Author Topic: Has anyone submitted a religious exemption for the vaccine? How did the eperie  (Read 11573 times)

FrugalSaver

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 832
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)
« Last Edit: August 21, 2021, 10:10:50 AM by FrugalSaver »

ixtap

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4560
  • Age: 51
  • Location: SoCal
    • Our Sea Story
Religious exemptions, if evaluated at all, usually rely on belonging to an actual religion that agrees. For example, if you say you can't because you are Catholic, but the Pope says you should get a vaccine, you could be denied

Usually, they aren't evaluated. However, if a large percent is claiming the same thing just because they think it is the same as being a conscientious objector, that may change.

SwordGuy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8955
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Captain FIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Who submitted might need to be kept confidential but I don’t see how number would. It’s not even a small cell that would need to be kept confidential for those whom HIPAA applies to bc you might be able to back into the info.

FrugalSaver

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 832
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Why?

innkeeper77

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 360
It sounds like a good time for your friend- if people continue to refuse vaccination, and the workload in the transition is survivable, there should be good advancement opportunities if a couple hundred+ people leave the company.

Also, NOT sharing the number could make people incorrectly estimate the risks of going into the office. Why would they not share the number?

Lastly, what mainstream religion is actually antivax for anything besides covid? Assuming this is the US, the majority of religious people in a typical business will be christian. The only religious groups in the US that have demonstrated a precedent of rejecting vaccinations are Christian Scientists, and the Dutch Reformed Church. Both of these are small groups and a tiny percentage of the mass of people who would be called christian. Therefore, just going off of average populations, the vast majority of those 300 exemption requests would be bogus.

PS: I doubt you will find many, if any, people on this forum who will have submitted a religious exemption request for this vaccine. This is a forum for a blog that while pro individual responsibility, is also explicitly environmentalist and pro community, to the point of advocating for higher taxes. This isn't a point of view that is shared with the majority of anti vaccination proponents.
« Last Edit: August 21, 2021, 11:25:33 AM by innkeeper77 »

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4865
  • Location: The Garden Path
Religious exemptions, if evaluated at all, usually rely on belonging to an actual religion that agrees. For example, if you say you can't because you are Catholic, but the Pope says you should get a vaccine, you could be denied

Usually, they aren't evaluated. However, if a large percent is claiming the same thing just because they think it is the same as being a conscientious objector, that may change.

In addition to this, the organization we work with is asking for documentation that the person has been a member of the religion for a significant period of time and didn't just join to get out of the Covid shot.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Why?

In the US, vaccination is not against the beliefs of Catholism, Mormonism, mainline Protestant Christianity, any form of Judaism, Islam, Jehovah's Witness doctrine, Seventh-Day Adventist doctrine, or Hinduism. I believe that only the members of the Church of Christ, Scientist and the Dutch Reformed Church are forbidden by their churches to receive vaccines. I sincerely doubt that 300 people at a single workplace belong to one of those two churches.

Captain FIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Also Oct. 1st makes sense to me.  It's not a nefarious plot.  It's the easy date (1st) with enough time for people to get vaccinated by then.  My workplace is requiring full vaccination by Oct. 10th, and I know others are Oct. 17th.

In terms of who will evaluate, I imagine some in leadership roles (e.g. legal counsel, HR, those whom head up the applicable department, etc.) might be involved in setting the rules.

FrugalSaver

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 832
Also Oct. 1st makes sense to me.  It's not a nefarious plot.  It's the easy date (1st) with enough time for people to get vaccinated by then.  My workplace is requiring full vaccination by Oct. 10th, and I know others are Oct. 17th.

In terms of who will evaluate, I imagine some in leadership roles (e.g. legal counsel, HR, those whom head up the applicable department, etc.) might be involved in setting the rules.

What would possibly qualify them to make this determination?

Cranky

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3842
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Why?

Because there aren’t many religions that are opposed to vaccination?

MayDay

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4953
Also Oct. 1st makes sense to me.  It's not a nefarious plot.  It's the easy date (1st) with enough time for people to get vaccinated by then.  My workplace is requiring full vaccination by Oct. 10th, and I know others are Oct. 17th.

In terms of who will evaluate, I imagine some in leadership roles (e.g. legal counsel, HR, those whom head up the applicable department, etc.) might be involved in setting the rules.

