WelcomeUser Guide
ToSPrivacyCanary
DonateBugsLicense

©2025 Poal.co

172

[FOR CLARIFICATION] If you are religious or part of a religious organization, you would continue to be part of that organization. Think of the following as a personal addendum to your faith. In the same way two individuals at the same church may disagree in the interpretation of a passage in the bible and how they choose to follow that passage, a person can still be part of a religion and have other deep founded faith/beliefs that may or may not necessarily align completely with their current faith. I am not talking about changing your current faith or religion, simply adding a personal faith/belief to your current faith and beliefs. For example, there are at least 20 different denominations of Baptists in the United States. Some religions might include the word "reformed" before they list their particular sect. If you are religious, I would suggest adding a new word, "informed". For example, "I am part of the Informed Seventh Day Baptists".

This new faith/belief is simple, you are not allowed to wear a face mask or take any vaccines that you don't want to and you don't have to give a reason.

Federal Law: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/26/2017-23269/federal-law-protections-for-religious-liberty

>Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) - If 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.

>Importantly, the protection of the Free Exercise Clause also extends to acts undertaken in accordance with such sincerely-held beliefs. That conclusion flows from the plain text of the First Amendment, which guarantees the freedom to “exercise” religion, not just the freedom to “believe” in religion. See Smith, 494 U.S. at 877; see also Thomas, 450 U.S. at 716; Paty, 435 U.S. at 627; Sherbert, 374 U.S. at 403-04; Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 219-20 (1972). Moreover, no other interpretation would actually guarantee the freedom of belief that Americans have so long regarded as central to individual liberty. Many, if not most, religious beliefs require external observance and practice through physical acts or abstention from acts.

>The Free Exercise Clause protects beliefs rooted in religion, even if such beliefs are not mandated by a particular religious organization or shared among adherents of a particular religious tradition. Frazee v. Illinois Dept. of Emp't Sec., 489 U.S. 829, 833-34 (1989). As the Supreme Court has repeatedly counseled, “religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.” Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 531 (1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). They must merely be “sincerely held.” Frazee, 489 U.S. at 834.

>“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” U.S. Const. amend. I, cl. 1. Those protections have been incorporated against the States. Everson v. Bd. of Educ. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 15 (1947) (Establishment Clause); Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303 (1940) (Free Exercise Clause).

I understand that our current government has been attacking religion mercilessly under their medical tyranny hoax, but it's time to start filling up the courts with lawsuits. I want to sue every local business that tells me I have to wear a face mask. I want to sue my employer. I want to sue everyone. Let them publicly attack the freedom to practice religion in the courts daily. Shine a light on their attack on religion. Unite every religious person in the country together. Unite atheists with the religious. You don't have to believe in a deity in order to have faith. What we need more than ever is a united front against this tyranny on every level. Every courtroom every day should be filled with people fighting for their religious freedom not to wear a mask and their religious freedom to not to be forced to take injections.

“religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”

