Soloist

kind of missing the point. I was thinking of modern practice and should have clarified that.

I take issue with your first point. Many times a religious group has formed a position on something that prior would not have even been a consideration. For example, prior to the TV the Conservative Mennonites had no stance on the TV. The Amish prior to electricity had no stance on electricity. Again prior to abortion being a practice, the Christians had no specific statement on abortion. The basis of objection to the vaccines on the use of fetal cells does not agree with you or the majority of people, but religious groups have always suffered for their beliefs. Some of them I would question and find too far but I would find it lamentable if we have no tolerance for religious beliefs. That being said, I'm not here to debate you but Title 7 of the Federal code makes no stipulations of the conviction. It does however, have a stipulation of reasonable accommodations which one could argue should be in effect for medical preventing exemptions from vaccines.

While I agree all three of those have been tested, only one of them was tested during development and approval. Ivermectin and Hydroxychloroquine are both very old medications that pre-date use of fetal cell testing. Under my pickup analogy only 1 of those medications would be unusable for myself. Not that I endorse either for treatment of Covid. I don't know and I'm not adequately trained to dispute research on their effectiveness or not.

Well... none of my religious kin wear make up. I'll admit prior to covid I was not aware of the use of HEK-293 in medicine testing... I was aware of things like Epogen and Procrit but completely ignorant on other medications. I'm still hunting for a non-medical job option despite getting a religious objection because I personally feel its not prudent or safe nursing to refuse a vaccine and remain in nursing. Where I draw the line is on if it was tested for approval versus post testing. I would compare it to an analogy with buying a 2000 Ford pickup. The company used crash dummies to test the car, you bought the car, later the company decided to test your ford model by crashing it with people in it. It doesn't make your car wrong, but I wouldn't buy from them anymore. The model isn't perfect and has some holes and I understand most people would find my position untenable.

If an employer is not capable of determining which belief is valid, then you might as well just give a philosophical objection to the vaccine. After all, it seems like the religious objectors outside of a small handful like myself are religiously Republican for their resistance. As for the cell testing, thats a misleading claim of relatability. The majority of those medications predated the fetal cell lines. MMR is perfectly related though and anyone claiming to object to covid vaccines on grounds of fetal cell lines but approve of MMR... there is a serious consistency problem there.

I have the 290, it was kind of a pain to get ordered though. My impression on it is that it is very breathable and comfortable. My biggest issue is the puddle that forms by my chin in the catch. Periodically it needs to be drained out. Filters last until you can't breath through it and the mask itself can be wiped down easily. That being said, its a little bit on the cheap manufactured side and I'm not sure how long term wise it would last.

a better question at my work... who is vaccinated...

This comes across as though the use of fetal cells is somehow a conspiracy... its the most factual reason out there to object... And what in the world is religious misinformation? Is that my doctrine is "righter" then yours?

This is assuming the nursing boards look favorable on granting licenses to vaccine dodgers and that you can find places that would take you. Our president is going to ultimately require all medical workers in any location taking Medicaid/Medicare. Then what would you do? Unless you have a medical or religious belief waver, you might as well either get vaccinated or find a new line of work. I really doubt those with a religious exemption are going to find it that easy to find new work.

When I was first trained with a Mic-Key, the policy stated to vent, and then prime otherwise it would trap air causing pain. This particular patient had their esophagus surgically closed, so perhaps that contributed to the order the way it was... Either way, the nurses seem terribly lazy and only one or two of the 5 prime first. Suffice to say I doubt one time is an issue but remember your mistake for the patient's sake and always prime. (that being said, I've only worked at one place for 2 years, lots of G-tubes though)

it is interesting to contrast this with natural medication which historically has been shown not to work but nurses are taught to listen and not be judgmental of different religious teachings or health practices. The anti-vaccine position for it causing autism is well known to be fake, and nurses have had to deal with that for years but this sort of hate is always stated to be ineffective by all the professional nursing boards and state regulatory boards. Why change known professional behavior when social science has shown it only causes more harm? In this thread I've been said to be anti-science because I believe some connection to fetal cells is unethical. That has no connection with science other then the articles I posted. It's a religious opinion, not an anti-science view since it is factual and founded on scientific research. How would this be any different then a Muslim objecting to a vaccine being grown on pig? Or would you treat the Muslim the same way you speak of me? What about a vegetarian that didn't want a vaccine using animal products? None of those positions are anti-science other then simply being unpopular. Could you say its hateful and unloving? sure you could say that. It's not however anti-science. Do you call the Amish anti-science because they don't use powerlines to their houses? or do you call them anti-science because they use alternative medication? Has anyone actually seen the requirements to qualify for a religious objection or are you just speaking hate to say there isn't any that should qualify? https://www.prinz-lawfirm.com/our-blog/2020/december/the-covid-19-vaccine-is-here-a-look-at-religious/ From other websites, I've seen strong suggestion from a legal point of view that hospitals do not have to accommodate if this results in undue risk. The majority of people out there are fussing about this vaccine purely from unfounded health fears or conspiracies. None of them would qualify for an exemption if this legal firm is correct.

