Wufhart said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Such a simpleton you are if you think the Pope speaks for what Catholicism means to the individual. I presume you also think all Catholics should support pedophilia amongst their priests since the Catholic Church, popes, and bishops harbored priests that molested children. Can you pull some quotes there too?

It's sad that you're cheerleading person losing their job because their religious exemption was denied. Such a good Democrat you are. Such a "common good" person. You've even given him a nickname.

---

A lot of conflation here but since you seem so passionate about the right to object on religious grounds what is the Catholic religious objection to the vaccine? I have more than a few close friends that are Catholic and all are vaccinated and have honestly never heard any of them, or for that matter, the basis for a religious objection. Birth control objections yes, vaccines no. Edit: I do see their reasoning ,or reason, on the J&J version but not the others.

---

That would be a question for him. Not me. I'm (formerly) Catholic and vaccinated.

You don't think there is a right to object on religious grounds?

---

No I didn't say that someone should not be able to object on religious grounds, only that I have not heard or seen the reason for objection other than for the J&J shot and there's kind of a split among the Catholic clergy in that. That leaves two other options. But the WS coach is Catholic and is objecting for religious reasons. That said, if there are to be grounds for a religious objection in my opinion it should be based on core tenant of that religion. Not a one off or something created for the sole purpose of a grounds for objection.

---

There are different kinds of Catholicism. Actually there are 7 different kinds.

---

The "two options" wasn't a reference to different types of Catholicism but options for shots besides J&J. That said after further research on the vaccine testing if they are basing their objection on pro-life then I guess they would object to all of the options. But a somewhat ironic objection.

---

How is it ironic?

Choosing not to take a vaccine that has been proven to reduce transmission of a virus that's killed 700k+ Americans (and millions worldwide) is not a very pro life stance. I assume that's the irony of it.

statefan91 said:

---

Choosing not to take a vaccine that has been proven to reduce transmission of a virus that's killed 700k+ Americans (and millions worldwide) is not a very pro life stance. I assume that's the irony of it.

---

Ahhh. Ok. As is the irony in "my body my choice". I assume it goes both ways, eh? All about fake gotcha statements, right? The irony and all.

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Such a simpleton you are if you think the Pope speaks for what Catholicism means to the individual. I presume you also think all Catholics should support pedophilia amongst their priests since the Catholic Church, popes, and bishops harbored priests that molested children. Can you pull some quotes there too?

It's sad that you're cheerleading person losing their job because their religious exemption was denied. Such a good Democrat you are. Such a "common good" person. You've even given him a nickname.

---

A lot of conflation here but since you seem so passionate about the right to object on religious grounds what is the Catholic religious objection to the vaccine? I have more than a few close friends that are Catholic and all are vaccinated and have honestly never heard any of them, or for that matter, the basis for a religious objection. Birth control objections yes, vaccines no. Edit: I do see their reasoning ,or reason, on the J&J version but not the others.

---

That would be a question for him. Not me. I'm (formerly) Catholic and vaccinated.

You don't think there is a right to object on religious grounds?

---

No I didn't say that someone should not be able to object on religious grounds, only that I have not heard or seen the reason for objection other than for the J&J shot and there's kind of a split among the Catholic clergy in that. That leaves two other options. But the WS coach is Catholic and is objecting for religious reasons. That said, if there are to be grounds for a religious objection in my opinion it should be based on core tenant of that religion. Not a one off or something created for the sole purpose of a grounds for objection.

---

Exactly.

When your religious organization's supreme leader and bishops around the world strongly support a cause and their spiritual guidance for their flock indicates the same, hard to make a case that your objection to the cause is on the basis of your "religious beliefs."

If people can just say they believe whatever, whether or not it's in agreement with their prescribed religion's stated dogma and guidance, the "religious belief" test loses all meaning. At that point we're all just making up our own religions.

Wufhart said:

---

Steve Videtich said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Such a simpleton you are if you think the Pope speaks for what Catholicism means to the individual. I presume you also think all Catholics should support pedophilia amongst their priests since the Catholic Church, popes, and bishops harbored priests that molested children. Can you pull some quotes there too?

It's sad that you're cheerleading person losing their job because their religious exemption was denied. Such a good Democrat you are. Such a "common good" person. You've even given him a nickname.

---

A lot of conflation here but since you seem so passionate about the right to object on religious grounds what is the Catholic religious objection to the vaccine? I have more than a few close friends that are Catholic and all are vaccinated and have honestly never heard any of them, or for that matter, the basis for a religious objection. Birth control objections yes, vaccines no. Edit: I do see their reasoning ,or reason, on the J&J version but not the others.