What would possibly qualify them to make this determination?

Literally anything would qualify them because the exemption requests are all bullshit.

onecoolcat

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 632
Is there a religious exemption from wearing a mask as well?  How about a seat belt?

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: NoVA
How big is the organization, though? University of Virginia, for example, granted 335 permanent waivers (medical+religious), but that's for the student population of 25,000.

Looks like a reasonable number. 300 out of 600 would be, of course, bogus, unless it's the head office of Dutch Reformed Church (or whatever their administrative arm is called).

bacchi

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7056
Also Oct. 1st makes sense to me.  It's not a nefarious plot.  It's the easy date (1st) with enough time for people to get vaccinated by then.  My workplace is requiring full vaccination by Oct. 10th, and I know others are Oct. 17th.

In terms of who will evaluate, I imagine some in leadership roles (e.g. legal counsel, HR, those whom head up the applicable department, etc.) might be involved in setting the rules.

What would possibly qualify them to make this determination?

Who else? The company leaders run the company and the Pope doesn't have the time.

Being unvaccinated, because of personal beliefs, is not a protected class. Except in Montana.

Psychstache

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1594
Is there a religious exemption from wearing a mask as well?  How about a seat belt?

Our Holy Mother of St. Douchebag

Villanelle

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6651
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4865
  • Location: The Garden Path
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

Religious exemptions must go through a committee that fact checks all these things. They will also be asking for medical records and in some cases contacting providers for people who claim a medical exemption.

I know not just the number but a list of names, because I need the information to do my job.

SwordGuy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8955
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Why?

The odds.   Just not that many people in the US have a real religious objection and gobs of right-wingers are against it for political reasons.   They're trying to use false vaccination cards (US Customs has confiscated gobs of blank ones) and they're passing around info to one another on how to pretend to have a religious objection.

There might be a couple of honest religious objectors in that 300.   Anything else would be a statistical anomaly.

AccidentialMustache

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 927
Our Holy Mother of St. Douchebag

I saw a lot of folks preaching that on the roads today.

NorthernIkigai

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 330
  • Connoisseur of Leisure
Our Holy Mother of St. Douchebag

I saw a lot of folks preaching that on the roads today.

At least that’s idiocy that mainly affects themselves (and anyone sitting in a seat in front of them), and is not contagious.

Cranky

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3842
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

It ought to be as hard to get a religious exemption to the vaccine as it was to get a religious exemption to the draft - which was pretty damned hard.

RetiredAt63

  • CMTO 2023 Attendees
  • Senior Mustachian
  • *
  • Posts: 20742
  • Location: Eastern Ontario, Canada
Our Holy Mother of St. Douchebag

I saw a lot of folks preaching that on the roads today.

At least that’s idiocy that mainly affects themselves (and anyone sitting in a seat in front of them), . . .

and whatever unlucky person they hit.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

It ought to be as hard to get a religious exemption to the vaccine as it was to get a religious exemption to the draft - which was pretty damned hard.

Agreed.

Catbert

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3298
  • Location: Southern California
^^^Totally agree that getting an exemption should be as hard as getting out of the draft.

Someone asked why HR and Legal would make the determinations.  I'm a long retired HR manager and HR and legal are the ones who have usually made reasonable accommodation determinations whether it was physical, mental or religious accommodation requested.  Back in my day requests for religious accommodation were rare and generally involved getting days off for religious observances.

Personally I would argue that if you work in a medical or LTC facility that your religious objection to vaccines cannot be accommodated no matter how sincere any more than a person's blindness can be accommodated in a job as a fire spotter.

It all does make me glad I'm retired though. 

MudPuppy

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1468
I mean, I can’t work in healthcare if I’m participating in the sacrament of ganja as a part of Rastafaran beliefs (I do not and I am not) so I can’t say I disagree.

SwordGuy

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 8955
  • Location: Fayetteville, NC
Well, out of 300 exemption requests I'll bet that 300 are bogus.

Why?

The odds.   Just not that many people in the US have a real religious objection and gobs of right-wingers are against it for political reasons.   They're trying to use false vaccination cards (US Customs has confiscated gobs of blank ones) and they're passing around info to one another on how to pretend to have a religious objection.

