"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."
-1st Amendment to the US Constitution.
“1f there is any fixed star in our constitutional constellation, it is that no official, high or petty, can prescribe what shall be orthodox in politics, nationalism, religion, or other matters of opinion or force citizens to confess by word or act their faith therein.”
-West Virginia State Board of Education Barnette (1943)
Last year I pointed to these two items (and the 14th Amendment) when I refused to attend a 'diversity" training session that was "mandated" by the state agency I work for. While most, if not all the "colored" folks loved that these sessions were being mandated because they saw it as a chance so "get at white folks". I saw it for the unconstitutional intrusion that it was and knew that acquiescing to that only means that the state would continue to trample on the rights of citizens and in the end, those who were cheering before will be tearing and complaining.
I also commented on the 'Bake that cake" situation of a few years ago that it was a very bad thing that SCOTUS refused to make a hardcore 1st amendment argument against the state and it's "equalities" commission. Instead ducking the issue with comments about how they were being biased against religious people. They should have flat out said that the state has no power to compel any religious person to perform anything for anybody that conflicts with their beliefs (and that includes non-religious beliefs as pointed out in Barnette). Further, I commented that when the state compels a citizen to perform work against their will, then it is ALSO a violation of the 13th amendment which specifically prohibits involuntary servitude.
Section 1. Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction.
Which brings us to the topic of this post. Over in Virginia the authorities have demanded employees of the Univerity of Virginia Health System get flu shots. Now I have already stated multiple times that there is no such thing as a flu vaccine because a vaccine by definition prevents the disease in question. For example, you get the Polio vaccine. One and done. Similar for MMR. One (or two) and done for life. The flu shot does not work like that. It has as little as 30% effectiveness and the claim is that for strains it misses it reduces symptoms. Well taking Zinc reduces symptoms too (by blocking viral replication). Why not tell your employees to take that? Well because SOMEBODY is getting paid to make that flu shot and somebody is getting paid to give it. Even if YOU don't directly pay for it. But this isn't about the shot, directly. Instead it is the new tack: Official state religion.
UVA Health said, however, it's own interpretation of the Bible must prevail.
"Stating that you are a Christian and citing biblical verses that do not address vaccinations is not sufficient basis for granting an exemption from the vaccine requirement," the worker was told. "Christian philosophy does not have absolute rules that must be followed regarding vaccinations. Therefore, your request is one of a personal belief rather than religious doctrine."
Really? Not according to the supreme law of the land AND Barnette. Even IF it is a personal belief, that employee is covered under 1A and Barnette. But what is most concerning is that the state claims it can dictate what IS and IS NOT a valid religious OR personal belief.
I'm not entirely surprised by this event. In their last election, the state apparatus went blue and went straight after the rights of gun owners in that state. If you thought that such ideas were limited to the state capitol then you haven't been paying attention.
