“To use a silly example, imagine my religion – I sincerely believe that working is a sin. Well my employer is not required to accommodate that religious belief that I don’t want to work. So there are limits to even sincerely held religious beliefs.”

As more and more businesses and health care facilities are giving ultimatums for staff to get vaccinated to remain at work, many people are citing religious exemption to avoid taking a Covid vaccine.

But this is presenting new legal challenges, according to a new report from NBC. The core question, among many, ‘Is their exemption actually valid?’

In a short segment on NBC News airing on September 7th, the show’s host asked NBC legal analyst Danny Cevallos for some clarification on how this fits in with the first amendment rights of Americans.

The show’s hosts told Cevallos that they are aware that many evangelical leaders are telling their congregations that they should not take the Covid vaccines, and a lawsuit has been filed by Maine healthcare workers stating that the vaccine mandate violates their first amendment rights and religious exemptions.

Cevallos responded with this:

They’re essentially saying that the vaccine violates their sincerely held religious beliefs, and generally these track two theories:

One is under 1 Corinthians [3:16-17, 6:19-20] in the Bible, the notion that the body is a temple. Uh, of course the answer to that is: ‘Well, when was the last time you had another vaccine? Or a potato chip? Or a beer? Or piece of beef of jerky? If your body is a temple, then what exactly – how pure are the things you are putting into it?’

The other position is that this violates sincerely held religious belief against using fetal tissue. And some of this fetal tissue dates back to 1955.

But those are the two main tracks that the objectors, or the ones claiming religious exemptions to vaccines are advancing.

The show’s hosts then asks Cevallos what exactly does the first amendment cover, and how does that fit in with the vaccine mandates. Cevallos said this is the largest and longest topic of discussion in legal school, but says it can be narrowed down in this case:

To the notion of sincerely held religious beliefs, if a court ever reaches that issue, be warned that sincerely held religious beliefs can be very broad, they can be at odds with the main religion’s tenets.

But arguably the court may never reach whether or not these folks sincerely believe that their religion prevents from getting the shot. Because, the federal law prohibiting discrimination based on religious beliefs only requires a reasonable accommodation if doesn’t create an undue hardship on the employer.

To use a silly example, imagine my religion – I sincerely believe that working is a sin. Well my employer is not required to accommodate that religious belief that I don’t want to work. So there are limits to even sincerely held religious beliefs.

One of the hosts noted that Cevallos said the courts may never be able to properly determine if this is a sincere religious conviction or not, but asked what the process would even look like, whether someone simply just does not want the vaccine or establish what is a legitimate conviction.

Here’s the mission, and this has been in some of the documents by Liberty Council that they have sent letters to employers and the idea is this:

That this is a reasonable accommodation and because of that we do reach the issue of sincerely held religious beliefs. And they even have an answer to my beef jerky argument, which is: ‘Look, just because this person has had had vaccines the past, just because the may have had pepperoni pizza in the past’ – and your body is not a temple with a pepperoni pizza unfortunately – ‘that doesn’t mean that the next day they can’t wake up the next day and start fresh and be born again and say, ‘Look, going forward I will only take pure things into my body.”

Then of course that raises the factual issue of, well, what are the taking tomorrow? Did they have a pizza tomorrow? Did they have a beer in two weeks? Did they smoke a cigarette? So that idea of starting afresh, anew, everyday may not hold water either.


AUTHOR COMMENTARY

A few points to make here:

Firstly, let’s cut through all this double-tongued tomfoolery (James 1:8). The bottom line is this: he’s saying that our first amendment rights are nothing more than toilet paper; they only apply when the government wants them to apply. After all, in this day and age where evil is called good and good is called evil (Isaiah 5:18-22), truth is only relative to the situation in their minds, just like Pilate once looked Jesus in the eye and said “What is truth?” (John 18:37-38).

Secondly, once again the word of God is being blasphemed because of the hypocrisy and false professions of faith by so many of these Laodicean losers.

Media Says Taking The Covid Vaccine Is ‘The Christian Thing To Do’

New Survey Reveals That Most “Christians” Believe Jesus Was A Sinner And Is Not The Only Way To Heaven

Survey Finds Over Half Of Christians Are Fine With Playing Violent Video Games

[6] Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. [7] Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil.

