What exactly is the religious reason for not getting the vaccine?

(As I’ve said a hundred times, I’m in favor of the vaccine. Get it — unless you and your doctor have agreed you have some good reason not to.)

A federal judge has stopped a New York state healthcare mandate because it did not adequately explain why people were denied religious exemptions.

People seem to forget that religion is protected in this country. I don’t know why that’s so hard to remember.

But what, exactly, is a religious reason for not getting the vaccine? It’s an important question because in some countries there have been outbreaks due to people’s religious objections to vaccines. (Not just Covid.)

When it comes to religion, your average secular American acts as if his off-the-cuff, “Oh, it’s probably this” guess is good enough. I mean, there’s no logic to religion anyway, right, so why spend time thinking about it? Whatever dumb explanation comes to hand is probably right. Or at least good enough. (/sarcasm.)

While there are plenty of dumb religious ideas out there, there are also plenty of very smart people who spend enormous time and energy thinking about these things.

So, what are some religious reasons not to get vaccinated?

Catholics object to some of the vaccines because they depend on cell lines harvested from abortions. Some Buddhists might also object for similar reasons, since they are against the taking of life. You may agree or disagree with that reasoning, but it’s not just some airhead saying “God will protect me.”

Muslims (and possibly some Jews) might object to medicines that rely on unclean animals. For example, back when I had a blood clot, I had to inject myself with some stuff that was derived from the lining of a pig’s stomach. I expect some people would be offended by that, although there are exemptions in Islam and Judaism based on the “law of necessity,” so Muslims and Jews do not (generally) oppose vaccines. (I’m sure you can find some who do.)

Some believers, especially in some of the more conservative Reformed denominations, say a vaccination is interfering with God’s providence. That one seems pretty dumb (does a seat belt or a motorcycle helmet interfere with God’s providence?), but the constitution doesn’t exempt dumb religious views from protection, so … I’m not sure how that one falls out in the courts.

The bottom line is that there is some ground for actual religious objections to vaccinations in some cases, although the vast majority of religious authorities encourage the vaccines. (I’m not counting as a “religious authority” Pastors Billy Bob and Suzy Anne from The Roadside Tabernacle of Fun.)

Unfortunately, in our efforts to accommodate every weird belief out there, “religion” has progressively morphed into “my personal convictions,” which could be anything. I suspect a lot of the “religious objections” are along those lines.

“I don’t feel comfortable about the vaccine, so it’s my ‘sincerely held belief’ that it’s wrong.”

I don’t know how a society can function if we credit such “exemptions.” There doesn’t seem to be any limiting principle to it. Or, in other words, it’s one thing to respect the considered, serious beliefs of an actual religion. It’s another thing entirely to allow people to say “my religion tells me Bill Gates put microchips in the vaccine to eat my brain.”

Which brings us back to the court case. The judge says religious objections were not adequately considered. What were they?