Judge Blocks Medical Worker Vaccine Mandate in NY State After Christian Health Care Workers Sue

This deeply grieves me. How did we get here?

What if we got here because people took our history seriously? And many today do not take it seriously. They seem to think our history can be easily discarded with no long-term ramifications. In history, many have been willing to give their lives for basic freedoms—both civically and religiously. But today, many are willing to jettison those freedoms for what is at best a temporary short-term gain. You can be pro-vax and reject the idea that the government can compel it.

Christians are becoming famous not for the gospel or the love of Christ or clean, redemptive living but for all this sort of nonsense. Critics were going to keep going after our faith anyway, but that’s no excuse for continually handing them good reasons to do so.

It is also interesting to me how many are willing to change fundamental historic Christianity in order to gain acceptance by the world around us. To consider Christian conscience and religious conviction a bad thing is troubling particularly for those claiming to be conservative. You can’t be conservative unless you are actually willing to conserve. And yet now, many are not willing to conserve even the most basic parts of the Christian faith, that is, the individual right to conscience.

When the Son of Man comes, will He find faith on the earth?

One could be forgiven for wondering. But what if this means exactly the opposite than you imply here? What “faith on the earth” is actually people who take their Christianity seriously enough not to let pressure from those outside the church redefine it? What if “faith on the earth” says “We can die of COVID is need be but what we cannot do is agree not to be a church”? Like so many emotional type arguments, these cut both ways.

Rhetoric is strong but often logic and arguments don’t support it. So again, I urge caution and let people disagree in good faith.

No major religious denominations oppose the vaccines for religious reasons.

Why is there this constant flurry of misunderstanding what a religious exemption? It seems like every thread in the past few days has said something very similar to this. And it’s dead wrong. We even have one poster who is apparently very knowledgeable claiming this is cowardice and moronic. I am not sure how he came to that conclusion.

The truth is that religious exemptions do not belong to denominations, churches, or other people. They belong to individuals. That’s the point — No one can coerce belief. If you are opposed to something for a religious reason, then that is entirely on you. No one has to agree.

With all the technical talk about vaccines and science, let’s at least get the religion part of it correct.

I find the fetal cell argument the least convincing of all. I think it is absolutely ridiculous and without merit whatsoever. But I don’t get to make that decision for others. The bottom line is that the babies are already dead and not taking a medicine connected to them won’t bring them back to life.

The strongest arguments, IMO, are the “temple of God” argument and the “freedom” argument. On the former, there is all kinds of stuff, including medicines, that Christians don’t put in their bodies because they are temples of the Holy Spirit. This is not new. Nor should it be troubling. On the latter it is common to claim that all these vaccines are already mandated. But I have not seen anyone interact and whether they should be mandated. And what types of vaccines should be mandated. Should the flu shot be mandated? Most would say no. But why MMR and not the flu shot? Or why COVID and not the flu shot? Should a Z-pak be a government mandate? Should an employer require an employee to take Norco to deal with his pain so he can work and threaten him with termination if he doesn’t want to? Should an employer be able to require an employee to take birth control pills so that she doesn’t get pregnant and have to take a leave from a job that she was trained for at great expense? Most people would probably say “No” to the latter, but why? Where is this line drawn? Why employers with 100 employees and not 125? Or 75? Again, it seems to me that very little critical thinking is taking place. But all too frequently, that hasn’t stopped people from talking.

[Larry]

No major religious denominations oppose the vaccines for religious reasons.

Why is there this constant flurry of misunderstanding what a religious exemption? It seems like every thread in the past few days has said something very similar to this. And it’s dead wrong. We even have one poster who is apparently very knowledgeable claiming this is cowardice and moronic. I am not sure how he came to that conclusion.

Larry, the simple answer is that “Christians” using the religious exemption are often quoting Scripture out of context to demonstrate that God himself and their Christian faith doesn’t allow them to get the vaccine. If you twist Scripture and pull the God card, other believers certainly can evaluate whether your use of Scripture is legitimate. It’s called hermeneutics, and for the past 2,000 years the church has been evaluating and judging whether groups and individuals are rightly understanding and interpreting what Scripture says about God.

