on Islam, I would think anyone could claim religious exemption. Looney Leftist think women aren’t the only ones who can have babies and 12 years can identify as the opposite sex so why can’t I claim religious exemption? There is no legitimate argument the left can offer to a religious objection. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Serowbot on 10/02/21 at 08:57:05 One of your more tangled posts, Web I tried standing on my head to see if it got clearer, but no... 43 million cases, 700,000 dead is a small demographic? |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/02/21 at 10:24:35 43 million cases, 700,000 dead is a small demographic? Well you have to remember that most of those are fake. They died falling off canyon edges and were listed as C-19 etc. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by WebsterMark on 10/02/21 at 19:55:29 3721362B33262B30440 wrote:
Yes, it’s a small demographic. You’re a liberal so facts, science or numbers don’t mean anything. From CDC: Adults 65 and older account for 16% of the US population but 80% of COVID-19 deaths” . Now add in the number with two or more high risk factor and you have an even smaller demographic. Now, factor in some unknown number of deaths classified as Covid because they tested positive but the victim was like many others who showed no symptoms of Covid but died of the flu or RSV and the target demographic gets even smaller. So yes, it’s a small demographic. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by MnSpring on 10/03/21 at 16:38:58 Quote:
Another display of a emotion, called 'Humor' ! |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 10/04/21 at 12:47:51 What happened to informed consent? What happened to basic, individual rights? If Risk is part of the equation, choice should be, too. You can't say there is no risk. And that whole Safe and Effective thing? Nope.. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/04/21 at 18:13:00 "What happened to informed consent?" How is this being violated? Coersion or duress has to be at the point of care for it to apply to Informed Consent of medical treatment. You must have the capacity or ability to make the decision. The medical provider must disclose information on the treatment, test, or procedure in question, including the expected benefits and risks, and the likelihood or probability that the benefits and risks will occur. You must comprehend the relevant information. You must voluntarily grant consent, without coercion or duress. What happened to basic, individual rights? If Risk is part of the equation, choice should be, too." You don't have a "right" to work for a specific employer. The US Government is not requiring that you get a vaccine. If an employer chooses to make this a term of their employment that doesn't violate your rights. It may not be right - but that is not equal to violating your rights. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by justin_o_guy2 on 10/05/21 at 02:11:36 It may not be right No schitt |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/05/21 at 05:46:22 Well as an employer I think it should be my choice if my staff are vaccinated in order to work for me. I should also be able to deny vaccinated workers from working for me. So there is a bit of a paradox. Requiring vaccination to work for me removes my employee's choice - if they want to work for me. But saying I can't require vaccinations removes my choice. So who's choice do we remove? The owner/operator of a business, or the employees? |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by WebsterMark on 10/05/21 at 05:56:36 You don't have a "right" to work for a specific employer. The US Government is not requiring that you get a vaccine. If an employer chooses to make this a term of their employment that doesn't violate your rights. It may not be right - but that is not equal to violating your rights. Absolutely not true. If I recall my high school history, the pole tax after the civil war was a way to restrict who voted. It didn’t come out and say blacks can’t vote, but that was it’s intention. Likewise, Employers cannot make the possibility of pregnancy as a reason for not hiring someone. They don’t come right out and say we’re not going to hire you because you’re a woman but that is effectively, de facto, what that requirement would do. It is in fact a violation of that woman’s right. Governments routinely threaten to withhold funding if states don’t produce a desired result. So the government does not need to specifically state you have to be vaccinated in order to be employed but they can accomplish the same thing through other methods. Those other methods potentially violate someone’s rights. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/05/21 at 06:19:16 It is a violation of her rights because it is recognized as a right, if the employer has 15 or more employees. The Pregnancy Discrimination Act is an amendment to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. Vaccination choice is protected where? I get your point about coercion with Government actions, but specifically saying "rights" should, to me, mean there are "rights" and not just complaints. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by oldNslow on 10/05/21 at 06:25:32 Quote:
