Calif. church offers religious exemption letters for people opposed to COVID vaccine

One of our elders spoke some wisdom last Sunday regarding the times: we need to choose our battles and a lot of believers are not choosing well these days.

The church as an entity, and believers as individuals, are not called to be freedom fighters. We are called to pursue the good of our neighbors and to be subject to the authorities and to pursue peace with all our fellow humans (Heb. 12.14, Rom 14.19).

So, to the degree Christians should be chasing after “freedom” at all, it’s as a way to promote the good of those around us, not as a “moral objection” to authority.

But this is mostly fueled by fear and rebellion and thinking that that the left is “the world” in the John 15:18 sense. All of this is bad theology leading to unChristian attitudes and choices.

We need to choose better battles. We’re not at war with flesh and blood or even with “the left.”

[Aaron Blumer]

So, to the degree Christians should be chasing after “freedom” at all,

It also points to an utter lack of understanding of what freedom truly is for the Christian. Our freedom as Christians is not structured, supported and maintained by political leaders and our ability to control and influence politics. It is in Christ. COVID, in my mind, has really exposed the inadequacy of theology taught in our churches, and the lack of maturity among believers. It also exposes that most likely many that are in our pews that seem to live a Christian life are not really true believers.

I also struggle with what is “religious exemption” for the Moderna or Pfizer vaccines. The only real moral concerns have been the use of aborted fetal cells. Neither of these vaccines used fetal cells in their creation. All key Christian ethical institutions have confirmed that they do not see an ethical problem with taking either of these vaccines. I see significantly more ethical and moral concerns laid out in Scripture for not taking the vaccine. This is probably less rooted in religious exemption and more the resistance of the government telling someone what to do, and using a religious exemption to cloak that concern.

My harsh take …

If someone doesn’t want to receive the vaccine, I’m fine with that …

And if they die of COVID .. that’s their choice. (I know of several)

The only real moral concerns have been the use of aborted fetal cells.

That’s not the only real moral concern. There is also the moral concern of injecting something into our body about which there is no data concerning longterm effects. Many Christians, in face most Christians and a large number of non-Christians have been historically cautious about introducing certain substances into the body. There is the moral concern of governmental or employer authoritarianism. To dismiss these as not “real” seems both uninformed and shortsighted to me.

So, to the degree Christians should be chasing after “freedom” at all, it’s as a way to promote the good of those around us, not as a “moral objection” to authority.

The good of those around us seems promoted by freedom. If we have seen anything over the past year, it is that many have little to no discernment about these kinds of things. We seem not to be able to see past the immediate fears into the longer term.

I think the idea that a church would issue a letter of religious exemption is a continued demonstration of bad ecclesiology and bad civics. The religious exemption belongs to the individual as a matter of conscience. No one else can make that argumnent for them.

[Larry]

The only real moral concerns have been the use of aborted fetal cells.

That’s not the only real moral concern. There is also the moral concern of injecting something into our body about which there is no data concerning longterm effects. Many Christians, in face most Christians and a large number of non-Christians have been historically cautious about introducing certain substances into the body. There is the moral concern of governmental or employer authoritarianism. To dismiss these as not “real” seems both uninformed and shortsighted to me.

Larry, I wouldn’t classify your other concerns as “moral” in nature. And I would almost classify them as uninformed concerns, but that probably sides on being too prejudicial.

Uninformed because…you have factual information that these vaccines do not cause long term issues? Hmmm.

[G. N. Barkman]

Uninformed because…you have factual information that these vaccines do not cause long term issues? Hmmm.

Death is pretty long term. These vaccines do reduce the risk of death from COVID. That is factual.

[G. N. Barkman]

Uninformed because…you have factual information that these vaccines do not cause long term issues? Hmmm.

Vaccines don’t have long-term side effects. It is a misconception amongst many people that confuse therapeutic medicines with vaccines. Therapeutic medicines are meant to stay in the body and can be stored to accomplish their effect. Vaccines are eliminated fairly quickly. Side effects almost exclusively show up in less than 4 weeks, and in most cases show up in a few days.

