This right here I think is definitely true.
Also most of the vaccine requirement were only for public schools, I’m not sure how it plays out in private settings.
Part of what’s been exposed during the year of Covid, is that the high-minded, flighty political rhetoric on both sides about privacy and rights and personal autonomy doesn’t match reality.
For years, the left has told us that absolute personal autonomy is what it means to be truly free. I can have an abortion, or a same sex marriage, or change my gender, and the government must not intrude. If you believe the government should intrude, you are a fascist. This year, the right decided to appropriate this ideology on masks. Our bodies, our choice!
The Left completely owns the culture. All of our debates take place on their terms. The chaos unleashed this year at least partially has to be blamed on their mutually contradictory ideological slogans. Nobody really believes in My Body My Choice. How could you? In spite of liberal jurists accusing everyone who mentions state’s rights of being a closet racist, state’s rights in regards to police powers are still very real. If they order you to stay at home because of a virus outbreak, there is no remedy in federal court. The Fourteenth Amendment bogus Equal Protection buzzsaw hasn’t cut through all public health authority…yet.
Apply the above to vaccines. It’s not Your Body Your Choice. Absolute personal autonomy is a fiction.
The ideology of the Left is really just nihilism, pure and simple. We saw that during the riots. Every authority must be destroyed. The end of modern liberalism is just destruction. They (we) destroy with their own hands. Because it’s still God’s world, and nations and peoples rise and fall by His hand.
1 Like
This is why argument with the Left on its own terms (“Transgenderism undermines women’s equality!” “MLK would reject Critical Race Theory!”) is so futile: there’s always one more layer of nihilism that nihilists can reach for to undermine anyone who believes in something.
2 Likes
Just received this from a friend who works at Butler. Indiana University tried this and had to rescind due to being a public institution and our Attorney General saying they would be in violation of various laws to require it. Butler is a private institution. We shall see.
1 Like
This is certainly going to vary by state. The public university in my state is requiring COVID vaccination, and I expect it will stick since other vaccines are already required as a condition for enrollment. Several states have removed religious exemptions from vaccination requirements at public schools, and so far as I am aware, those have been upheld in court.
I can sympathize with not knowing who to believe as there does not seem to be a consensus on the immediate necessity of the covid vaccines.
Our family has largely black balled us, because we didn’t jump first in line to get vaccinated. We aren’t anti-vaccine, but there are a lot of unknowns when it comes to the various COVID19 vaccines and a lot of ethical issues that do bind the conscience at some level.
No one wants to be Jonathan Edwards in this particular regard. He may have been right, generally, but it did cost him his life, the very thing they were seeking to protect.
I chose to get the vaccine, much as I disagree philosophically with mass vaccinations for a disease with a 99.3% survival rate. I never get the flu jab (got it once in uni, got the flu, decided never again…very scientific I know). I have tremendous concerns about the lockdowns (which in my context are nowhere near ending), and I have growing theological concerns about the restrictions placed upon church gatherings where I am located. And I despise the mass panic over covid. So please no comments directed at ‘sheeple’ towards me.
Yet in my congregation me not getting the vaccine would be a source of division. It would significantly hinder my ability to shepherd this flock. And I don’t yet know how my extended family will take my decision. I may be black-balled for choosing to get the vaccine regardless of my rationale.
My rationale is that if Timothy was willing to let an aged rabbi with eye problems circumcise him for the sake of gospel opportunities, I can probably take what is at best a merely statistical risk for the sake of unity among the flock I serve. And if the risk in my case turns out to be more than statistical, well, that’s in God’s hands.
Why is this the issue that so divides people? Why is this the one that brings the dogmatists out of the woodwork? Why is this the issue that encourages Christians to break fellowship. Just the other day I had another pastor tell me that he knew a woman who left her church because her pastor wouldn’t take the vaccine, and this pastor was proud of the woman! I know of many situations where the roles were reversed but the arguments were no less heated. Division, division, division…over a vaccine.
There are many issues that we face on a far more regular basis that are far clearer from both an ethical and a theological perspective, yet we don’t divide over them. Pastors have loads of ethical matters that we must think very carefully of our tender flocks in how we handle them. We labour to not break the bruised reeds over issues much clearer than the various responses to covid. And for what? To receive a level of moral certainty on questionable matters that borders on asinine.