True. But when you add government extortion to the mix - however that extortion is accomplished - then you have removed everyone's free choice. That's not a paradox, that's tyranny. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/05/21 at 06:55:11 I don't consider what has happened thus for to be extortion by definition. So far I can choose my company policy regarding vaccines because vaccination refusal is not a protected right. An employee can choose to work for me. So either my choice can be removed, or my employee's choice can be removed. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by MnSpring on 10/05/21 at 11:00:40 4B6B69617C6B0E0 wrote:
“ … Requiring vaccination to work for me removes my employee's choice …” Yes it does. And no it doesn't. If, you, own the/a business/s, You decide the perimeters. That is your Choice. The employee decided to, or not to, work for you. That is his/her Choice. If you are part of a larger business/company/entity, and you have been granted the power to fire and hire people on/by conditions that are set by, ‘Your’, employer. You, have made a Choice, to work for a company which has made a choice, for you. “… But saying I can't require vaccinations removes my choice. …” No, you made a Choice. You made a Choice, to work for a company, that has made a choice, for you. If you own a business that employees less than 100, you have a choice. If you own a business of over 100, someone else made that, ‘choice’ for you “…The US Government is not requiring that you get a vaccine. …” They will be, if the 100 employee mandate passes. Then, Your Choice, has now narrowed. Instead of Choosing a employer, Who has made a Choice. You can only Choose from companies that employ, UNDER 100. That have made a Choice. If you choose a Company of 89 employees, then they grow to 100+, at that point, your only Choice becomes to have, or not to have a job. Which you had before ! This is yet another of the small, (slowly raising the temp of the water the frog is in) removal of Freedom. O.B.T.W. Who, ‘owns’ the Government ? |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/05/21 at 11:54:30 "If, you, own the/a business/s, You decide the perimeters. That is your Choice. The employee decided to, or not to, work for you. That is his/her Choice." That is my situation. I do not have more than 100 employees and will not grow to over 100. So either my choice can be removed, or my employees choice can be removed. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by MnSpring on 10/05/21 at 13:12:56 5474767E6374110 wrote:
Wrong. If you Chose something, It is YOUR Choice. If a potential employee Chose something, It is their Choice. No one took any persons Choice away. If you are a Carpenter/Plumber/Electrician/etc. you do Not have to, work at a Union shop. You do Not have to be a Union member. You do Not have to pay Union Dues. It is a Choice, for a company/business, to be, or not to be, a Union shop / business. To work or not to work has always been a Choice. To work doing this, or that. To work at what shift. Where to work. Are all choices. Yet now (if it passes) one more Choice, one more Freedom, is removed. All because of the mush for brains, puppet masters. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/05/21 at 13:28:09 Wrong. If you Chose something, It is YOUR Choice. If a potential employee Chose something, It is their Choice. No one took any persons Choice away. I am referring to what I actually posted: Requiring vaccination to work for me removes my employee's choice - if they want to work for me. But saying I can't require vaccinations removes my choice. The Government saying I can Not require vaccinations removes my choice. The revocation of my choice to require vaccinations for my company being removed. As in I would Not be able to require vaccinations. That removes my choice. But if I am allowed to require vaccinations, that removes my employee's choice. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by oldNslow on 10/05/21 at 15:34:37 Quote:
"extort tr. v. To obtain from another by coercion or intimidation extortion n. The act or instance of extorting." What the government is attempting to "obtain" is consent to taking the drug. And their method fits the definition perfectly. The various mandates go only as far as the feds and some of the states believe that they can get away with. For now. If non compliance becomes a problem for those pushing the mandates then the level of coercion and intimidation will be increased. |
|
Title: Re: Religious exemption? Post by Eegore on 10/06/21 at 05:19:25 I'm sure at a certain point either my choice, or my employee's choice will be removed. The question for me is how long will that take and will vaccinations ever end up in an Amendment. In CO we are working to allow for more avenues for exemption which should in turn slow the implementation of actual mandates. |
|
SuzukiSavage.com » Powered by YaBB 2.2! YaBB © 2000-2007. All Rights Reserved. |