The mRNA vaccines are even safer than previous vaccines because they use your own body and natural steps to create the protein and then uses the natural steps to eliminate the vaccine. The biochemistry is well understood and in animal studies it was very easy to tag and track all of the elements of the vaccine and how they are eliminated.

This is why the FDA can give full approval to a vaccine. It took time after the emergency approval, to build up enough of a population of data to understand the prevalence of side effects. Phase 1 through Phase 3 Clinical Trials don’t provide enough of a population to understand all side effects, only enough statistical data to show serious side effects that may be more common.

But there is so much misinformation out there, that it will be almost impossible to convince anyone otherwise. Just like people are still clinging to vaccine caused autism.

According to a recent SI article by Gene Veith, the greatest resistance to Covid vaccines among the well educated are those with Ph.D.’s. It’s also notable that one of the largest groups of resisters is medical professionals. I don’t claim to understand all the scientific details, but the report of who is hesitant should make everyone a bit cautious. I don’t think anyone should be overly dogmatic that these vaccines will not cause any long term problems.

That said, I have decided to get the vaccine. Having recovered from COVID, I probably have strong antibodies that make the vaccine unnecessary. However, I have decided to take it anyway for a number of reasons, but I remain respectful towards those who are holding out. They may prove to be wiser than I. Time will tell.

[G. N. Barkman]

According to a recent SI article by Gene Veith, the greatest resistance to Covid vaccines among the well educated are those with Ph.D.’s. It’s also notable that one of the largest groups of resisters is medical professionals. I don’t claim to understand all the scientific details, but the report of who is hesitant should make everyone a bit cautious. I don’t think anyone should be overly dogmatic that these vaccines will not cause any long term problems.

That said, I have decided to get the vaccine. Having recovered from COVID, I probably have strong antibodies that make the vaccine unnecessary. However, I have decided to take it anyway for a number of reasons, but I remain respectful towards those who are holding out. They may prove to be wiser than I. Time will tell.

You have to be very careful with Gene’s analysis. He does source his data, which is good. And I don’t dispute the data. What is challenging is that it is singular in its slice. We are not just defined as a health care worker or a PhD. We can also be a Qanon follower, white evangelical, Republican, anti-vaxxer, foreign national….There are other elements that can define us as vaccine hesitant that is more definitive than our educational status. So we have to be careful when the analysis pick data from different sources, combines it together to create a singular conclusion.

It is 100% right to be concerned about putting something into your body. And it is 100% right for someone to be hesitant and want to do research. I would encourage anyone to do that. And at the end of the day there are some legitimate reasons not to take the vaccine or any vaccine.

I would not be 100% dogmatic, but I have a high degree of confidence to feel safe about them. My respect begins to wane when the concern is supported by disinformation. Almost all of the disinformation on social media platforms is coming from 12 sources or from foreign governments. They get spread and supported further by different personalities and social media further reverberates it through the echo effect that we are all bombarded by. Unfortunately people have lost the perspective of what is a trusted source and what is not a trusted source, but that is across the entire spectrum of news and information, not just vaccine.

Fortunately my background is in vaccines and my wife’s is in virus growth and development, so it helps us when we read the studies. I would never instruct anyone to get a vaccine without talking to their own physician to discuss the pro’s and con’s in their particular situation. All I can say is that the science behind the mRNA vaccine is truly amazing and ground breaking and it offers an extremely high level of safety, beyond what we have seen in other forms of drugs and drug delivery. What we will most likely find in the coming years is that COVID has had a greater impact on drug development than probably any other event in modern history. But I won’t be dogmatic on that, time will tell.

Larry, I wouldn’t classify your other concerns as “moral” in nature. And I would almost classify them as uninformed concerns, but that probably sides on being too prejudicial.

So you don’t think that care for the body or government power is a moral issue? What kind of issue is it then?

Uninformed? To the first (care for the body), yes it is absolutely is uninformed. That’s the whole point. We simply don’t know the long term effects yet. Later you say, “It is 100% right to be concerned about putting something into your body. And it is 100% right for someone to be hesitant and want to do research.” It sounds like you agree with me on this.