Sounds to me like your religious belief isn't about a vaccine but more about personal freedom of choice. From someone who has a fairly strong religious belief and would not get the vaccine, I would urge you to work somewhere else other then a field with people who are particularly vulnerable to disease. I'm leaving nursing as soon as I have a reasonable option, maybe thats not an option for you... Perhaps you could look into non-bedside nursing something like telehealth?

I actually agree, I don't think any pharmaceutical company is promoting abortion. There might be some impact in the way the abortions are performed to acquire specific tissue. I want nothing to do with this practice of benefiting from abortion, but I speak with my personal actions not at the voting box or with what I administer patients. aka, I won't use the medications tested or derived from abortion. I would believe my opinion is very rare. (I don't vote at all, this is a religious belief)

While you have the right to your position, I would point out you would never convince anyone that they are wrong with this approach. New cell lines have been made in a fairly consistent pattern with it being said its never going to happen again. First in the 60s then in the 80s then again in 2010. Thats just the vaccine cell lines. We have well over 100 cell lines in regular research from fetal cells in the USA alone. My primary objection is that this research supports further use of new cells from abortion. That is challenged repeatedly but history shows this is a booming expanding industry and its not just cells being used. Fetal tissue/cells are being grafted/injected into mice to create humanized mice for research and production of monoclonal antibodies (link provided as proof) https://www.nuventra.com/resources/blog/monoclonal-antibodies-past-present-and-future/ https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22723099/ https://www.jax.org/news-and-insights/2014/September/humanized-mice-for-tumor-antibody-production https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/20973278/ https://www.nature.com/articles/s41598-020-71548-z https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3755109/ Take it for what you will, but the secular world knows its inconsistent to use the fetal cell produced research and deny funding or support https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/08/health/trump-covid-fetal-tissue.html I object to this and feel that unless one takes a stand, it will eventually be what medicine is across the board. More and more advanced medication is being based on this technology or produced from this. Should I just accept that abortion derived medication is the future? I can't and that is why I'm looking for other fields to work in. The future of medicine does not involve me. Unless you've had this stance pre-covid, I doubt you'd convince anyone of conviction...

unfounded fears? which ones that I have actually expressed call into question the safety or effectivity of the vaccine? I've never made a claim that the vaccine isn't safe or isn't effective... based on data from Israel, maybe it needs a booster but that doesn't really change anything... The only thing I'm claiming is that all the covid vaccines have been tested on a fetal cell line which is quite accurate and reported by multiple sources. I do vaccinate my children and I am vaccinated (my convictions came after my military enlistment) I object to vaccines (and medication for personal use) produced or tested with fetal cells. Nothing else... The comment about the Pope was based on what Hppy said, I really don't care what the Catholics do. You distort my position. I believe the covid vaccines are safe and effective. I believe they are unethical for myself to take given my stance of the use of fetal cell lines. This is well documented and I would be happy to point you to several research articles detailing the testing with HEK-293. I am not anti-vaccine nor do I believe in unprovable covid conspiracies. Thanks for wishing me well on my job hunt.

I am not a member of either of those two churches. I also point out the Islam comment depends heavily on which group of Muslims you are in. Show me where it says only these two Christian groups that secular researchers conclude are permitted to object to vaccines. Every time this comes up, some random article gets brought up showing how no religious group objects, this is silly... the Amish are well known to not vaccinate as frequently as others and some would entirely object altogether to vaccines. The Amish are Congregationalists which means every group is a little different. Mennonites would be similar with the various subgroup differences between the multiple conferences. I've also made it clear I don't object to vaccines, I object to the process used today that isn't necessary to prove effectivity and safety. There are other methods used. If the Pope sees that personal conscience matters, why can't you? Ultimately, I'm looking at other fields to work, so if someone like you chose to deny my beliefs and refuse to let me continue working with masking and testing, then I would quit and quietly go elsewhere. The courts have upheld the right to conviction without a church including the flu vaccine for healthcare workers. To clarify though, I attend a church with conservative Mennonites, and the leadership of the church would support my conviction without question due to the number of conversations I've had on it pre-covid.

I'm not personally convinced that HCQ or Ivermectin is a better choice then the recommended medications. That being said, I am opposed to the new Monoclonal antibodies for how they are produced and tested. I take a stance to not use medications for myself made after 1980. This is mostly due to the difficulty of determining if something was tested on a fetal cell line. It's pretty easy with stuff made in the last few years though. I can't apply my thoughts to others, and I actually recommended to a friend who has a fragile adult IDD child that maybe they look into a booster based on some data out of Israel... They know I object to it personally, but they don't. Newness side... it makes me uneasy, but I have no practical reason to object other then some nervousness that I keep to myself as its not my primary reason anyway. Honestly, if it weren't for the fetal cell testing, I would have tried getting into the trials. As far as it goes though, if anyone could qualify for a religious objection I could... So far every mandate has a religious exemption... I'm hunting for other lines of work though.

