Except this isn't a legal matter. It's an administrative decision the Navy is making based on the assessed risk.
-
Please take a moment and update your account profile. If you have an updated account profile with basic information on why you are on Air Warriors it will help other people respond to your posts. How do you update your profile you ask?
Go here:
Edit Account Details and Profile
Navy Reserve COVID Vaccinations by October
- Thread starter snake020
- Start date
It's also the subject of many lawsuits. That makes it a legal matter.
In the Navy? How many?
You're conflating the internal process with the lawsuit, which are two independent actions. As the Navy adjudicates the waivers, it is an administrative process, which doesn't necessarily consider when any individual decided they had a religious objection to the vaccine, nor is it necessarily bound by any of the legal standards Wink mentioned. Those matters will be decided by a judge.
Oh jeez, that has nothing to do with this vaccine refusal crap. Believe it or not, unless treatment is involved, not taking this vaccine will have more operational impact than being transgender, as Spekkio pointed out that is a big factor in why we are requiring it. Remember the push by Mattis a few years ago to discharge folks who couldn't deploy? Goes right in line with that. Good luck trying to deploy to another country without a COVID vaccine nowadays, unless you are a tennis star with bucketloads of money to hire the best lawyers and sue your way in.
And last I checked, ignorance is not a defense.
ABMD
Bullets don't fly without Supply
If the balloon goes up, are we really going to say we can't respond/defend because of COVID?
@Flash @Brett327 I am afraid I wasn't clear or maybe you just happened to read what you want. I'll try again. I absolutely agree that the Navy can pursue the waiver process as they are. My post regarding the law contained a disclaimer. I meant to point out that as far as Navy policy it is administrative. I believe I simply said the Navy's accommodation is unique. That would be because like many other things, some laws, processes and constitutional guarantees in the civ world do not convey to the military.
My analogy to a transgender person had nothing to do with deployability. I understand readiness is what the Navy is concerned about, which is why I largely support their policy. My analogy was a response to those, and the Navy in particular, that would not have any doubt in accepting a newly declared transgender, but makes sweeping declarations that anyone seeking a religious waiver for the vax is a fraud, and even irreligious.
Oliver Wendell Holmes actually said "Ignorance of the LAW is no excuse." or as a legal principle gnorantia juris non excusat. Notwithstanding the posted phrase was incorrect, the actual quote is not on point as we are not talking about ignorance of the law, but ignorance the technical method for the derivation of a previous vaccine taken by someone. And even then, how does one square the fact that one day they can hold a certain conviction one day and later another just a certainly as before? And that is law. Just like the recruits in Boot Camp getting religion, Prison convicts get "converted" at an astonishing rate. No one presumes to sort it out and devine who is really a good Christian, Muslim, etc. Of course, the Navy can separate people for not being vaccinated or disobeying an order. But they can not do so because they don't believe someone religious convictions for any reason, least of all previous vaccination records. And I think it is wrong for any individual to assume they can look into another's heart and know anything about their religious convictions. Defend the policy. Don't attack the people seeking exemption. They will lose anyway.
My analogy to a transgender person had nothing to do with deployability. I understand readiness is what the Navy is concerned about, which is why I largely support their policy. My analogy was a response to those, and the Navy in particular, that would not have any doubt in accepting a newly declared transgender, but makes sweeping declarations that anyone seeking a religious waiver for the vax is a fraud, and even irreligious.
Oliver Wendell Holmes actually said "Ignorance of the LAW is no excuse." or as a legal principle gnorantia juris non excusat. Notwithstanding the posted phrase was incorrect, the actual quote is not on point as we are not talking about ignorance of the law, but ignorance the technical method for the derivation of a previous vaccine taken by someone. And even then, how does one square the fact that one day they can hold a certain conviction one day and later another just a certainly as before? And that is law. Just like the recruits in Boot Camp getting religion, Prison convicts get "converted" at an astonishing rate. No one presumes to sort it out and devine who is really a good Christian, Muslim, etc. Of course, the Navy can separate people for not being vaccinated or disobeying an order. But they can not do so because they don't believe someone religious convictions for any reason, least of all previous vaccination records. And I think it is wrong for any individual to assume they can look into another's heart and know anything about their religious convictions. Defend the policy. Don't attack the people seeking exemption. They will lose anyway.
Spekkio
He bowls overhand.
No, and a component of that is because the military is not allowing religious vaccine waivers in order to meet that operational commitment.
If there was ever a reason for a religious exemption, I would think the Small Pox and Anthrax shots would top the list. Those were horrible.
Thanks. I was thinking more Tricare Select vs Tricare Reserve. Although I was on base last week and the line was crazy long. I don't know if my Hover-Round scooter would have had the battery power to wait the many hours to get nasal-ated.