---

That would be a question for him. Not me. I'm (formerly) Catholic and vaccinated.

You don't think there is a right to object on religious grounds?

---

No I didn't say that someone should not be able to object on religious grounds, only that I have not heard or seen the reason for objection other than for the J&J shot and there's kind of a split among the Catholic clergy in that. That leaves two other options. But the WS coach is Catholic and is objecting for religious reasons. That said, if there are to be grounds for a religious objection in my opinion it should be based on core tenant of that religion. Not a one off or something created for the sole purpose of a grounds for objection.

---

There are different kinds of Catholicism. Actually there are 7 different kinds.

---

The "two options" wasn't a reference to different types of Catholicism but options for shots besides J&J. That said after further research on the vaccine testing if they are basing their objection on pro-life then I guess they would object to all of the options. But a somewhat ironic objection.

---

I guess my point was that people from the same religion had a choice to make, and they made they're individual choices. Religion means different things to different people, therefore, making different choices for different people..

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Civilized said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Wufhart said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Such a simpleton you are if you think the Pope speaks for what Catholicism means to the individual. I presume you also think all Catholics should support pedophilia amongst their priests since the Catholic Church, popes, and bishops harbored priests that molested children. Can you pull some quotes there too?

It's sad that you're cheerleading person losing their job because their religious exemption was denied. Such a good Democrat you are. Such a "common good" person. You've even given him a nickname.

---

A lot of conflation here but since you seem so passionate about the right to object on religious grounds what is the Catholic religious objection to the vaccine? I have more than a few close friends that are Catholic and all are vaccinated and have honestly never heard any of them, or for that matter, the basis for a religious objection. Birth control objections yes, vaccines no. Edit: I do see their reasoning ,or reason, on the J&J version but not the others.

---

That would be a question for him. Not me. I'm (formerly) Catholic and vaccinated.

You don't think there is a right to object on religious grounds?

---

No I didn't say that someone should not be able to object on religious grounds, only that I have not heard or seen the reason for objection other than for the J&J shot and there's kind of a split among the Catholic clergy in that. That leaves two other options. But the WS coach is Catholic and is objecting for religious reasons. That said, if there are to be grounds for a religious objection in my opinion it should be based on core tenant of that religion. Not a one off or something created for the sole purpose of a grounds for objection.

---

Exactly.

When your religious organization's supreme leader and bishops around the world strongly support a cause and their spiritual guidance for their flock indicates the same, hard to make a case that your objection to the cause is on the basis of your "religious beliefs."

If people can just say they believe whatever, whether or not it's in agreement with their prescribed religion's stated dogma and guidance, the "religious belief" test loses all meaning. At that point we're all just making up our own religions.

---

Covid vaccine has nothing to do with religious dogma. Perhaps you should visit a church sometime. You are literally making up religion.

Supreme leader lol.

Disagreeing with the pope is not a new phenomenon, nor is it limited to one side. That does not make you less Catholic, nor your position less religious. You have no idea what you're talking about.

---

This ain't hard man.

Example verbiage from a Washington religious exemption vaccination form is as follows:

"...Complete this section ONLY if you belong to a church or religion that objects to the use of all types of COVID-19 vaccination..."

Rolivic doesn't belong to such church or religion if he's Catholic.

When you're claiming a "religious belief" exemption but your stance runs counter to the most powerful international religious leader in the modern world's stance and actions, and counter to a mountain of published guidance from your religion's national leaders, you have a non-existent case that your church is compelling you to require the exemption.

At that point it's not your religion compelling you to behave in a certain way, it's just your personal philosophy and Washington's proclamation is written to explicitly exclude philosophical objections.

Your argument is with the Catholic Church's issued guidance, or with the way the proclamation is written; as they're both written it's clear Rolovich doesn't qualify for the religious exemption if he applied for one as a Catholic.

---

This ain't hard man. You don't know what you're talking about. Join a church. Learn what happens there instead of what you read on MSNBC. You are a blind sheep trying to win an argument on a message board using sheer ignorance.

What reason did he give? Do you know? No, you don't. But being the partisan you are you pretend to know his reason and say it is not religious based, based on what you googled on "supreme leaders".

Stick to crying wolf on racism. You're out of your safe space talking about religion, and it shows.

---

LOL. "Being the partisan that I am?" LOLOL, naw man, being the human that can read that I am. We know what reason he gave because his attorney told us so yesterday.

