Religious vaccine exemption stays for NY health care workers

"New York will continue to be barred from enforcing any requirement that employers deny religious exemptions. Additionally, the state cannot revoke exemptions already granted." - RNS

327 reads

There are 5 Comments

Aaron Blumer's picture


This might be a good time to point out that the government can be wrong and the plaintiffs be wrong also. Similar situation with the athletes who sued and won in the 6th circuit. This cases are frustrating because, as a legal principle, I want to see government lose to religious liberty. At the same time, I don't want to see religious liberty abused/used to rationalize behavior that doesn't really have a religious basis.   ... so I can't be happy about these legal victories that are probably cultural losses.

Views expressed are always my own and not my employer's, my church's, my family's, my neighbors', or my pets'. The house plants have authorized me to speak for them, however, and they always agree with me.

dcbii's picture


Is a wrong decision reached for the right reasons better than a right decision reached for the wrong reasons?  I personally don't think so.  I think there's some argument to be made for the latter being better.

Philippians 1:15-18:

Some indeed preach Christ from envy and rivalry, but others from good will.  The latter do it out of love, knowing that I am put here for the defense of the gospel.  The former proclaim Christ out of selfish ambition, not sincerely but thinking to afflict me in my imprisonment.  What then? Only that in every way, whether in pretense or in truth, Christ is proclaimed, and in that I rejoice.

Similarly, I can rejoice in correct legal decisions, even those reached by arguments I don't agree with.

Edit: In light of Larry's post, I should qualify that I absolutely agree with the fact that people should be able to claim a personal religious exemption, even if I disagree with their reasons for doing so.  I don't see a "Christian" need for such an exemption to the Covid vaccine, but clearly there are some who do.  I'm not convinced that they damage the Christian faith any more than the "pretense preachers" that Paul faced.

Dave Barnhart

Larry's picture


At the same time, I don't want to see religious liberty abused/used to rationalize behavior that doesn't really have a religious basis. 

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, no one else gets to determine a religious objection for another person. I don't understand why this keeps getting said. It makes no sense either religiously or civically. Freedom of conscience means you and you alone get to decide what your beliefs require of you. This is the point of religious freedom. It isn't freedom if someone else can judge its legitimacy. 

Aaron, in the past few years you were adamant about true conservatism but here you are as far from conservative as you can get. It is hard to understand how you can be a conservative and take this position. You aren't conserving here.

A church is free to sit in judgment on who can be a member, who can teach, etc. As individuals, we can have debates about what should be believed or not. But religious convictions and religious freedoms belong to individuals.

these legal victories that are probably cultural losses.

I am not sure what is meant by a cultural loss. I fear that one thing that has happened in the last 18 months is that Christians have increased their tendency to let their churches and their beliefs be controlled by those who do not share them. We are handing over the practice of Christianity to those who do not share our Christianity and in many cases to those who are antagonistic to it. If there is a "cultural loss," it seems to me that is it. 


WallyMorris's picture

Many years ago the Supreme Court said that a "religious belief" is a belief which a person holds "religiously". Legally, a "religious belief" may or may not have anything to do with God.

Wally Morris

Charity Baptist Church

Huntington, IN