Has the Navy said that?
There was a reason I didn't put it in quotes.
Religion is a pretty tricky subject to debate which is why I usually shy away from it, but my first-hand experience has given me a healthy amount of skepticism and even cynicism to those who loudly proclaim that they are required to do certain things because of their religion. In my own experience the most sincere religious believers are relatively modest about their beliefs and make careful considerations in to how their beliefs may affect their professional and personal lives. That goes for any religion, to include the numerous Muslims I worked with in my last command.
To change or discover one's religious beliefs is not something I am unfamiliar but to have what has become a controversial vaccine and the mandate to take it be the trigger for a newfound belief is going to engender doubt on my part, especially given my personal experience where those who have proclaimed similar beliefs in the past have much more often than not proven themselves to be hypocrites when it comes to not only the issue but usually religion in general.
So it may be wrong, unduly judgmental and dare I say so, even un-Christian, but I will continue to cast a very wary eye to the recent wave of waivers.
The bottom line on bottom, to paraphrase my Army colleagues.
The only two vaccines I have had an adverse reaction to were the smallpox and first does of the COVID one. That I had the smallpox one in the middle of Narmy 'combat training' made it even more fun. Other than a swollen upper arm I'm fortunate not to have had a reaction to the 10 or so anthrax doses I've gotten.
wink said:
My analogy to a transgender person had nothing to do with deployability. I understand readiness is what the Navy is concerned about, which is why I largely support their policy. My analogy was a response to those, and the Navy in particular, that would not have any doubt in accepting a newly declared transgender, but makes sweeping declarations that anyone seeking a religious waiver for the vax is a fraud, and even irreligious.
The Secretary of Defense shall:
(i) immediately prohibit involuntary separations, discharges, and denials of reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity or under circumstances relating to their gender identity;
(ii) identify and examine the records of service members who have been involuntarily separated, discharged, or denied reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity or under circumstances relating to their gender identity;
On the broad brush applied to religious waivers, I guess there have been no overt declarations I know of, but zero waivers speaks for itself. As the Navy can separate individuals for a couple good reasons for refusing the vax, it would have simply been better to not offer a religious exemption rather than carry on a charade. To deny a religious accommodation suggests the Navy does believe you are sincere in your convictions. Aside from the fact the Navy can not know that for certain, it can not be so for 100% of the applications.
I admit not knowing the actual process of religious waiver excepting that the chaplaincy is involved. I'd be interested in the specifics and even what the denial letter looks like. I would expect the chaplaincy can't help but start from a sympathetic view point and go from there.
My analogy to a transgender person had nothing to do with deployability. I understand readiness is what the Navy is concerned about, which is why I largely support their policy. My analogy was a response to those, and the Navy in particular, that would not have any doubt in accepting a newly declared transgender, but makes sweeping declarations that anyone seeking a religious waiver for the vax is a fraud, and even irreligious.
On wholesale acceptance of transgender service members, the Commander in Chief ordered in January 2021
The Secretary of Defense shall:
(i) immediately prohibit involuntary separations, discharges, and denials of reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity or under circumstances relating to their gender identity;
(ii) identify and examine the records of service members who have been involuntarily separated, discharged, or denied reenlistment or continuation of service on the basis of gender identity or under circumstances relating to their gender identity;
On the broad brush applied to religious waivers, I guess there have been no overt declarations I know of, but zero waivers speaks for itself. As the Navy can separate individuals for a couple good reasons for refusing the vax, it would have simply been better to not offer a religious exemption rather than carry on a charade. To deny a religious accommodation suggests the Navy does believe you are sincere in your convictions. Aside from the fact the Navy can not know that for certain, it can not be so for 100% of the applications.
I admit not knowing the actual process of religious waiver excepting that the chaplaincy is involved. I'd be interested in the specifics and even what the denial letter looks like. I would expect the chaplaincy can't help but start from a sympathetic view point and go from there.
I agree with you that a number of the religious exemptions sought were likely due to the politicization of the vaccine (and the pandemic in general), but the fact is that none of us knows which or how many religious exemptions fall into that category. I'd offer an alternative perspective: that the wide publicity and visibility of the development of the vaccine brought to light to a large number of people the moral implications involved, namely the used of fetal cell lines, in a way that hasn't been done in medicine in a long time. Bolstering this argument is the statement the Catholic Church made speaking to the morality of the COVID-19 vaccines here, reaffirming their position that while it is morally acceptable to receive these vaccines when no better alternative exists, it must still be voluntary, subject to the individual's own conscience, and that we should continue to encourage the development of a vaccine that do not create problems of conscience. This is why it's possible for some Catholics to have no issue receiving the vaccine but others to claim that their personal religious beliefs do not permit it.