U.S. Supreme Court Spurns Bid for Religious Opt-Out From Vaccine Rule

[AGENT J]

My observations have always been that they find something they don't want to do, and then work back from there to justify why they don't have to because of their religion, so far as some of the vaccine reticence. To me it shouldn't be a matter of it conflicting with religion or not. It's a matter of even a secular person being allowed to reject having forced medical treatments on them, misguided or not.

Huh? What forced medical treatments are you talking about?

 

[Fishking]

Huh? What forced medical treatments are you talking about?

Vaccination.

 

[AGENT J]

Vaccination.

WHere is that being factually forced?

 

[Fishking]

WHere is that being factually forced?

That's what mandates are all about.

 

[AGENT J]

That's what mandates are all about.

Ill ask you AGAIN, where are vaccines factually being forced?

 

[Liberal7360]

Vaccination.

I'm sorry but the mandates don't force vaccination.

A person can take covid tests instead of vaccination. All of the mandates say that a person can take regular covid tests instead of vaccinating.

A person can get another job instead of a vaccination.

No one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated.

 

[Fishking]

I'm sorry but the mandates don't force vaccination.

A person can take covid tests instead of vaccination. All of the mandates say that a person can take regular covid tests instead of vaccinating.

A person can get another job instead of a vaccination.

No one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated.

Coercion is force.

 

[AGENT J]

I'm sorry but the mandates don't force vaccination.

A person can take covid tests instead of vaccination. All of the mandates say that a person can take regular covid tests instead of vaccinating.

A person can get another job instead of a vaccination.

No one is forcing anyone to get vaccinated.

100% correct its not factually being forced in the US but facts like you posted will go ignored

 

[AGENT J]

Coercion is force.

WHere are vaccines being factually forced?
Where are vaccines being factually coerced?

 

[Overitall]

A "guarantee" doesn't really have anything to do with the principle. If I build bombs in my house, I'm not "guaranteed" to blow up my house and threaten my neighbors if my house explodes, but does that mean if my religion calls for me to make bombs that I should be allowed to do so because blowing up my neighbors' houses is only a possibility?

If my religion doesn't recognize the power of the state to regulate private behavior, I answer only to whatever God I choose, should I be able to drive 100mph through a school zone, because I'm not guaranteed to run over a child or parents? If my religion requires me to be armed at all times to protect myself and my family, can I then disregard limits on where/when I can carry an AR-15 because doing so certainly doesn't "guarantee" that I'll use it to shoot a bunch of innocents? Etc...........

I know you've put a lot of thought into this, but it's still a false equivalence. Your analogy is just a watered down version of the first one I responded to comparing sacrifice with taking a vaccine in respect to religious beliefs.

 

[Liberal7360]

Coercion is force.

It's not coercion.

All the person has to do is take tests to prove they aren't infected.

They are given a choice.

Vaccinate or be tested regularly.

That isn't forcing anyone to get vaccinated.

A person can always find a new job.

That's not forcing anyone to get vaccinated either.

Please stop with the theatrics.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

If they can't consider it, then there are no exemptions for religious beliefs.

That would be the ultimate and logical extension of a total "separation of Church and State".

Anything that the "Church" wants to do, the "Church" should do WITHOUT any consideration of the needs or wants of the "State", and anything that the "State" wants to do, the "State" should do WITHOUT any consideration of the needs or wants of the "Church".

The "Church" is perfectly free to dictate that its members NOT comply with a rule made by the "State" and any member of the "Church" that violates that requirement (by complying with a rule made by the "State" that the "Church" says should NOT be complied with) then has to face whatever consequences that the "Church" imposes.

The "State" is perfectly free to dictate that its members NOT comply with a rule made by the "Church" and any member of the "State" that violates that requirement (by complying with a rule made by the "Church" that the "State" says should NOT be complied with) then has to face whatever consequences that the "State" imposes.

 

[noonereal]

"exemptions" are tricky because...

They are not tricky at all. They are not science and should never have been allowed anywhere in anyway.

Religion should never exempt anyone of anything.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

The problem is the USSC has already set precedence in the Hobby Lobby decision. If you have a deeply held religious belief, you do not have to obey laws that run contrary to that belief. you get an exemption.

In short, the US Supreme Court has ruled that rulings by "The Church" take precedence over rulings made by "The State".

Another name for a country where "The Church" is the highest ruling body is a "Theocracy".

The only thing that saves the US from being a complete "Theocracy" is that the various branches of "The Church" simply cannot get it together enough to present a united front and none of the individual branches of "The Church" is actually strong enough to usurp power.

 

[noonereal]

It's a matter of even a secular person being allowed to reject having forced medical treatments on them

Agree. Religion should have nothing to do with it.

 

[dockside]

You said "...in this country my rights as a Christian are 100% protected". You can pray in school, but you can't be led in prayer. Seems like your rights are not 100% protected.

