Sep 10, 2021 05:13 PM
‘Religious’ exemptions add legal thorns to looming COVID vaccine mandates
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2021/09/10/...-mandates/
EXCERPTS: No major denomination opposes vaccination. [...] Still, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) grants broad leeway to what constitutes a sincerely held religious belief. As a result, some experts predict most employers and administrators won’t want to challenge such objections from their employees.
[...] The Food and Drug Administration’s full approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Aug. 23 could bring the matter to a head. Many government agencies, health care providers, colleges and the military had been awaiting the move before enforcing mandates.
California, which abolished nonmedical exemptions for childhood vaccination in 2015, has led the way on covid vaccine mandates. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s July 26 order for state employees and health care workers to be fully vaccinated or submit to weekly testing was the first of its kind, as was a similar declaration Aug. 11 for all teachers and staff at both public and private schools. The 23-campus California State University system joined UC in requiring vaccination of all students and staff, and companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter have announced mandatory proof of employee vaccination for those who return to their offices.
The University of California is requiring proof of vaccination for all staffers and students across its 10 campuses, a decision that potentially affects half a million people. But like many other businesses, it makes room for those who wish to request an exemption “on medical, disability or religious grounds,” adding that it is required by law to do so.
Nothing in history suggests that a large number of students or staff members will seek such an out — but then, no previous vaccine conversation has been as overtly politicized as the one around covid.
“This country is going to mandates. It just is. Every other alternative has been tried,” said Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious diseases expert at UC-San Francisco. “That phrase, ‘religious exemption,’ is very big. But it’s going to be quite hard in the current climate — in a mass health crisis, with a vaccine in place that works — to just let any such religious claims go.”
Indeed, while pop-up anti-vaccine churches have long offered reluctant parents ways to exempt their kids from shots, these days churches, internet-based religious businesses and others seem to be offering covid vaccination exemptions wholesale.
[...] As for the objection itself, the commission’s advice is vague. Employers “should ordinarily assume that an employee’s request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief,” the EEOC says. Employers have the right to ask for supporting documentation, but employees’ religious beliefs don’t have to hew to any specific or organized faith.
The distinction between religion and ideology is blurring among those seeking exemptions. [...] A surgical technician working at Dignity Health, which has ordered its employees to be fully vaccinated by Nov. 1, said she was awaiting a response from the company’s human resources department on her request for a religious exemption. She freely explained her reasons for applying by referencing two Bible passages and listing vaccine ingredients she said are “harmful to the human body.” But she didn’t want anyone to know she applied for the religious exemption.
A state’s right to require vaccination has been settled law since a 1905 Supreme Court ruling that upheld compulsory smallpox vaccination in Massachusetts. Legal experts say that right has been upheld repeatedly [...] “Under current law it is clear that no religious exemption is required,” Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC-Berkeley’s law school, told KHN. Clearly, that is not preventing people from seeking one... (MORE - details)
Opinion: Religious exemptions to the vaccine should be rare — but they should exist
https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2021/9/1...ould-exist
[1]Securing public health in a pandemic is surely a compelling interest that justifies vaccine requirements. But that shouldn’t neglect First Amendment principles[/i]
EXCERPTS: In an op-ed published in The New York Times earlier this week, former pastor Curtis Chang argues that religious exemptions to employer vaccination requirements should never be permitted under Title VII — the federal law that requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation to their employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs or practices. Such accommodations should not exist, argues Chang, because “there is no actual religious basis for exemptions from vaccine mandates in any established stream of Christianity.”
As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I am inclined to agree with Chang’s argument that Christianity, properly understood, does not require abstention from vaccines. [...] But as a lawyer, the question is not whether a person’s religious beliefs are correct according to the authorities of their denomination. Heretics have as much a claim to religious freedom as the orthodox. A person may sincerely hold a religious belief — and claim the protection of Title VII for that belief — even if that belief is heretical. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment forbids courts from deciding who is right and who is wrong on a disputed question of religious doctrine.
The question under Title VII is whether the objection to vaccination is a sincerely held religious belief. To be clear, that is not — and should not be — an easy hurdle to clear. Title VII does not protect a mere preference not to take a vaccine, for example. Nor does it protect a belief that a vaccine is simply unsafe or ineffective, or part of a conspiracy to exert political control. Nor does it — or should it — protect a person who disingenuously cloaks such secular objections in religious language.