There might be a couple of honest religious objectors in that 300.   Anything else would be a statistical anomaly.

For example:   https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/louisiana-attorney-general-gave-parents-sample-letters-to-help-their-children-skirt-mask-wearing-guidance-in-schools/ar-AANBlJ6?ocid=msedgntp   These people don't have religious exemptions to the covid vaccine.  Most just don't want to take it -- either because their leader (who did take it) said covid is no big deal or because liberals want them to do it.

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.


jpdx

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 760
If your religion requires you to put your health and the health of the community at risk, I suggest finding a different one.

If you're attempting to exploit an exemption loophole so you can put your health and the health of the community at risk, shame on you.

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3193
  • Location: Europe
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

Religious exemptions must go through a committee that fact checks all these things. They will also be asking for medical records and in some cases contacting providers for people who claim a medical exemption.

I know not just the number but a list of names, because I need the information to do my job.

I had no idea that so few branches of Christianity refused vaccination! Being Dutch, the Dutch Reformed Church is a significant minority here. I think many people in my country think Christian = antivaxx. Personally, I grew up Catholic, so I had all my vaccinations growing up and so does everyone I know.

Pre-Covid very few people spent time thinking about the Dutch Reformed Church since they live in the own towns and villages and are a very close-knit, isolated community. They're not really a threat to outsiders. They keep their heads down and pay their taxes and every few years there's an outbreak of preventable disease. Now those communities suddenly turn up in the Covid statistics.

Due to this minority, vaccination is not and will never be mandatory in my country. But our voluntary vaccination rate is something like 85%. It's just a risk all the anti-vaxxers live together and go to the same churches.  The same communities also claim religious exemption for insurance, even for social security and our national health insurance system. You can't pick and choose. You can only claim religious exemption for all insurance. Some of them even claim religious exemption for seatbelts but I don't think that's been allowed - wearing a seatbelt is not mandatory. It's only mandatory in cars and being in a car is voluntary. If your religion doesn't allow you to wear a seatbelt you can walk or take the train.

By the way, many of those Dutch Reformed people aren't as trusting in God as they seem on the outside. Secret vaccination at night by plain clothes health visitors has been offered in those communities for decades and is offered for Covid vaccines now too. Especially for the scary diseases like polio, a lot of them get the vaccine in secret.

Morning Glory

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 4865
  • Location: The Garden Path
How did the experience go?* (subject got cut off)

Where a friend works, over 300 people have submitted religious exemption requests. It’s odd that anyone knows this as the exemptions were to be submitted in confidence and even sharing the number betrays that confidence.

Was curious if anyone had gone through this process. Who makes the decisions to accept or deny?

They have been threatened with termination on October 1st (also the first day of the governments new fiscal year - not a government agency but curious timing nonetheless)

Just curious how you think that giving a number of applications betrays a confidence.  When we are told that 543,210 people in X precinct voted for X candidate, does that violate anonymous voting in any way?  Of course not. 

I hope all these claims are evaluated, to include comparing them to the accepted doctrine of the church, as outlined by that church's central body, and the person's actual practice of the religion.  Frankly, I'd love to see it interpreted strictly.  You can't claim that the church won't allow it unless you follow every but of doctrine of the church.  If you can skip over some parts, then you can skip over this one (and that is if claim and practice a religion that actually forbids these vaccinations, and no major religion qualifies).   And it should go without saying, but you also need to be willing to swear to forgo *all* vaccines in order to claim the exemption, unless the religions doctrine somehow specifically forbids these specific vaccinations and these alone.

Religious exemptions must go through a committee that fact checks all these things. They will also be asking for medical records and in some cases contacting providers for people who claim a medical exemption.

I know not just the number but a list of names, because I need the information to do my job.

I had no idea that so few branches of Christianity refused vaccination! Being Dutch, the Dutch Reformed Church is a significant minority here. I think many people in my country think Christian = antivaxx. Personally, I grew up Catholic, so I had all my vaccinations growing up and so does everyone I know.

Pre-Covid very few people spent time thinking about the Dutch Reformed Church since they live in the own towns and villages and are a very close-knit, isolated community. They're not really a threat to outsiders. They keep their heads down and pay their taxes and every few years there's an outbreak of preventable disease. Now those communities suddenly turn up in the Covid statistics.