So while I am no fan of experimenting relatively new albeit apparently benign vaccine technology upon an unwitting populace, is comparing these vaccines to the very beginning of vaccine research in Edwards’ day either accurate or helpful? Does that defuse the situation or exacerbate the rhetoric?
10 Likes
I taught a class on Cotton Mather last Sunday. We know him for his role in the Salem Witch Trials but less so (and I had no idea before researching for this class) for pushing small pox inoculations in Boston. In fact, he was responsible for their first use in New England. He, his father (Increase), and other pastors who pushed for the use were labeled the “Inoculation Pastors.” Boston was sharply divided about their use, debating questions like whether taking inoculations was fighting against God’s will. They lambasted one another in the newspapers. Anti-inoculationists threw a bomb through Cotton’s window one night (it failed to explode) with this message attached: “Cotton Mather, you dog, dam you! I’ll inoculate you with this; with a pox to you.”
In 1721, 6,000 cases were reported in a population of 11,000. 850 deaths.
A doctor friend of Cotton’s (Zabdiel Boylston) performed 287 inoculations. 2% died compared to 14.8% of those not inoculated.
Read more here.
We think we are the first to encounter certain trials and think through the issues…until we read history.
9 Likes
Do you disagree with mass mass vaccination for measles, pertussis, etc.? Those diseases have a higher survival rate than COVID-19.
Moreover, a 99.3% survival rate means a 0.7% death rate, right? That means a 7 in 1000 chance of dying. Would you get in an airplane if there was a 7 in 1000 chance that it would crash? I guess everyone has their own perception of risk, but you shouldn’t be surprised that people fear a disease that kills 7 in a 1000. Of course, the risk varies tremendously with age and health condition, but people in the low risk category shouldn’t expect that their perspective will be universally shared. I’m not arguing for any particular policy position here, but let’s not downplay that COVID-19 is a serious problem.
When it comes to mass vaccination, the critical issue here is that COVID-19 is frequently transmitted by people who are not symptomatic (or at least not yet). That has happened to people in the church I am currently attending (though not in the worship service). This past winter, a son of one of the members here came home for the holidays and unknowingly infected his father and sent him to the ICU for a week, besides other examples. There’s no easy way to identify sick people and quarantine them before they infect others. Mass vaccination is the only effective recourse, unless you prefer perpetual masks and lockdowns. And I don’t think the majority of the population is willing to do nothing and just let it rip.
2 Likes
Indiana University is still going to require vaccination for all students, faculty, and staff. Pursuant to the opinion of the state Attorney General, they will not require documentation to verify vaccination. Instead they will require an attestation that you have been vaccinated (which can of course be falsified, but if so will be dealt with similarly to academic dishonesty). All this, of course, assuming that the lawsuit that’s just been brought by a group of 8 students will be thrown out.
1 Like
One of the unknowns of the vaccine is whether it actually does limit transmission or just minimize symptoms. The reason this is concerning is because a significant portion of transmission comes from people who are asymptomatic, meaning vaccines may or may not actual reduce spread. The other issues surrounding the vaccine is what the effectiveness rate is after accounting for already known demographic differences related to COVID19 outcomes.
I’m not fully convinced that the low rates of infection presently are because of the vaccine, but it could be. I think those who are highest risk based on their risk profile, should probably get vaccinated, but until we know what the actual effects on transmission are, I’m not convinced that we should be pushing everyone into the same pot.
Lastly, we also don’t know the sustainability of the inoculation, or even if that’s what it actually does. If the effectiveness is similar to or no better than the flu vaccine, I have serious doubts from a policy perspective as to whether it is actually best to require every person to get vaccinated.
But I do understand the issue with those that want to argue my body my choice…that is utter foolishness, but it also doesn’t absolve of our duty to love all our neighbors. None should be expendable in this equation.
When you account for differences in age and health, 99.3 goes up drastically for much of the populace. That also means that the risks also go up rather steeply for the at-risk portion of the populace as well, which I grant. I’m not downplaying the seriousness of this disease for that populace, but the overall response seems disproportionate to me.
As for measles, maybe I’m inconsistent, but I’m not that bothered about the usual childhood vaccinations. Maybe it’s because there’s a much better established body of evidence. Maybe I’ve just accepted it because I grew up with it. But for covid to have come up in one year and have a vaccine in less than a year…then to get pushed on the whole population with heavily moral language…that troubles me. Add in the significantly political dimension to much of this (how localities count covid deaths, the lack of academic interest in its origin for much of the last year, the way politics determines the public reception to a state’s response), and I think it’s rather less straightforward than medical altruism and the legitimate demands of science.