Also, establishing a sincere religious objection to vaccines is only the first step under Title VII. Once you clear that hurdle, the next question is whether accommodating that religious belief is possible without imposing an undue burden on the employer’s right to maintain a safe workplace.
[...] Chang’s op-ed only addresses Title VII, and the legal issues are a little different when the vaccine mandate comes from a government agency rather than a private employer, but the law still balances individual rights against public health... (MORE - missing details)
Biden's personal belief flip-flop on abortion
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/archbis...d/1035765/
EXCERPTS: Wilton Gregory, archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., said President Joe Biden is ''not demonstrating Catholic teaching'' after the president last week shared his opinion about when ''life begins.''
Speaking at a press gathering Thursday, Gregory said: ''The Catholic Church teaches, and has taught, that life — human life — begins at conception. So, the president is not demonstrating Catholic teaching."
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to allow a restrictive abortion law to go into effect in Texas, the president told White House reporters he did not ''agree'' that life begins at conception. ''I have been and continue to be a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade. 'I respect them — those who believe life begins at the moment of conception and all — I respect that. Don't agree, but I respect that,'' Biden said.
The National Catholic Register, however, was quick to point to Biden's contradiction when he responded to the same question in a 2012 debate with Republican Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. ''Life begins at conception, that's the church's judgment. I accept it in my personal life,'' Biden said.
[...] The New York Post said the president had done a ''flip-flop'' on the issue of when life begins. ''I'm prepared to accept that the moment of conception is a human life and being,'' Biden said in a 2015 interview. ''But I'm not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view.''
The Post also reported about a 2007 interview Biden gave to Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" in which once again stated his view on when life begins. ''I am prepared to accept my church's view. I think it's a tough one. I have to accept that on faith.' (MORE - details)
https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2021/09/10/...-mandates/
EXCERPTS: No major denomination opposes vaccination. [...] Still, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) grants broad leeway to what constitutes a sincerely held religious belief. As a result, some experts predict most employers and administrators won’t want to challenge such objections from their employees.
[...] The Food and Drug Administration’s full approval of the Pfizer-BioNTech vaccine on Aug. 23 could bring the matter to a head. Many government agencies, health care providers, colleges and the military had been awaiting the move before enforcing mandates.
California, which abolished nonmedical exemptions for childhood vaccination in 2015, has led the way on covid vaccine mandates. Democratic Gov. Gavin Newsom’s July 26 order for state employees and health care workers to be fully vaccinated or submit to weekly testing was the first of its kind, as was a similar declaration Aug. 11 for all teachers and staff at both public and private schools. The 23-campus California State University system joined UC in requiring vaccination of all students and staff, and companies like Google, Facebook and Twitter have announced mandatory proof of employee vaccination for those who return to their offices.
The University of California is requiring proof of vaccination for all staffers and students across its 10 campuses, a decision that potentially affects half a million people. But like many other businesses, it makes room for those who wish to request an exemption “on medical, disability or religious grounds,” adding that it is required by law to do so.
Nothing in history suggests that a large number of students or staff members will seek such an out — but then, no previous vaccine conversation has been as overtly politicized as the one around covid.
“This country is going to mandates. It just is. Every other alternative has been tried,” said Dr. Monica Gandhi, an infectious diseases expert at UC-San Francisco. “That phrase, ‘religious exemption,’ is very big. But it’s going to be quite hard in the current climate — in a mass health crisis, with a vaccine in place that works — to just let any such religious claims go.”
Indeed, while pop-up anti-vaccine churches have long offered reluctant parents ways to exempt their kids from shots, these days churches, internet-based religious businesses and others seem to be offering covid vaccination exemptions wholesale.
[...] As for the objection itself, the commission’s advice is vague. Employers “should ordinarily assume that an employee’s request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief,” the EEOC says. Employers have the right to ask for supporting documentation, but employees’ religious beliefs don’t have to hew to any specific or organized faith.
The distinction between religion and ideology is blurring among those seeking exemptions. [...] A surgical technician working at Dignity Health, which has ordered its employees to be fully vaccinated by Nov. 1, said she was awaiting a response from the company’s human resources department on her request for a religious exemption. She freely explained her reasons for applying by referencing two Bible passages and listing vaccine ingredients she said are “harmful to the human body.” But she didn’t want anyone to know she applied for the religious exemption.
