Kmgw9v Loc: Miami, Florida

"Most evangelical objections to v*****es have nothing to do with Christianity"

"As the United States ends the year with the highest levels in new infections of the c***d p******c, the historical question naturally arises: Were a hefty portion of Americans entirely out of their senses?

Some of this rapid spread has come from breakthrough infections, caused by the insidiously t***smissible omicron variant. But after a ghastly year of rumor, alarm and needless death, nothing is going to erase the harsh verdict against Americans in 2021: They were granted a miracle drug, and tens of millions refused to take it (or take enough of it).

In the grab bag of reasons for v*****e resistance, the religious exemption claimed by evangelicals is perhaps the most perplexing. The default ethical stance of Christianity is the Golden Rule: “Do to others as you would have them do to you.” This principle was developed in a variety of other religious and moral traditions. (See the Babylonian Talmud: “What is h**eful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah.”) In the New Testament, the Golden Rule is the moral culmination of the Sermon on the Mount. And it is clear from the text that Jesus is not encouraging a calculating ethic of reciprocity. His goal is to inspire a kind of aggressive, preemptive generosity. “If anyone would sue you and take your tunic, let him have your cloak as well. And if anyone forces you to go one mile, go with him two miles.”

The proper application of this principle can be difficult, particularly when it comes to Christian participation in a just war. But the case of v******tion is not really a hard one. Here the tunic is the prick of a needle and a minuscule risk of a bad reaction. The result is a significant benefit for the v******ted and the community they live in.

Many have come to a very different view. White evangelical Christians have resisted getting v******ted against the c****av***s at higher rates than other religious groups in the United States. Some initial resistance came in the context of a familiar ethical debate: Did the creation of c****av***s v*****es involve cell lines produced from aborted fetuses?

The short answer is: no. A slightly longer answer is that the Johnson & Johnson v*****e is grown in fetal cell line PER.C6, which was derived from an elective a******n in 1985. “But contrary to social media claims,” Francis Collins, former director of the National Institutes of Health, told me, “there are no fetal cells or fetal DNA in the Johnson & Johnson v*****e.” The Vatican has indicated that Catholics can take the Johnson & Johnson v*****e.

“The P****r and M*****a m**A are synthesized without the need for a cell line,” Collins said. “The only possible objection against those is that their effectiveness was tested in certain lab experiments that used fetal cell lines. But if that is sufficient reason to decline them, that would also need to apply to a very long list of current medicines, including aspirin and statins.”

The main resistance of evangelicals to public health measures does not concern a******n. Having embraced religious liberty as a defining cause, they are now deploying the language of that cause in opposition to jab and mask mandates. Arguments crafted to defend institutional religious liberty have been adapted to oppose public coercion on c***d. But they do not fit.

More than that, the sanctification of anti-government populism is displacing or dethroning one of the most basic Christian distinctions. Most evangelical posturing on c***d mandates is really syncretism, a merging of unrelated beliefs — in this case, the substitution of libertarianism for Christian ethics. In this distorted form of faith, evangelical Christians are generally known as people who loudly defend their own rights. They show not radical generosity but discreditable selfishness. There is no version of the Golden Rule that would recommend Christian resistance to basic public health measures during a p******c. This is heresy compounded by lunacy.

It is worth recalling, as a matter of law, that someone does not need a good or theologically coherent religious-liberty claim to make a religious-liberty claim in court (absent fraud or opportunism). To deny such a claim, government needs a compelling interest advanced in the least restrictive manner. But it is hard to imagine a clearer, more fundamental example of a compelling state interest than preventing the spread of a v***s that has already taken the lives of more than 800,000 Americans.

And when Christians are asserting a right to resist basic public health measures, what is the actual content of their religious-liberty claim? The right to risk the lives of their neighbors in order to assert their autonomy? The right to endanger the community in the performative demonstration of their personal rights?

This is a vivid display of the cultural and ideological trends of a warped and wasted year. It just has nothing to do with real Christianity."


Michael Gerson, The Washington Post

mjmoore17 Loc: Philadelphia, PA area

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

What a CoC, Crock of Crap, that is. The Left h**es the Christian religion and yet never misses an opportunity to use it when it suits their i***tic agenda.

Dennis

mjmoore17 Loc: Philadelphia, PA area

Po child, just sit in corner and wait for new year.

Frank T Loc: New York, NY

The worst thing that has ever happened to this country was and is allowing churches to dictate policy.
Let them go pray to their invisible man but keep him/her out of the business of governing.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

What policies are you talking about. Give us some examples. My God, I bet your list is long to have you whining and b***hing so much about it. It must really be an irritation for you. So give us some examples. That is the WORST thing that has ever happened to this country??? WOW!!!!!

Even worse is Congress making laws for a small group of people. It is already against the law to murder someone but if you h**e someone and murder them that is a special law or has enhancements. It is already against the law to beat someone up but if you don't like that person's color or sex, religion, anything other than a normal beating up then it is something different. Aren't laws made for ALL people no matter their race, color, religious beliefs and so on? Let's face it, all of these are nothing more than to DIVIDE Americans.

Dennis

howIseeit Loc: Kootenays, BC Canada

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

I see you are somewhat new to UHH. If you do not click on Quote Reply when answering a post then we have no idea who you are answering. It helps a lot to keep the thread straight.

Have a Happy New Year.

Dennis

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Still waiting Frank for you to tell us what church dictated policies you are talking about. Thanks too for proving my point about the Left, that would be you, hating Christianity.

Dennis

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

Since I have been hearing first hand and reading about the side effects short and long term. Taking that jab would definitely be going against my belief.
There are some Christian preachers who will sell out to stay in the good graces of those in power.

I stand on these scriptures below.

1 Corinthians 3:16-17
New King James Version
16 (A)Do you not know that you are the temple of God and that the Spirit of God dwells in you? 17 If anyone [a]defiles the temple of God, God will destroy him. For the temple of God is holy, which temple you are.

Matthew 22:21
New King James Version
21 They said to Him, “Caesar’s.”

And He said to them, (A)“Render[a] therefore to Caesar the things that are (B)Caesar’s, and to God the things that are (C)God’s.”

I belong to my Lord Jesus Christ not this government or this world

redlegfrog

Thats quite a rant! So now we d**g religion into our p***********e war of words? Do you just like to cloud the issue?
How about some hard facts?

Christmas party with seven adults and 3 children. By Monday morning all were sick. We had 3 home tests, all were positive. Of the seven adults, three were unvaxed, four were vaxed and two of those were heavily vaxed because because of work or school requirements. C***d did not treat anyone of us differently!
I know the pro-vaxers won't accept or believe a word of this and thats fine. For you anti-vaxers, not to worry, the age spread on our group was 19 years to 72 years and we all got through it ok.

soba1 Loc: Somewhere In So Ca

srg

The "Christian Religion" I.e. that which Jesus preached, has very little resemblance to what you refer to as the christian religion.

thom w Loc: San Jose, CA

I long suspected that you were not of this world.

dennis2146 Loc: Eastern Idaho

Maybe, maybe not. But without further discussion where you point out the specific changes I reserve the right not to comment. I do believe the positives of the teachings such as the 10 Commandments for example remain the same.

Is it the teachings that changed OR has it been the people of modern times that adopted and accept different meanings?

Have a wonderful day.

Dennis