"In a statement Wednesday morning announcing future legal action, attorney Brian Fahling said Rolovich was morally against taking a COVID-19 vaccine because of his Catholic faith..."

Yet, the Pope, the Holy See, the US Conference of Catholic Bishops, and innumerable Catholic hospitals and schools strongly support or require vaccination on the basis both that it is ethical, and that Catholics have a duty to vaccinate.

Again, when "his Catholic faith" runs directly counter to Catholic leaders' actions and clearly stated guidance, that cripples his exemption case. HIs religion strongly endorses COVID vaccination. The Catholic Church has issued guidance that COVID vaccination is ethical. His personal philosophy runs counter to his religion.

Obviously the committee agreed and his exemption was denied. We'll see soon enough what the courts say.

---

Use as many LOLs as you want. You don't know what you're talking about. Your entire position is based on your partisanship. You know nothing about Catholicism. You throw around words you don't know like "dogma" inappropriately completely destroying your position. To understand religion, and Catholicism, you need to spend a little more time than you've done so far.

The Catholic faith speaks nothing to covid vaccines. The pope can offer guidance, but Catholicism is not a cult. The pope is not God. Pope Francis does not determine Catholic faith for Catholics. Pope Francis has many critics on many positions he holds. Those critics are no less Catholic, nor no less religious. His "personal philosophy" does not "run counter to his religion". Covid vaccine mandates are not covered anywhere in Catholic scripture.

Of course the committee agreed that he did not deserve a religious exemption. Covid is a religion for leftists at universities these days, and WSU apparently views these days as the Crusades.

Good becomes Bad and Bad becomes Good!!! More and more, I'm starting to understand why my wife believes we are in end-times...

I want to believe everyone has some good in them; however, I'm not sure about that... We all have our failings, but, man... some of you all are really allowing too much evil in your views!!!

Not be judgmental (on this); just stating what I see. I pray for the best in all of you!!!

Civilized said:

---

PackFansXL said:

---

Civ, be careful judging the positions folks take on their faith, else you may have to reprimand the POTUS for his dogmatic support for abortion despite the clear dichotomy with his stated Catholic faith.

---

You're proving my point.

Biden hasn't claimed to support abortion due to his own personal version of his faith, despite church guidance that ran directly counter to his stance. He'd get skewered for trying to claim his Catholic faith led him to support abortion.

In contrast, Rolovich is claiming that he refuses to be vaccinated due to his own personal version of his faith, despite church guidance that runs directly counter to his stance.

Judicially the litmus test for a religious exemption can't be based on people's own person versions of their faith. It has to be based on widely held beliefs or clear guidance from those that practice their religion. If we can claim "religious" exemptions for personal stances that run counter to widely held beliefs and clear guidance, then we're just approving whatever anyone sincerely thinks and calling that their "personal religious beliefs." The exemption loses all meaning.

Argue that the Catholic Church should have a more nuanced view of vaccines than their published guidance indicates, or that employer mandates are illegal, or that the religious exemption process lacks due process instead.

But based on the Catholic Church's published guidance and employer mandates with exemption reviews thus far having survived court challenges it doesn't seem like Rolovich has a leg to stand on.

---

I am not Catholic; however, my wife grew up in the faith. Her family is all Catholic. My wife is vaccinated; however, she didn't do her research on the testing (this is the issue at hand for Catholics). She is appalled by this testing and has not gotten a boosters, because of this testing.

Civ, this is no way counter to the traditions of the Church. This current Pope; however, is a hard left individual and is not liked by many Catholics, including some Bishops, Cardinals, and Priest.

So, when this happens, in the church, tradition is heavily leaned upon in the faith.

Edit: My wife works in a lot of Pro-Life organizations. In other words, she's not just a talker, she puts her actions in place. Also, (not to toot my own horn) my wife and I have spent tons of hours and our personal money towards helping young lady's when they are in crises. Even if they choose to abort the child, we stay with them until they no longer need our support. Hopefully, our actions will help them in the future if the crises arises again.

Catholicism speaks to murder. It does not speak to forced vaccination. It does not prove your point in the slightest.

Maybe it's in one of the dogmas you were talking about though?

Civilized said:

---

packgrad said:

---

Catholicism speaks to murder. It does not speak to forced vaccination. It does not prove your point in the slightest.

Maybe it's in one of the dogmas you were talking about though?

---

You need to go back and read how I used dogma.

I said "If people can just say they believe whatever, whether or not it's in agreement with their prescribed religion's stated dogma and guidance, the "religious belief" test loses all meaning. At that point we're all just making up our own religions."

