Vaccines — Personal Belief vs. Religious Exemptions

First things first — there should be no exemptions. As far as I’m concerned, if you don’t vaccinate your child you are guilty of child abuse and neglect(unless there is a medical reason not to do so). The government retains an important role in enforcing laws requiring vaccinations.  A state law like Mississippi’s (yes, that Mississippi) with only medical exemptions ensures that nearly all kids are vaccinated.

But in the United States, with our separation between church and state, why should only a religious person get special treatment?   If a state offers something to someone because a religious belief, shouldn’t someone with an equally sincere philosophical belief be entitled to the same benefit?  For example, as currently conceived, if called for military duty in the United States, one does not have to be religious to be a conscientious objector.   It would also include “moral or ethical beliefs.”

There actually is a related NJ case from 2014 that touches on this topic, Valent v. Board of Review, Department of Labor.  In this case, a nurse who refused to have a flu shot was dismissed from her job and denied unemployment benefits.   The court reversed this ruling and granted her the benefits, because to do otherwise would violate the First Amendment.

Under these circumstances, by denying appellant’s application to receive unemployment benefits based only on her unwillingness to submit to the employer’s religion-based policy, the Board violated appellant’s rights under the First Amendment.

On the issue of vaccines, the answer is, of course, easy — no exemptions.

5 thoughts on “Vaccines — Personal Belief vs. Religious Exemptions

  1. You unfortunately are misunderstanding why some folks exercise their rights to their “religious beliefs” when it comes to vaccines. Some “religious” people have sound scientific reasons for opposing various vaccines, and it’s not because of your stereotypical claim of them wanting to be treated as a special class of citizens who require special protections from the state.

    The WI-38 cell line which is used in all flu vaccines in the US is derived from babies that were intentionally aborted. There are cell lines that are equally affective (but less profitable) that can be obtained ethically. The large pharma companies who supply these vaccines have monopolized the market space and now refuse to offer these ethical alternatives due to financial reasons.

    Where’s the outrage over the practices of large pharma companies who continue to coax people and other scientists into using these unethical methods for their own profit? They are making money from the intentional termination of life because other ethical approaches are not as lucrative. That’s abusive.

    BTW…let’s recall the other times “religious folks” exercised their rights to stick to their convictions despite popular opinion at the time, abolishing slavery, fighting for civil rights, repeal of Jim Crow laws, abolishment of lynchings, immigration reform, environmentalism, social justice for the poor, care for Aids victims (The largest non-government provider of healthcare for Aids victims is the Catholic Church!)…oh yeah, and let us not forget, Democracy.

    1. I won’t get into an argument about the effectiveness or safety of vaccines here. That’s a well-trod path, and the evidence is clear.

      However, what you describe is not a scientific objection but a moral one. We shouldn’t confuse the two.

  2. You missed the entire point about it being an “ethical” problem.

    You are saying we should just blindly follow anything large pharma tosses at us and never question it. You seem to be completely fine with large corporations choosing profits over ethics, otherwise your heart and your intellect would be open to the fact that the “ethical” alternatives are just as effective as the vaccines produced with the WI-38 cell line. That is a well-trod path, and the evidence is clear.

    Aborted fetal tissue from the WI-38 cell line has no place in medical science. Using such things for a vaccine is operating under a Dr. Mengele-type of mentality. The ends do not justify the means

    I thought liberals love it when ethics, morals AND science all point to something that is a cause for objection. I’m thinking you’re more of a Republican then a liberal. (I know you won’t post this)

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.