But all that was a side issue for my main point. I still got the vaccine. I’m less concerned about how one views the current crisis and more concerned about how one is able to interact with those of different perspectives. My main point was the divisiveness that these conversations have occasioned within the home and within the church among Christians. I’m more troubled by that than I am the disease.
6 Likes
That’s an excellent reminder. Thank you for that.
I guess one of the side lessons from that reminder (or even a primary lesson even?) is that the true church will weather this storm as it has every other storm.
Neither disease nor division will sink Christ’s church.
4 Likes
Aside from the initial phase in spring 2020 when everything was unknown, I have doubted that lockdowns were a good policy, all things considered, and it seems that they were much stricter and lengthier in the UK than in the US. And if I were in my 20s or 30s, I would be especially annoyed at the restrictions, so I am very sympathetic to the plight of the younger generation. But when it comes to older people, I am not surprised that they want everyone to be vaccinated to decrease their own risk. And as I have said from the beginning, governmental policy has been driven by those with the most power – the older generation, and the professional class. My point is that it is not helpful to dismiss it as “mass panic” but instead acknowledge the health concerns as genuine and try to bring in more generational balance.
When it comes to division, I think the reasons why we get the vaccine or not are more important than whether we get the vaccine or not. For the most part, I expect it is the reasoning behind the choice that is driving division, not the choice itself.
3 Likes
People have been very touchy about many things throughout the Covid crisis. Vaccines are the latest thing. Given how vehement the debates were in the past, as Andrew pointed out, I wonder if we should be more willing to let it rip? Have a manly debate and set out the truths of the matter?
The debate should be carried out with gentleness. People are more willing to get vaccinated if you don’t browbeat them as science deniers and grandma killers. Our American public health officials thus far have chosen a softer, persuasion-based approach.
Christians should love truth. We should be truth seekers. That’s hard to do in a post modern age where every man knows what is right in his own eyes.
But that is very difficult to do when no one can figure what’s true and what isn’t true. Social media makes all truths and sources relative. It makes post modernists of us all.
3 Likes
This is a really important point for me. While the older vaccines aren’t without controversy, they have lengthy track records, and aren’t operating under emergency authorization.
Perhaps when a vaccine operates under emergency authorization, it should only be used by those for whom the disease itself is an emergency, which certainly doesn’t include my kids.
Could we get a single year of safety data before we stick it in the arm of everything with a pulse?
And I know I keep beating this drum, but the volume of lies from our authorities about everything Covid-related has not strongly inclined me to trust them about vaccine safety.
I’ve never developed a vaccine in a rush, but I’ve rushed an awful lot of code into production, and normally it fixes or changes what you want it to, but unexpected/unintended consequences relating to something you weren’t testing very closely are common in those cases.
Scientific evidence in favor of lockdowns and mask mandates being effective is controversial, to put it mildly. Whether that will change anything related to public policy or not is an open question.
It’s not just social media: Our best and beautiful stopped believing in the existence of truth itself some decades ago, and all our authorities and institutions are shot through with post-modernism.
Having a culture and an authority structure that rejects truth is a bit like having a father who is a mob boss: We owe respect and obedience, but what does that even look like?
5 Likes
I’m sure you meant that seriously, but I can’t stop laughing! Great comparison. How do you honour your father when he’s Tony Soprano? Very helpful framing. Seriously.
And to answer the question, at least to begin to answer it: we honour those from whom we receive a common table, bread and wine.
We love our brethren sincerely, even when their arguments and even rhetoric over mask/vaccines/Trump/whatever seem asinine to us.
We submit to our elders, even when we don’t understand or even disagree with their approach, knowing they watch over our souls.
We prioritise genuine and intimate fellowship with those we trusted before all this began, resisting the urge to think covid has made idiots of everyone else.
We fight the temptation to go all Martin Luther on everyone else over this or that point or approach and trust those whose wisdom we would have valued 15 months ago.
If we can’t give honour and respect here, at the basic level, we’ll never be able to provide it in the more complicated relationships.