Due to this minority, vaccination is not and will never be mandatory in my country. But our voluntary vaccination rate is something like 85%. It's just a risk all the anti-vaxxers live together and go to the same churches.  The same communities also claim religious exemption for insurance, even for social security and our national health insurance system. You can't pick and choose. You can only claim religious exemption for all insurance. Some of them even claim religious exemption for seatbelts but I don't think that's been allowed - wearing a seatbelt is not mandatory. It's only mandatory in cars and being in a car is voluntary. If your religion doesn't allow you to wear a seatbelt you can walk or take the train.

By the way, many of those Dutch Reformed people aren't as trusting in God as they seem on the outside. Secret vaccination at night by plain clothes health visitors has been offered in those communities for decades and is offered for Covid vaccines now too. Especially for the scary diseases like polio, a lot of them get the vaccine in secret.

Some of our Amish communities don't take vaccines (it's up to the elders of each community, they don't have a certralized authority). They also typically leave school at 14 to work in farming or trades, and don't work in healthcare.  The members I've seen about have been compliant with mask mandates.

asauer

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 848
  • Location: North Carolina
HR Lady here.  I've processed 320 religious exemption requests since last year.  Zero have been approved. 

ChickenStash

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 569
  • Location: Midwest US
My employer just mandated the jab and, so far, the only exemptions they've approved are for those currently pregnant. I believe they have a religious exemption option but it's unlikely many, if any, will be approved.

I recall the same thing happened when the flu shot was mandated. A large percentage of people were upset, threatened to quit, etc. Lots of exemptions filed, very few approved. Most people decided their outrage wasn't worth finding another job - particularly when nearly every employer in the field had the same requirements. I remember one person on my team tried the religious exemption and eventually was let go when it wasn't approved.

Aegishjalmur

  • Bristles
  • ***
  • Posts: 293
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines".

There isn't any difference. They're trying to pretty up a dead, rotten maggot infested corpse.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: NoVA
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

Historically, there was a fair amount of persecution based on religion. One could argue it is still going on: see mosque and synagogue shootings. So religious affiliation makes you a part of a protected class. There is no history of persecution for believing dumb shit seen on youtube, and thus no need to take special care to protect people who believe dumb shit on youtube.

Captain FIRE

  • Handlebar Stache
  • *****
  • Posts: 1176
Also Oct. 1st makes sense to me.  It's not a nefarious plot.  It's the easy date (1st) with enough time for people to get vaccinated by then.  My workplace is requiring full vaccination by Oct. 10th, and I know others are Oct. 17th.

In terms of who will evaluate, I imagine some in leadership roles (e.g. legal counsel, HR, those whom head up the applicable department, etc.) might be involved in setting the rules.

What would possibly qualify them to make this determination?

Who else? The company leaders run the company and the Pope doesn't have the time.

Being unvaccinated, because of personal beliefs, is not a protected class. Except in Montana.

+1

The 3 years of law school, passing the bar, and ~15 years of legal experience I like to think qualifies me to interpret the regulation that requires those at my workplace to be vaccinated, and apply it in consultation with appropriate leadership.

However, I'm very curious to hear who you think at a workplace ought to make that determination instead.

Villanelle

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 6651
HR Lady here.  I've processed 320 religious exemption requests since last year.  Zero have been approved.

I'd love to hear more about this, if you can share.  What is your process for vetting and approving or denying the requests? 

Weisass

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 806
    • "Deeper In Me Than I"
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

Historically, there was a fair amount of persecution based on religion. One could argue it is still going on: see mosque and synagogue shootings. So religious affiliation makes you a part of a protected class. There is no history of persecution for believing dumb shit seen on youtube, and thus no need to take special care to protect people who believe dumb shit on youtube.

Thank you for articulating the difference in a way that is respectful of the history.

I am a pastor, and my own denomination falls squarely on the side of trusting science, and so we have had no conflict about vaccines or encouraging our people to get them.