How does not being led in prayer violate your religious rights since you can still pray. I didn't realize there was a religion where you could not pray unless led in prayer. And, who is to do the "leading"? A Muslim? Someone who diametrically preaches and prays something that is not part of your religious belief? The USSC decades ago said that a tribe of Native Americans who used peyote in their religious rituals could not do so as peyote was a controlled substance. So, religious beliefs can only go so far. And, I think the USSC was way wrong when it decided the Hobby Lobby case. Just because they are a Roman Catholic majority gives them no authority to impose their beliefs of birth control on employees of certain corporations.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Really? Prayer in school ring a bell?

Would it make a difference if "prayer in school" were rotated between ALL "theological viewpoints" (which would include agnosticism, atheism, "Nuwaubianism", "The Prince Philip Movement", "Raelism", "Aghourianism", "Panawaveism", "The 'Universal People'", "The Church of All Worlds", "Jediism", "The 'Creativity Movement'", "The 'Aetherius Society'", "'Happy Science'", "The Church of the Invisible Pink Unicorn", "Preslytarianism", and, lest we forget them, "Pastafarianism" and "Scientology".

However, if you stick to only "recognized" religions then it would take roughly 22.22 school years to get through them all, so it's best that each school day have TWO sessions so that each student can "pray" according to the "correct" religion at least once in their public school career.

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

It's complete garbage, unless they are Jehovah witnesses

Did you know that the Jehovas Witnesses have not opposed vaccination since 1954 (likely before you were born) and that an article in a recent issue of the church's newsletter promotes vaccination to avoid infectious diseases.

Obviously your knowledge of the subject is just a wee tad -bigoted- dated.

You might find "Immunizations and Religion" (from the Vanderbilt University Medical Center) of a bit of existence in bringing your knowledge up into the 2020s.

or something like that where they don't believe in medicine. And all the supposed "religious exemption" people are all already vaccinated, so where does it say I'm against the covid vaccine mandate when even the red states have school vaccine requirements and have had it for a long time?

It's bullshit like every other thing republicans push.

Can a muslim claim honor killings should be legal because its their religious belief? No, so its garbage people can hide behind their religion to not follow the rules and laws.

But of course, this hack court will allow it, particularly the Christian Taliban queen

 

[AGENT J]

They are not tricky at all. They are not science and should never have been allowed anywhere in anyway.

Religion should never exempt anyone of anything.

well thank god America isn't design like that, the constitution disagrees with you and we have rights in this great country

 

[TU Curmudgeon]

Coercion is force.

You do know that the United States of America HAS had FORCED vaccination (or Americans) in the past and that those FORCED vaccinations were ruled to be legal - don't you?

Are you taking the position that someone who wants to immigrate to the United States of America should not be required to be vaccinated against any diseases that the US government MANDATES they be vaccinated against? Isn't that "coercion"?

 

[The Mark]

That would be the ultimate and logical extension of a total "separation of Church and State".

Anything that the "Church" wants to do, the "Church" should do WITHOUT any consideration of the needs or wants of the "State", and anything that the "State" wants to do, the "State" should do WITHOUT any consideration of the needs or wants of the "Church".

The "Church" is perfectly free to dictate that its members NOT comply with a rule made by the "State" and any member of the "Church" that violates that requirement (by complying with a rule made by the "State" that the "Church" says should NOT be complied with) then has to face whatever consequences that the "Church" imposes.

The "State" is perfectly free to dictate that its members NOT comply with a rule made by the "Church" and any member of the "State" that violates that requirement (by complying with a rule made by the "Church" that the "State" says should NOT be complied with) then has to face whatever consequences that the "State" imposes.

So churches and religious organizations called churches would have to pay taxes, provide various medical services they disagree with to their employees depending on circumstances, and various other things they're currently allowed to do or protected from would no longer apply.

I mean, because the state isn't allowed to consider that it's a church before collecting taxes.

I can see a massive pile of court cases in the future of this change.

 

[Fishking]

It's not coercion.

All the person has to do is take tests to prove they aren't infected.

They are given a choice.

Vaccinate or be tested regularly.

That isn't forcing anyone to get vaccinated.

A person can always find a new job.

That's not forcing anyone to get vaccinated either.

Please stop with the theatrics.

It's not theatrics. People are being fired for it, for example. People I work with.

 

[Fishking]

You do know that the United States of America HAS had FORCED vaccination (or Americans) in the past and that those FORCED vaccinations were ruled to be legal - don't you?

Are you taking the position that someone who wants to immigrate to the United States of America should not be required to be vaccinated against any diseases that the US government MANDATES they be vaccinated against? Isn't that "coercion"?

Yes, I'm against that. Just because the US does things as well doesn't mean I automatically support it.

 

[Fishking]

Agree. Religion should have nothing to do with it.

For real. I'm trying to think of anything exemption that is given for religious people that shouldn't also just be something a completely secular person couldn't also do from their own ideology and beliefs. I just can't really think of it.

 

[AGENT J]

It's not theatrics. People are being fired for it, for example. People I work with.

WHere are vaccines being factually forced?
Where are vaccines being factually coerced?