As for the second (government power), we are pretty informed about government power. Recently reading “Live Not By Lies” which is a fascinating read in many respects. It isn’t uninformed to be cautious about government power. That’s not conspiracy kind of theory stuff. It’s historical and it’s common sense in a lot of ways.

To disagree on the substance of the concerns is one thing; to claim these are non-moral issues is quite another, IMO.

[Larry]

As for the second (government power), we are pretty informed about government power. Recently reading “Live Not By Lies” which is a fascinating read in many respects. It isn’t uninformed to be cautious about government power. That’s not conspiracy kind of theory stuff. It’s historical and it’s common sense in a lot of ways.

To disagree on the substance of the concerns is one thing; to claim these are non-moral issues is quite another, IMO.

The government (across both parties), worked with the private sector to fund the development of a vaccine for a national health crisis. The FDA, created over 100 years ago, and responsible for the approval of drugs, followed their normal process to give emergency approval (as they have done numerous times before) and subsequently full approval of a vaccine(s) to combat the national health crisis. Private insurers have agreed to pay for the vaccine, and the proper government agencies have recommended that people who meet certain conditions should get the vaccine. That is where it stands now.

Given that, what in that process or the state that we are in today, creates a moral dilemna? Not a perceived government over reach (which is not taking place right now), but how the government is operating as it stands. And if Scripture is our ultimate moral authority, what Scriptural basis indicates that the government is currently not acting morally?

[dgszweda]

You have to be very careful with Gene’s analysis. He does source his data, which is good. And I don’t dispute the data. What is challenging is that it is singular in its slice. We are not just defined as a health care worker or a PhD. We can also be a Qanon follower, white evangelical, Republican, anti-vaxxer, foreign national….There are other elements that can define us as vaccine hesitant that is more definitive than our educational status. So we have to be careful when the analysis pick data from different sources, combines it together to create a singular conclusion.

Of course any comprehensive analysis must be multivariate. However, no study that can actually be accomplished, especially in a reasonable amount of time, will include all variables. That simply isn’t realistic.

I’d be curious just how many medical professionals or PhDs are in the categories of “QAnon followers” or “anti-vaxxers.” Of course I don’t know either, but I’d be willing to put money on that being a tiny number, just from common sense. Nowhere near all hesitancy comes from those categories. It’s interesting to actually listen to medical professionals. My wife just finished a doctor visit, and the nurse (and this is at Duke University, hardly a backwater medical institution), after asking her about Covid vaccination status, mentioned that if she were not required to have it, she wouldn’t have done so either.

I myself have not gotten the Covid vaccine, but I neither follow QAnon, nor am I an anti-vaxxer. I have had most vaccines, and my children got all of the ones offered, except HPV, which, at the time the doctors were offering it, was too new for my comfort. I’d probably have thought differently of it if it had had 10 or 20 years of use. Getting the various vaccines comes down to a relatively simple cost/benefit analysis. Polio and smallpox are obvious choices. So is rabies if one is exposed. The dangers are far too high to worry about side effects or long-term effects. Frankly, Covid is not in those categories. It doesn’t even compare to SARS or MERS from a few years back in how dangerous it is to the vast majority of those infected. No one has long-term experience with any of the Covid vaccines, and they won’t for years. It’s easy to say that vaccines won’t cause long-term problems until we encounter one that does.

Further, it seems from the categories you list above. and how you expressed them, that you are considering them essentially equivalent, or at least, extremely likely to occur together. I.e. white evangelical is most likely an anti-vaxxer is most likely a QAnon follower is most likely a Republican. I realize that that is how many on the left or in the media paint it, but of course, that is nonsense. Doing so is just a way of dismissing actual concerns.

It’s good that you are comfortable with making the choice to get the vaccine. Most of those who haven’t (unless they were unable for some reason) are also comfortable with their choice and the risks it could entail. This isn’t simply a matter of “those who understand” vs. “the unwashed masses.”