At the same time, the reality is that there is something discomfiting about the state forcing compliance on a church. Interestingly enough, the United States defends and advocates for the separation of church and state not because we worry about protecting any particular religion so much, but because we wished to be different from governments in Europe in which the church and the state were the same thing. Our law reflects a preference for protecting a diversity of religious minorities. So yes, religious peoples (hindus, universalists, buddhists, christians) are all protected classes, but what is really infuriating is that our religions tend to agree that care for neighbor is very much a discipline of faith, and so it boggles my mind that so many of my fellow religious folks would use religion to be selfish.

deborah

  • Senior Mustachian
  • ********
  • Posts: 15955
  • Age: 14
  • Location: Australia or another awesome area
My employer just mandated the jab and, so far, the only exemptions they've approved are for those currently pregnant. I believe they have a religious exemption option but it's unlikely many, if any, will be approved.
The currently pregnant are better off having the jab.
https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/need-extra-precautions/pregnant-people.html

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

Historically, there was a fair amount of persecution based on religion. One could argue it is still going on: see mosque and synagogue shootings. So religious affiliation makes you a part of a protected class. There is no history of persecution for believing dumb shit seen on youtube, and thus no need to take special care to protect people who believe dumb shit on youtube.
What's the difference though? That the former call themselves a religion? In both cases you just believe something (perhaps given to you by an authority figure).

My point is: who are you to say that "believing dumb shit on youtube" is not a religion while "believing dumb shit in church" is? If this is not playing favorites with people's beliefs, I don't know what is.

Imma

  • Magnum Stache
  • ******
  • Posts: 3193
  • Location: Europe
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

Historically, there was a fair amount of persecution based on religion. One could argue it is still going on: see mosque and synagogue shootings. So religious affiliation makes you a part of a protected class. There is no history of persecution for believing dumb shit seen on youtube, and thus no need to take special care to protect people who believe dumb shit on youtube.
What's the difference though? That the former call themselves a religion? In both cases you just believe something (perhaps given to you by an authority figure).

My point is: who are you to say that "believing dumb shit on youtube" is not a religion while "believing dumb shit in church" is? If this is not playing favorites with people's beliefs, I don't know what is.

I don't know about the US but in Europe, the jurisprudence has evolved to include "comprehensive worldview that does not involve God" into the protected class based on religion. So for legal purposes, for example humanism and antroposophy are religions. Objectivism was recognized a few years ago. Theoretically, in time, QAnon could qualify, if it "attains a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance" (Campbell and Cosans v. Great Britain, 1982).

bacchi

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 7056
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

Historically, there was a fair amount of persecution based on religion. One could argue it is still going on: see mosque and synagogue shootings. So religious affiliation makes you a part of a protected class. There is no history of persecution for believing dumb shit seen on youtube, and thus no need to take special care to protect people who believe dumb shit on youtube.
What's the difference though? That the former call themselves a religion? In both cases you just believe something (perhaps given to you by an authority figure).

My point is: who are you to say that "believing dumb shit on youtube" is not a religion while "believing dumb shit in church" is? If this is not playing favorites with people's beliefs, I don't know what is.

I don't know about the US but in Europe, the jurisprudence has evolved to include "comprehensive worldview that does not involve God" into the protected class based on religion. So for legal purposes, for example humanism and antroposophy are religions. Objectivism was recognized a few years ago. Theoretically, in time, QAnon could qualify, if it "attains a certain level of cogency, seriousness, cohesion and importance" (Campbell and Cosans v. Great Britain, 1982).

In the US, "Torcaso v. Watkins" [1961] also extended the "religion" protection to non-Creator worldviews. However, in "Thomas v. Review Board" [1981], the Supreme Court carefully stated that philosophical views did not deserve special treatment. Meaning, Buddhism would pass muster but "rando guy on the internet" won't.

There is an Atlantic article about how Q might eventually become a religion. This is mostly based on their end-times beliefs, more-or-less, coupled with their "it'll happen in 2 weeks!" rolling timeline and their belief in the prophet Q (aka, Ron).

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: NoVA
What's the difference though? That the former call themselves a religion? In both cases you just believe something (perhaps given to you by an authority figure).

My point is: who are you to say that "believing dumb shit on youtube" is not a religion while "believing dumb shit in church" is? If this is not playing favorites with people's beliefs, I don't know what is.