6 Likes
There are so many interesting points made in this thread since I last checked it. I had a couple things I thought I’d raise because I’m genuinely interested in what those living in the lands of sanity think. I’ve tried not to say too much because while I personally believe there’s a lot more going on at present than merely the ongoing effects of the collapse of a society that once acknowledged Jesus Christ and now seems bent on denying him no matter the costs involved, I have come to view the situation as almost SO strange or abnormal that my attempts to tease out all the details of the complexity are more destined to cause potential problems than the approach of trying to better focus on the gospel and time with God’s word and allow the pursuit of an understanding of the present “goings-on” to take a much more secondary position. Despite how important an understanding of the recent not-at-all-normal is, it really seems to me that there are more potential pitfalls for deception in trying to analyze some of the weirdness of present events than I, at least, was factoring in. Possibly such factors are at play in the extreme division produced in society over some of these things and, as pointed out by many, division in the church, too. I don’t think a lot of what’s been observed over the last year and a half is just a furtherance of the un-civility of our culture continuing it’s increase a bit more. The levels of extremely intentional manipulation in the political realm and probably spiritually as well seem to me to be very high. All the more reason to be committed to encouraging fellow believers in the things of God’s word and truth. (One reason I like to hang out around here!) 
With that said, two ideas to contribute something on:
- On the medical/vaccine front
Regarding HIPPA-related issues, I’m nothing but a mostly uninformed layman. But it definitely seems like ACTUAL medical privacy was much more a reality before HIPPA and the present configuration of the administration of medicine. That doesn’t mean abiding by HIPPA can’t cause endless headaches and difficulties for people within health professions, simply that, for instance, when my Mom called her Dr. on a public pay phone and found out that our own family would get a new baby sister over 30 yrs. ago there was far more information privacy involved than virtually anything that takes place in the practice of medicine today. (I don’t just mean “big-tech” wasn’t monitoring.) I think the modern administrative state as it relates to medicine has been intentionally and not just incidentally constructed in such a way as to reduce and not increase personal privacy and autonomy. (For the record, I mean something that’s a very far cry from secular-humanist understandings of “autonomy.” But ACTUAL medical privacy and free and informed decision making seems to be trending towards something far more horrifyingly totalitarian in nature.)
Also, as it relates to smallpox, I’d be very interested if anybody is familiar with the work/writings of Dr. Suzanne Humphries on smallpox or vaccines more generally. I’m planning to read one of her primary books, but have been impressed with her treatment of numerous things thus far. A sample relating directly to smallpox and it’s history
- YouTube
- One thing that I’ve found slightly disappointing about discussions over the last year and more relating to present world-wide-weirdness
is that so often they’re too easily about a particular smaller set of points involved. Frequently this is necessary and good but also allows for such discussions, on the net in particular, to get bogged down in endless back and forth about one set of statistical analyses vs. another set of statistical analyses. Statistics can be very important but there’s a Mark Twain quote in there somewhere. Basically, my original intrusion into this thread regarding “conspiracy theories” was my attempt to bring up the far greater accuracy of some “larger narratives” than just about anything I’ve heard any of the “sensible people” or the media or “health authorities” or “experts” say over the course of a good long while. Please note, I said SOME “larger narratives.”
In service of this point I’m truly extremely interested in what anyone here thinks regarding the content of these interviews with Patrick Wood
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 1 of 3) - YouTube
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 2 of 3) - YouTube
Patrick Wood: Technocracy Rising Interview (Part 3 of 3) - YouTube
They’re from 2015 and more relevant to meaningful understanding of many things developing in the world today than almost any of what the people whose narratives the society is “supposed” to be taking as reliable and trustworthy. FWIW I believe Mr. Wood claims to be a Christian. The interview is long and spread over three parts. Once you start, though, it shouldn’t take long to see the value of what he has to say. Watching the full thing is well worth it and I’d love to know how others view the relevance of what is said regarding technocracy, it’s history and it’s relationship to almost all the various developments taking place in the world today. Even the really weird ones.
As much as we’d like to believe the restrictions would not go on forever, they are definitely trying to keep the panic going. The experts need to start reassuring everyone just how effective the masks are again. Or better yet, keep reiterating that the covid injections are so effective and safe that only those not getting the shots will need to continue masking as to not infect the inoculated. And since “cases” are still apparently going up, time to get those boosters. Because science.
And conspiracy theorists.