I personally for religious reasons have chosen not to get the vaccine. Last year I had covid as well as another nurse (both unvaccinated). I was out sick for a few days and then the remaining isolation time. She was out for 4+ months basically. Our facility roughly has 50% compliance with the vaccine. While hunting for a new job, this is one of the questions I ask upfront making it clear my stance before getting offered a job. As it is, I still get offers, but I'm personally thinking I'll have to change careers due to risk assessment and the general feel of medicine about vaccines and demanding compliance. While I could fight for my right and likely get it, I don't desire to cause conflict for those who sincerely believe mandates are the best route forward. If you don't plan on getting it and will not comply, switch to phone nursing or another career. It seems unlikely that long term it would work out. As soon as these places offering me work are not so tight, they would never offer me a job because of the vaccine and likely would pressure me out or find an excuse to fire me.

And this is a helpful list that shows the majority of the vaccines produced or based on fetal research. There is no claim that fetal cells are in the vaccine itself at least from me or based in a scientific view. https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/vaccineListOrigFormat.pdf Specifically Covid vaccines both current and in production https://cogforlife.org/wp-content/uploads/CovidCompareMoralImmoral.pdf That includes treatments as well.

Oh I agree. I'm not claiming that there is persecutions at foot. As for vaccines not fitting https://www.natlawreview.com/article/hospital-settles-claim-religious-discrimination-based-applicant-s-refusal-flu https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USEEOC/bulletins/24d7ec9 the UEEOC would disagree with you. (U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission) I do appreciate vaccines. I have no objection to vaccines in general, only object to the use of fetal cells. Many vaccines have ethical options available. I do not give glory to God for the use of abortion for development of Monoclonal antibodies or new vaccines based on fetal cell research. I don't wish to argue the merits of the covid vaccines and would gladly receive the first ethical one even with risk despite the fact I already had covid. My whole point was that there are people who for religious sake stand against the use of fetal cells in vaccine production.

We can claim whatever we want. Conviction will stand regardless of if jobs are lost or not. If someone changes their mind based on not having some religious objection route, that is illustrative of no true conviction. That being said, your litmus test isn't how the government looks at it. See Title 7 of the federal code in regard to vaccines. When my faith group begin there was no fancy doctrinal teachings and they were killed for what they believed based on the Bible. Your words would be the same that they would have said back then too.

While I myself am not a Catholic, this group is https://cogforlife.org They have been at this campaign long before Covid came around. Here is the Catholic theological response for someone who refuses vaccines based on fetal cell research https://cogforlife.org/catholic-exemptions/ Myself, I am a Conservative Mennonite (Anabaptist) , and we have a long history of being killed for our faith and while the Protestants can claim persecution from the Catholics in the 14th century, we have the profound ability to claim it from both. There are no official doctrinal positions addressing vaccines and each sub-group of Anabaptists would hold differing views. Most would not hold as strict a view as myself reaching even to the medications used based in fetal research. I am horrified by the new treatments coming out based on stripping mice immune systems and grafting in fetal tissue. There are far more cell lines used then the few you listed... My stance is using the fetal cells will only encourage more use and given that back in the 60s people who held my stance and view were told it was only one time and wouldn't be done again, and then the same story in the 80s and now we see China developing two new lines and the drug companies are looking for new lines... Meanwhile, chimeric research marches steadily on requiring a constant supply of fresh tissue to graft in. As for links for my theological position? well I'm sure you wouldn't find any published by the Conservative Mennonites who are mostly not online at all, we share some common practices of the Amish.

Interestingly enough, the hospital allowed religious objection which was not the focus of the lawsuit at all. So... if you have an actual religious objection, the hospital will still allow it. Those people were not fired.

I personally don't object to removing red tape...

The last research I saw was showing that currently the vaccine and natural immunity was tied with research ongoing at about 6-9 months. The vaccine should from what I've seen be comparable so far... Either way, isn't it true that we shouldn't know if the vaccine provides protection much more then a year yet? The research is ongoing. https://www.nih.gov/news-events/nih-research-matters/lasting-immunity-found-after-recovery-covid-19 This is word play... No fetal "tissue" was used nor were "fetal cells" because multiple articles say the cells used are not the same as they were "cloned" The cell line has a finite limit from the Hayflick limit and they are still the same cells from the baby assuming the baby had lived, these cells would have long died and been replaced with new ones anyway. There are several documented sources talking about the construction of Moderna's spike protein that depended on the fetal cells for development. The Pfizer did not, it did however, use the cells for testing. https://science.sciencemag.org/content/369/6510/1501