I don't know how to explain the difference between Holocaust and the absence of a "watchers of dumb shit"-caust.

kite

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 900
This is BS. Why is it OK for some people to not want the vaccine because "it's their religion" vs others who just "don't believe in vaccines". The latter seems just as much a "belief" as the former. What makes some opinions, ie. beliefs, more valuable than others? Either we make it mandatory or we make it a personal choice. We can't have it both ways.

I don't believe religion is the basis for vaccine rejection, but reliance on legal protection of religious freedom is how people try to exempt themselves from the systems that try to force conformation to certain behaviors.  Outright rejection (that we've always had) and hesitation because it is something new is so much more complicated than a religion versus science dichotomy.

There is also the fact that most of the unvaccinated are young.  And young people aren't likely to be religious.  They are more likely than any other generation to identify as 'nones'.  It's us old folks who are church goers (or live streamers) who were angling to get vaccinated late last winter or in early spring.

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
What's the difference though? That the former call themselves a religion? In both cases you just believe something (perhaps given to you by an authority figure).

My point is: who are you to say that "believing dumb shit on youtube" is not a religion while "believing dumb shit in church" is? If this is not playing favorites with people's beliefs, I don't know what is.

I don't know how to explain the difference between Holocaust and the absence of a "watchers of dumb shit"-caust.
If people started executing millions of people based on them not believing in vaccines, would there be a meaningful difference, though?

We should not execute millions of people, whether because of their religious beliefs or any other reason. If you're equating the Holocaust with requiring everyone to get vaccines, I think you've gone a bit too far down the "slippery slope" argument.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: NoVA
If people started executing millions of people based on them not believing in vaccines, would there be a meaningful difference, though?

Again, I'm at loss as to how to explain a difference between executing millions of people and not executing millions of people.

And yes, it would be meaningful.

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
And yes, it would be meaningful.
If you want people to believe you it might be good to detail the distinction, then. Because I have no idea what your point is.

OtherJen

  • Walrus Stache
  • *******
  • Posts: 5267
  • Location: Metro Detroit
And yes, it would be meaningful.
If you want people to believe you it might be good to detail the distinction, then. Because I have no idea what your point is.

It's a clumsy distinction, and possibly in poor taste, but I think the point was to emphasize that being forcibly and involuntarily detained in a concentration camp and killed because of your ethnicity/formal religious tradition is not equivalent to losing your job, after being informed of that consequence, for claiming personal beliefs (likely without institutional basis, as almost no religions forbid vaccination) as the reason why you refuse to take a public health measure that millions and millions of other people are willing to take to protect themselves and others. No one is arresting and killing people for refusing vaccination (and yes, that would be very, very wrong), but the choice not to take basic public health measures in a pandemic isn't without consequence.

As noted above, many people who actually belong to religious groups that oppose vaccination (e.g., some Amish sects) isolate themselves and wear masks as needed, and they tend to homeschool their kids.

GodlessCommie

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 969
  • Location: NoVA
Poor taste or not, the point is exceedingly simple: there is a long and many times validated history of persecution of people based on their religious beliefs. It is that history that necessitates extra protection, not belief itself. Same for race, nationality, sexual orientation, gender. These are protected classes because undue harm caused to them, based on nothing but being in that class, is established beyond any reasonable doubt, many times over.

There is no history of oppression of morons who spend too much time on Youtube. No harm being done to them now or ever. No harm - no need for protection.

lutorm

  • Pencil Stache
  • ****
  • Posts: 831
  • Location: About the middle of Sweden
Poor taste or not, the point is exceedingly simple: there is a long and many times validated history of persecution of people based on their religious beliefs. It is that history that necessitates extra protection, not belief itself. Same for race, nationality, sexual orientation, gender. These are protected classes because undue harm caused to them, based on nothing but being in that class, is established beyond any reasonable doubt, many times over.

There is no history of oppression of morons who spend too much time on Youtube. No harm being done to them now or ever. No harm - no need for protection.
Thanks for clarifying. I largely agree with that.

My point, however, is that the harm done to people by vaccinating them against their will is the same regardless of whether it's their religion or their youtube channel that is the base of their belief. I fail to see how the fact that some people have historically been persecuted for their religious beliefs translates to a freedom from being required to do exactly what everyone else is just because they don't want to, while all others are, irrespective of whether they want to or not.