A state’s right to require vaccination has been settled law since a 1905 Supreme Court ruling that upheld compulsory smallpox vaccination in Massachusetts. Legal experts say that right has been upheld repeatedly [...] “Under current law it is clear that no religious exemption is required,” Erwin Chemerinsky, dean of UC-Berkeley’s law school, told KHN. Clearly, that is not preventing people from seeking one... (MORE - details)
Opinion: Religious exemptions to the vaccine should be rare — but they should exist
https://www.deseret.com/opinion/2021/9/1...ould-exist
[1]Securing public health in a pandemic is surely a compelling interest that justifies vaccine requirements. But that shouldn’t neglect First Amendment principles[/i]
EXCERPTS: In an op-ed published in The New York Times earlier this week, former pastor Curtis Chang argues that religious exemptions to employer vaccination requirements should never be permitted under Title VII — the federal law that requires employers to provide a reasonable accommodation to their employees’ sincerely held religious beliefs or practices. Such accommodations should not exist, argues Chang, because “there is no actual religious basis for exemptions from vaccine mandates in any established stream of Christianity.”
As a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, I am inclined to agree with Chang’s argument that Christianity, properly understood, does not require abstention from vaccines. [...] But as a lawyer, the question is not whether a person’s religious beliefs are correct according to the authorities of their denomination. Heretics have as much a claim to religious freedom as the orthodox. A person may sincerely hold a religious belief — and claim the protection of Title VII for that belief — even if that belief is heretical. The Supreme Court has repeatedly held that the First Amendment forbids courts from deciding who is right and who is wrong on a disputed question of religious doctrine.
The question under Title VII is whether the objection to vaccination is a sincerely held religious belief. To be clear, that is not — and should not be — an easy hurdle to clear. Title VII does not protect a mere preference not to take a vaccine, for example. Nor does it protect a belief that a vaccine is simply unsafe or ineffective, or part of a conspiracy to exert political control. Nor does it — or should it — protect a person who disingenuously cloaks such secular objections in religious language.
Also, establishing a sincere religious objection to vaccines is only the first step under Title VII. Once you clear that hurdle, the next question is whether accommodating that religious belief is possible without imposing an undue burden on the employer’s right to maintain a safe workplace.
[...] Chang’s op-ed only addresses Title VII, and the legal issues are a little different when the vaccine mandate comes from a government agency rather than a private employer, but the law still balances individual rights against public health... (MORE - missing details)
Biden's personal belief flip-flop on abortion
https://www.newsmax.com/politics/archbis...d/1035765/
EXCERPTS: Wilton Gregory, archbishop of the Roman Catholic Archdiocese of Washington, D.C., said President Joe Biden is ''not demonstrating Catholic teaching'' after the president last week shared his opinion about when ''life begins.''
Speaking at a press gathering Thursday, Gregory said: ''The Catholic Church teaches, and has taught, that life — human life — begins at conception. So, the president is not demonstrating Catholic teaching."
Following the U.S. Supreme Court's decision to allow a restrictive abortion law to go into effect in Texas, the president told White House reporters he did not ''agree'' that life begins at conception. ''I have been and continue to be a strong supporter of Roe v. Wade. 'I respect them — those who believe life begins at the moment of conception and all — I respect that. Don't agree, but I respect that,'' Biden said.
The National Catholic Register, however, was quick to point to Biden's contradiction when he responded to the same question in a 2012 debate with Republican Paul Ryan of Wisconsin. ''Life begins at conception, that's the church's judgment. I accept it in my personal life,'' Biden said.
[...] The New York Post said the president had done a ''flip-flop'' on the issue of when life begins. ''I'm prepared to accept that the moment of conception is a human life and being,'' Biden said in a 2015 interview. ''But I'm not prepared to say that to other God-fearing, non-God-fearing people that have a different view.''
The Post also reported about a 2007 interview Biden gave to Tim Russert on NBC's "Meet the Press" in which once again stated his view on when life begins. ''I am prepared to accept my church's view. I think it's a tough one. I have to accept that on faith.' (MORE - details)