Again, if people don’t want to get the vaccine, then don’t get it. Just don’t blame God for your decision. That is cowardice.

[Larry]

No major religious denominations oppose the vaccines for religious reasons.

If you are opposed to something for a religious reason, then that is entirely on you. No one has to agree.

This is not always the case. Lawyers are currently advising companies about the process. Because you have institutions that are filling out religious exemptions en masse for people as a way to avoid the vaccine, some companies are starting to ask for better documentation to protect them. You may start seeing more pressure. Even the military issued guidelines around how to challenge people around religious exemption.

It should be a sincerely held belief, but with those requesting it, abusing it, you are going to see pushback and challenges to it. In the past, many instances of religious exemption had strong backing around it from a denomination and religious institution, so that helped. With all major denominations encouraging vaccines, it just makes the story a bit harder. I don’t know where it will fall out, but I would expect that there is going to be some level of challenge to the exemptions at some level.

That is cowardice.

So if I understand you correctly, it is impossible for anyone to disagree with you about vaccines in good conscience? They are all cowards? There is no chance that they, in good conscience, came to a different conclusion about what the Scripture requires of them?

I am still not sure how you came to that conclusion. Is there any chance that you might be wrong about their motives or their heart? Is there any chance that you are mistaken at all? In the end, it seems that at the very least you are confusing what it means to have religious truth with what it means to have religious freedom. The point of religious freedom is that people are allowed to come to their own conclusions and you (nor me) can impose belief on them?

What if I say you are a coward for your position? What if I can evaluate your use of Scripture and declare your position to be cowardice?

[Larry]

That is cowardice.

So if I understand you correctly, it is impossible for anyone to disagree with you about vaccines in good conscience? They are all cowards? There is no chance that they, in good conscience, came to a different conclusion about what the Scripture requires of them?

Larry, what have I written? You’re free to disagree with me about vaccines. I believe you should have the choice whether you receive the vaccine or not. Choosing to remain unvaccinated is not what makes you a coward.

Blaming God, Biden, Mexican immigrants, Andrew Cuomo, vaccine safety protocols, conspiracy theories, etc. for not getting vaccinated is what makes you a coward. At least have the courage to be honest with yourself and others.

[Larry] In the end, it seems that at the very least you are confusing what it means to have religious truth with what it means to have religious freedom. The point of religious freedom is that people are allowed to come to their own conclusions and you (nor me) can impose belief on them?

Agreed. in the name of religious freedom, if you want to claim a religious exemption to the vaccination that’s up to you. Just don’t say it’s based on your Christian faith as informed by Scripture. If you do, then you need to be able to defend your reasoning without resorting to “God told me” or twisting Scripture if you want other believers to take you seriously.

Of course, you may not care what other Christians think of you just as long as you have an excuse not to get vaccinated.

Larry, what have I written? … Blaming God, Biden, Mexican immigrants, Andrew Cuomo, vaccine safety protocols, conspiracy theories, etc. for not getting vaccinated is what makes you a coward.

You have written that they are cowards. You have not yet argued the basis for calling them cowards. We can’t really evaluate your argument. As of now, I have to agree that it appears to be simply name calling. What is cowardly about having a reason that is sufficient to yourself for an action?

It is hard to imagine that you think everyone who disagrees with you is a coward and that there is no other possible explanation.

Sure they might be wrong, but cowards? Why aren’t the people who demand everyone get vaccinated cowards? Why aren’t the people who want to shut everything down cowards?

you need to be able to defend your reasoning without resorting to “God told me” or twisting Scripture if you want other believers to take you seriously.

I agree with this. But the case doesn’t require “God told me so” in some non-biblical way or the twisting of Scripture. Again, you seem not to consider that people could differ with you in good conscience. You seem, IMO, to perhaps have too high a view of your own conclusion.