That was a general comment about how the religious exemption test works across religions. I never said the Catholic church's stance on vaccination was dogmatic teaching.

If you want to successfully claim a religious exemption, best to choose a stance that aligns with your religious organization's dogmas, teaching, or guidance. Pretty hard for an impartial authority to believe your religion is guiding you otherwise.

---

It's pretty easy to see how a pro life stance would support his position.

J&J doesn't have anything stem cell related in the vaccine, so that's an option he could take that wouldn't run counter to his religious argument: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-johnson-aborted/fact-check-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-does-not-contain-aborted-fetal-cells-idUSL1N2LU1T9

statefan91 said:

---

J&J doesn't have anything stem cell related in the vaccine, so that's an option he could take that wouldn't run counter to his religious argument: https://www.reuters.com/article/factcheck-johnson-aborted/fact-check-johnson-johnsons-covid-19-vaccine-does-not-contain-aborted-fetal-cells-idUSL1N2LU1T9

---

I need to find it, but that was disproven.

caryking said:

---

Posting this in multiple threads:

Biden Admin is freaking out about who is leaking to Posobiec, per WH official https://t.co/4hj2zyUWxW

— Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 (@JackPosobiec) October 20, 2021

---

Bringing this topic back as it didn't get much dialogue... The buried lead in this is: Our very own government is trying is find out how to defend peoples objections as opposed to understanding them.

Again, I will say: be careful what you ask for... When there becomes a time the government forces you to do something you don't like, well, are you going to scream? If so, how can you?

Quote:

---

Quote:

---

PackFansXL said:
Civ, be careful judging the positions folks take on their faith, else you may have to reprimand the POTUS for his dogmatic support for abortion despite the clear dichotomy with his stated Catholic faith.

---

You're proving my point.

Biden hasn't claimed to support abortion due to his own personal version of his faith, despite church guidance that ran directly counter to his stance. He'd get skewered for trying to claim his Catholic faith led him to support abortion.

---

On the contrary, I am proving a different point. Biden says he is Catholic but does not act in a manner consistent with that faith. I leave that to you to decide whether it is relevant. The death toll resulting from his position is astoundingly high. I am not saying the roughly 50M American lives extinguished during his political career are all on him, but being in a position of influence and doing nothing to stop or even discourage that choice is disappointing.

Now to the coach's argument, I am staunchly Pro-Life but I am not overly concerned with the legacy use of cells that originated with an abortion decades ago. Do I prefer that medical research begin using a set of cells that originated from problem free origins? Sure. But the choice to get vaccinated should not depend on this issue alone IMHO.

BTW, the legacy of medical research has many cases of poor ethical choices. HeLa cells from Henrietta Lacks were and probably still are used in cancer research without concern or regard for the "donor" or her family. There have also been cases where someone's body produced a mutation that proved to be beneficial for others and the courts chose not to award ownership to the donor. No compensation was awarded for this biological lottery winner, but the doctors who recognized the value of the mutation and cells were compensated handsomely.

Do you think an individual's faith should drive what they do in Government and apply it to the constituency, regardless of if those constituents are of the same faith and belief system?

statefan91 said:

---

Do you think an individual's faith should drive what they do in Government and apply it to the constituency, regardless of if those constituents are of the same faith and belief system?

---

Actually, that right there is the exact point!!! Actually, I don't!!! My expectation from a government official would be for them to NOT allow any personal beliefs come to the table! They should follow the simple constitutional words! Those words are very narrow and have full context by reading various papers.

Every person has some faith in something, whether you think you have faith or not! Too many people try and instill their faith on everything! So, Biden claims to be Catholic and I say so what…

statefan91, your question can bring a whole different conversation to the table; so, be careful what you ask for…

caryking said:

---

Good becomes Bad and Bad becomes Good!!! More and more, I'm starting to understand why my wife believes we are in end-times...

I want to believe everyone has some good in them; however, I'm not sure about that... We all have our failings, but, man... some of you all are really allowing too much evil in your views!!!

Not be judgmental (on this); just stating what I see. I pray for the best in all of you!!!

---

Spoken just like "Little Red Riding Hood" :-)

Amusing to see the R vrs D etc emerge. Almost sounds like a professional wrestling event where each side wins some and each side loses some. Somewhere in all the fray, in all the pandemonium, as both sides are incited by the gestures of the paid wrestlers..........there is an underlying truth that few see. That's how it works and without a hitch........until now. There are those of us that had been in the stands with the rest of you that now see Vince McMahon in the penthouse suite.........taking all your damn money and setting up to take the rest of it. He just needs to fuel a controversy to sell those tickets.

