Americans Fight to Get Off ‘Medical Death Row’ Over Vaccination Status

[JustOneWay]

I have friends on both sides of this question, and many did not want the vax but felt forced on account of work, travel, school, etc. Avoiding the vax could mean an end to one's career--it was an incredible sacrifice to make, and a very difficult decision. I am pro-conscience on the matter. If you want the vaccine, it should be your right to obtain it. If you do not want it, no one should force it upon you. Only one side of this question has been coercive. As God is not a God of force, but one who gives us freedom of choice, it should seem clear to any Christian which side should be taken. I have no judgment for those on either side of the vaxxed or non-vaxxed question. My concern is for those coercing others against their will.

This is not a reply to my question. It was a simple yes or no question.

 

[returntosender]

You shouldn't be a part of the problem. Our rights are being taken away by the government now. We all should have a choice. Even yes or no to vaccines. Losing our freedom is telling in the U.S. now. You're are not helping.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Is there anything to suggest that a lot of hospitals are still enforcing these types of rules as blanket policies?

If so, then while I would agree that it probably is time to revisit those policies so that it's a case by case basis instead of a blanket rule, that still doesn't mean that "personal freedom trumps all other aspects" with regards to the organ transplant selection process...it never has.

I think there needs to be some pragmatism and honesty injected into the conversation.

The religious freedom angle for the vaccine rejection was never an honest one. The claim was that people were rejecting it due to the fetal cell lines used in the R&D process (which are cultured cell lines from the 70's, they're not harvesting any new cell lines from aborted fetal tissue), if that were truly the reason for objection, then those folks wouldn't want to use Tylenol, Tums, Mylanta, Motrin, Claritin (and about 50 other common drugs that used a similar R&D process)

Not to mention, the 3 drugs that anti-vaccine people clung to during that whole thing (Ivermectin, Z-pak, and Monoclonal antibodies) also used the same process involving cultured fetal cell lines for their initial development... if people opposed the vaccines, citing that reason, then they should be rejecting those other 3 things if they're morally consistent, correct?


But, like I noted, it should be a case by case basis at this point. I think one can make a well-reasoned argument that a 28 old (who's otherwise healthy, needing a procedure or transplant) shouldn't be getting turned away based on whether or not they've taken a covid vaccine.

However, like I also noted, "personal freedom reasons" have never trumped everything else with regards to these types of screening decisions. For instance, if you have two people who both need a new liver, and one is a heavy alcoholic who has no intention of stopping drinking or heavy drug use, they're going to get passed over for another recipient...that's how it's always been.

So, if you have a person who was a heavy smoker, needs a lung, but has already insisted that they don't intend on ever getting vaccinated against a respiratory illness nor making other lifestyle changes, that would have to weigh into the decision making process.