1 Timothy 3:6-7

The context of that is referring to pastors, but still is great instruction in righteousness for all believers. To those in the faith, here’s an important piece of evidence that I beseech you with: the lost world pays attention to your every move. The lost world knows the truth (as the law of God is written in their hearts), and they are looking for hypocrites like them to justify their lifestyle (misery loves company – the “multitude of counsellers there is safety” (Proverbs 15:22, 24:6). The lost world looks to see if the Christian – who professes to read and believe the word of truth, and have the Spirit of truth in them – will stand by their convictions and beliefs. So if you claim to be a good Christian, and yet the lost world sees you eat junk food and ruin your health (in this case), they remember that. The Corinthian church had that problem, and the lost world was reporting on what abominations they were doing (1 Corinthians 5).

I have said in other reports that we have all these lethargic and obese pastors and “Christians” walking up and down this country. Moreover, so many of them get drunk, do drugs (street and pharmaceutical), they lie, they swear, they do all the same things as the lost world does. What’s the difference at that point. Therefore, the lost world can use that as ammo.

Nevertheless, this is typical lying-duplicity and sophistry from this media lawyer – who thinks that because people are so mentally weak these days – he didn’t think anyone would notice his own hypocrisy. Setting a precedent that eating junk food and getting vaccines are viewed as “impure,” that he too is implying that the “vaccines” are bad – which they absolutely are – ‘so what’s one more impure thing?’

Covid Vaccine Recipients Have Become Patented Government Property

DEATH SHOT: Videos Reveal Pfizer Vaccine Contains Self-Assembling Graphene Oxide Nanoparticles

[52] Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves, and them that were entering in ye hindered. [53] And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke him to speak of many things: [54] Laying wait for him, and seeking to catch something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him.

Luke 11:52-54

That passage says it all…

But the third point I want to make is that, for a true believer, going to court is not going to solve anything in this case.

[1] Dare any of you, having a matter against another, go to law before the unjust, and not before the saints? [2] Do ye not know that the saints shall judge the world? and if the world shall be judged by you, are ye unworthy to judge the smallest matters? [3] Know ye not that we shall judge angels? how much more things that pertain to this life? [4] If then ye have judgments of things pertaining to this life, set them to judge who are least esteemed in the church. [5] I speak to your shame. Is it so, that there is not a wise man among you? no, not one that shall be able to judge between his brethren? [6] But brother goeth to law with brother, and that before the unbelievers. [7] Now therefore there is utterly a fault among you, because ye go to law one with another. Why do ye not rather take wrong? why do ye not rather suffer yourselves to be defrauded? [8] Nay, ye do wrong, and defraud, and that your brethren.

1 Corinthians 6:1-8

I realize that passage is about brethren taking each other to a secular court of law, but it still applies to the current debacle. Based on the duplicity of this lawyer, the courts will never reach a valid and righteous decision, so don’t look to them for help. If you are called on the carpet at your workplace for not taking the death jab, and you are on the chopping block, then be a witness for Jesus Christ and make your boss fire you.

However, have some sort of preparation in place if you do get fired. Whatever that is you will have to figure that out.

But with these statements by this lawyer, all the media has to do is starting floating out more hirelings to promote the death shots. That will allow for “religious liberty” to get squashed even further.

But I do not care what the laws state, or what have you: I will NOT take the shot for any reason.

[28] Saying, Did not we straitly command you that ye should not teach in this name? and, behold, ye have filled Jerusalem with your doctrine, and intend to bring this man’s blood upon us. [29] Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

Acts 5:28-29

Leave your thoughts in the comment section.


[7] Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges? who planteth a vineyard, and eateth not of the fruit thereof? or who feedeth a flock, and eateth not of the milk of the flock? [8] Say I these things as a man? or saith not the law the same also? [9] For it is written in the law of Moses, Thou shalt not muzzle the mouth of the ox that treadeth out the corn. Doth God take care for oxen? [10] Or saith he it altogether for our sakes? For our sakes, no doubt, this is written: that he that ploweth should plow in hope; and that he that thresheth in hope should be partaker of his hope. (1 Corinthians 9:7-10).

The WinePress needs your support! If God has laid it on your heart to want to contribute, please prayerfully consider donating to this ministry. If you cannot gift a monetary donation, then please donate your fervent prayers to keep this ministry going! Thank you and may God bless you.

CLICK TO DONATE

5 Comments

  • My husband is up to his ears in this right now. We have written up a religious exemption from the “vax” testing and masks but we live in a miserably liberal state and he works for a liberal university. We shall see. He’ll never quit, they will have to fire him, but then we can sue for religious discrimination. At least there are a few allies who are also standing with him against this tyranny. And if God wants him somewhere else, we’ll go somewhere else, simple as that. But we’ll never bow down to these thugs

  • Granted this lawyer is a wicked Christ-rejecting shyster, by that same note it’s all used as a tool of justice by Jesus to further bring down the church building and organized religion system down and with that, I give thanks!

Leave a Comment

×