Get off the R and D ****, they're one in the same. You better start looking at things from the standpoint of our Constitution. Start with the 10th amendment and how in the hell have we gotten where we are today. How many of you know your US Congressman or have met your US Senator? How about your Governor? Your State Legislature ...the men/women that represent you at the State Capitol? Probably few know who your County Commissioners are...and your school boards. They work for you..........but they don't think so.

You're looking at tyranny, truly staring it in the face. It will get much worse. My ancestor Captain Robert Messer was hung by the neck in 1781 as the leader of the Alamance Regulators resisting Governor WIlliam Tryon, the King Of England's crony servant. He died fighting for freedom.........and against tyranny. How many of us here have the balls to take this on. The Governor was going to hang his only son if he didn't turn himself in. He did to save his son (my ancester).

Love my WOLFPACK but you guys and gals better get in the real game. Connect the damn dots, we need to come together as one people!!!!!!!!!! The divisive stuff has a purpose..and that is to keep us divided.

statefan91 said:

---

Do you think an individual's faith should drive what they do in Government and apply it to the constituency, regardless of if those constituents are of the same faith and belief system?

---

I do. I believe your faith in God and knowledge of his word should guide your actions. I could never vote for a Democrat as long as one of the largest planks in their platform is full on pursuit of abortion on demand. He knew what he was signing up for when he chose to become a Democrat. Convenience killing of innocent Americans is an unconscionable legacy for that political party. At a minimum, he could have retained his personal integrity by simply voting present when the issue came up.

Werewolf said:

---

Amusing to see the R vrs D etc emerge. Almost sounds like a professional wrestling event where each side wins some and each side loses some. Somewhere in all the fray, in all the pandemonium, as both sides are incited by the gestures of the paid wrestlers..........there is an underlying truth that few see. That's how it works and without a hitch........until now. There are those of us that had been in the stands with the rest of you that now see Vince McMahon in the penthouse suite.........taking all your damn money and setting up to take the rest of it. He just needs to fuel a controversy to sell those tickets.

Get off the R and D ****, they're one in the same. You better start looking at things from the standpoint of our Constitution. Start with the 10th amendment and how in the hell have we gotten where we are today. How many of you know your US Congressman or have met your US Senator? How about your Governor? Your State Legislature ...the men/women that represent you at the State Capitol? Probably few know who your County Commissioners are...and your school boards. They work for you..........but they don't think so.

You're looking at tyranny, truly staring it in the face. It will get much worse. My ancestor Captain Robert Messer was hung by the neck in 1781 as the leader of the Alamance Regulators resisting Governor WIlliam Tryon, the King Of England's crony servant. He died fighting for freedom.........and against tyranny. How many of us here have the balls to take this on. The Governor was going to hang his only son if he didn't turn himself in. He did to save his son (my ancester).

Love my WOLFPACK but you guys and gals better get in the real game. Connect the damn dots, we need to come together as one people!!!!!!!!!! The divisive stuff has a purpose..and that is to keep us divided.

---

"hear, all ye good people, hear what this brilliant and eloquent speaker has to say!"

WSU is going to lose.

Washington State assistant fired for being unvaccinated joins Nick Rolovich in pursuing legal actionhttps://t.co/fkJEHd4Efr

— Wendy (@autodog5150) October 22, 2021

packgrad said:

---

WSU is going to lose.

Washington State assistant fired for being unvaccinated joins Nick Rolovich in pursuing legal actionhttps://t.co/fkJEHd4Efr

— Wendy (@autodog5150) October 22, 2021

---

And they should...

packgrad said:

---

WSU is going to lose.

Washington State assistant fired for being unvaccinated joins Nick Rolovich in pursuing legal actionhttps://t.co/fkJEHd4Efr

— Wendy (@autodog5150) October 22, 2021

---

I bet they'll end up settling. WSU does NOT want discovery.

bgr3 said:

---

packgrad said:

---

WSU is going to lose.

Washington State assistant fired for being unvaccinated joins Nick Rolovich in pursuing legal actionhttps://t.co/fkJEHd4Efr

— Wendy (@autodog5150) October 22, 2021

---

I bet they'll end up settling. WSU does NOT want discovery.

---

you're probably right... I wouldn't settle for anything less than what's owed on my signed contract. Not one penny.

I would love to read the contract to see what type of provisions that might be for changing work environments.

Is there anything fundamentally different about this lawsuit than the 40-odd unsuccessful challenges to date in Washington State?