Religious Beliefs vs. Mandatory Vaccination

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
The Legal Aspect of the Issue
My Thoughts on Addressing the Problem
Conclusion
References

Introduction

The COVID-19 vaccines are critical to containing the pandemic, combined with effective screening and currently available measures. U.S. citizens often justify their refusal to vaccinate against coronavirus on religious grounds. This also applies to teachers because they have to be vaccinated because of social contact with students. Many people are applying for official exemptions from vaccinations. For this reason, it is essential to establish how compulsory vaccination should be addressed in such cases.

The Legal Aspect of the Issue

Significantly, the international law guarantees fundamental human rights and freedoms. These principles assert that law may limit human rights to preserve the health and welfare of individuals. That is, the legalization of compulsory vaccination does not emanate from a general concept of law. However, the First Amendment states that Congress has no power to legislate the introduction of any religion or prohibit the free practice of any religion (Letzing, 2021). Accordingly, a legal conflict arises between the possibility of restricting people’s rights for their well-being and providing for religious needs. This issue is particularly acute when it concerns educators (Occupational Safety & Health Administration, 2022). That is because they work with children and have a responsibility to ensure their safety, and simultaneously, teachers have the right to religious freedom.

One should also consider U.S. labor law confirming certain exceptions to the rule. American employers should reasonably modify working conditions to conform to the employee’s religious beliefs. However, they may request information to confirm whether those beliefs are sincere (Letzing, 2021). Nevertheless, case law has already emerged concerning this issue; for example, a federal district judge blocked a mandate that required vaccination of a Head Start education program employee (Walsh, 2022). The U.S. Supreme Court rejected a petition by a small group of teachers who challenged New York’s mandate to vaccinate public school employees. Significantly, the court blocked occurred without providing comment on the case. Then, the activists filed an appeal in which they claimed that the authorities were restricting their religious rights and that their removal from work was not legal (Chen, 2022). When leaders of religious organizations publicly support vaccination, their adherents obtain a refusal of immunization exemption.

My Thoughts on Addressing the Problem

I believe that teachers, like other individuals, are entitled to religious views and beliefs. Accordingly, administrations should examine their applications in detail where they affirm their religious identity. Significantly, the statements of the leaders of church organizations should not affect the decisions of the authorities. This is because every person has the right to dispose of their own body and not be vaccinated for fear of being fired from their jobs. Therefore, it seems that despite the sociality of teachers’ jobs, they have the right to use First Amendment possibilities.

Moreover, I think the government should provide a further explanation of labor law. This is because religious factors, faith, and feelings are hard to confirm with evidence. It is vital to emphasize that teachers and children can use medical masks and antiseptics to protect children from disease transmission.

Conclusion

Thus, the problem of refusal to vaccinate due to religious beliefs is widespread among public sector workers. I support the ability of teachers to refuse to vaccinate against COVID-19 immunization based on religious reasons. I think other health and safety measures that would prevent schools from firing them just because they are not inoculated should be considered by the courts. It would ensure that teachers and others have the rights guaranteed to them by the Constitution.