**[FOR CLARIFICATION]** If you are religious or part of a religious organization, you would continue to be part of that organization. Think of the following as a personal addendum to your faith. In the same way two individuals at the same church may disagree in the interpretation of a passage in the bible and how they choose to follow that passage, a person can still be part of a religion and have other deep founded faith/beliefs that may or may not necessarily align completely with their current faith. I am not talking about changing your current faith or religion, simply adding a personal faith/belief to your current faith and beliefs. For example, there are at least 20 different denominations of Baptists in the United States. Some religions might include the word "reformed" before they list their particular sect. If you are religious, I would suggest adding a new word, "informed". For example, "I am part of the Informed Seventh Day Baptists". This new faith/belief is simple, you are not allowed to wear a face mask or take any vaccines that you don't want to and you don't have to give a reason. Federal Law: https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2017/10/26/2017-23269/federal-law-protections-for-religious-liberty >>Minersville School District v. Gobitis (1940) - If 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. >>Importantly, the protection of the Free Exercise Clause also extends to acts undertaken in accordance with such sincerely-held beliefs. That conclusion flows from the plain text of the First Amendment, which guarantees the **freedom to “exercise” religion, not just the freedom to “believe” in religion**. See Smith, 494 U.S. at 877; see also Thomas, 450 U.S. at 716; Paty, 435 U.S. at 627; Sherbert, 374 U.S. at 403-04; Wisconsin v. Yoder, 406 U.S. 205, 219-20 (1972). Moreover, no other interpretation would actually guarantee the freedom of belief that Americans have so long regarded as central to individual liberty. Many, if not most, religious beliefs require external observance and practice through physical acts or **abstention from acts**. >>The Free Exercise Clause protects beliefs rooted in religion, **even if such beliefs are not mandated by a particular religious organization or shared among adherents of a particular religious tradition**. Frazee v. Illinois Dept. of Emp't Sec., 489 U.S. 829, 833-34 (1989). As the Supreme Court has repeatedly counseled, **“religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”** Church of the Lukumi Babalu Aye v. Hialeah, 508 U.S. 520, 531 (1993) (internal quotation marks omitted). They must merely be “sincerely held.” Frazee, 489 U.S. at 834. >>“Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, **or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.**” U.S. Const. amend. I, cl. 1. Those protections have been incorporated against the States. Everson v. Bd. of Educ. of Ewing, 330 U.S. 1, 15 (1947) (Establishment Clause); Cantwell v. Connecticut, 310 U.S. 296, 303 (1940) (Free Exercise Clause). I understand that our current government has been attacking religion mercilessly under their medical tyranny hoax, but it's time to start filling up the courts with lawsuits. I want to sue every local business that tells me I have to wear a face mask. I want to sue my employer. I want to sue everyone. Let them publicly attack the freedom to practice religion in the courts daily. Shine a light on their attack on religion. Unite every religious person in the country together. Unite atheists with the religious. You don't have to believe in a deity in order to have faith. What we need more than ever is a united front against this tyranny on every level. Every courtroom every day should be filled with people fighting for their religious freedom not to wear a mask and their religious freedom to not to be forced to take injections. **“religious beliefs need not be acceptable, logical, consistent, or comprehensible to others in order to merit First Amendment protection.”**

(post is archived)

[–] 4 pts

It doesn't even require a "new faith", nor even a new christian denomination, your own personal spin/interpretation of the christian narrative/scriptures is enough to support your position

[–] 0 pt

I mean if you say it's due to aborted babies and win your employer can come at you with a different requirement. You don't want to win an irrelevant case.

[–] 2 pts

Well you can go for the "My body is the temple of the holy spirit" and argue that vaccines will spoil it, but if you're a smoker that's going look weird

Also this https://slate.com/technology/2015/02/religious-exemption-for-vaccines-christian-scientists-catholics-and-dutch-reform-church.html

His conclusion: The only two religions that have any possible negative stance (though it’s not even clear that they do) on vaccination are Christian Scientists and the Dutch Reformed Church.

The Christian Scientists’ stance can be a bit tricky to ascertain, as they’re known to be excessively secretive about their thoughts on modern medicine. While they believe diseases can be cured through prayer, they don’t seem to have an official stance when it comes to preventive actions like vaccines. That being said, (((Grabenstein))) quotes Mary Baker Eddy, the founder of the Church of Christ, Scientist, as saying, “Rather than quarrel over vaccination, I recommend, if the law demand, that an individual submit to this process, that he obey the law, and then appeal to the gospel to save him from bad physical results.”

The Dutch Reformed Church’s objections seemed to start out as fear of adverse effects, but, for some, have morphed into a belief that vaccines interfere with the relationship with God, as they make people less dependent on God.

...

That's it. Vaccines interfere with your relationship with god, he only decides who gets sick and who doesn't, who lives and who dies