Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Common Sense

SHAME on Ascension. SHAME on UHS

Recommended Posts

Even though a judge has placed a temporary hold on the unconstitutional mandate for health workers to be lab rats for gene therapy injections that are killing people, Ascension which now runs the formerly religious-based Daughters of Charity hospital Lourdes, and United Health Services, have sent out notices to their employees that as of Monday, if they aren't jabbed, they're gone. Suspended. Lourdes/Ascension, which has NO faith affiliation any longer - and is run by a board of bean counters with NO medical background, claims it's considering religious exemptions but it's a lie. Shame on both of these organizations for treating their employees this way. I would recommend starving the beast. Do NOT use their services any longer. Find medical consultations online, don't pay your hospital or doctor bills. Make them eat the costs. UHS is said to be on the verge of bankruptcy anyway. Help them get there. I HATE these medical tyrants.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Control freaks that have been withholding medicine from people for years if they don't get what they want when they want it...did you see the story I mentioned about the guy who had his blood pressure medication withheld because he couldn't come in to meet his newly assigned doctor right away? That was a story I heard on the radio but I happen to know a bunch of people including myself this has happened to....right at Lourdes, with Lourdes doctors, nurse practitioners...

We need an alternative facility for normal people...who don't have time for BS...

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, ginger said:

Control freaks that have been withholding medicine from people for years if they don't get what they want when they want it...did you see the story I mentioned about the guy who had his blood pressure medication withheld because he couldn't come in to meet his newly assigned doctor right away? That was a story I heard on the radio but I happen to know a bunch of people including myself this has happened to....right at Lourdes, with Lourdes doctors, nurse practitioners...

We need an alternative facility for normal people...who don't have time for BS...

 

In a perfect world, where justice actually mattered, prisons would currently be FILLED with hospital administrators, pharmaceutical reps, doctors and yes, some nurses whose allegiance to that strange marriage of Communism and Capitalism we've got going now has caused them to engage in willful medical malpractice. I'm convinced it was malpractice, not the virus, that killed most of the people who've died of "COVID" in the last 18 months.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is part of the reason our lives are so miserable right now.
This "news" organization's reporting on this is disgraceful, dishonest and dangerous.
They make the miracle "vaccine" seem like the only solution to all our problems, and Kathy "King Andrew in a Dress" Hochul seem like a rare combination of medical expert, political goddess and caring compassionate public servant.
The reality is, the vaccines are killing people, don't work against COVID, arent' necessary for anyone because COVID barely kills anyone who gets it, and Hochul, who calls herself a "Biden Democrat", meaning she admires a man willing to steal the presidency, is actually a soulless repulsive shrew who has no business making any decisions that impact people's livelihoods, since she backed into the job and will not keep it when the election rolls around.
I miss the days when we had actual honest reporters.
https://www.pressconnects.com/story/news/coronavirus/2021/09/24/medical-worker-vaccine-mandate/5830251001/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There's a great question making the rounds today: if the "vaccinated" can still get, and spread this "deadly" virus, why aren't THEY being tested as a condition of continued employment? The vaccines obviously don't work, and are just a profit-making scam for Big Pharma, so why is there a distinction between people who've gotten them and people who choose not to? Both groups are just as capable of getting and spreading the virus. So both should be treated the same by employers.

So, Ascension and UHS, and many other public employers: what's it gonna be? Are you going to force vaccinated employees to also be tested weekly as a condition of continued employment, or is that asking for too much fairness?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/24/2021 at 7:06 PM, Common Sense said:

Even though a judge has placed a temporary hold on the unconstitutional mandate for health workers to be lab rats for gene therapy injections that are killing people, Ascension which now runs the formerly religious-based Daughters of Charity hospital Lourdes, and United Health Services, have sent out notices to their employees that as of Monday, if they aren't jabbed, they're gone. Suspended. Lourdes/Ascension, which has NO faith affiliation any longer - and is run by a board of bean counters with NO medical background, claims it's considering religious exemptions but it's a lie. Shame on both of these organizations for treating their employees this way. I would recommend starving the beast. Do NOT use their services any longer. Find medical consultations online, don't pay your hospital or doctor bills. Make them eat the costs. UHS is said to be on the verge of bankruptcy anyway. Help them get there. I HATE these medical tyrants.

OK, I'll bite. Lots of words here. I'd like to ask you about some of them.

Which judge has granted a TRO against the entire NYS mandate?

Why do you believe it is unconstitutional?

Aren't all employers free to terminate employees for any reason not explicitly forbidden by law, including for no reason at all?

New York law previously allowed religious exemptions for vaccination, but that law was abolished in 2019 by a large margin in the legislature. Even Akshar voted for it, after polling showed almost nobody in this county believes that vaccination laws should have religious exemptions. Do you believe that abolishing this exception was unconstitutional, or that it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

If so, how, and on what other exercises of the state's police power are people entitled to religious exemptions? For example, can we not enforce funeral and burial regulations at Islamberg?  Do Rastafarians have a constitutional right to possess marijuana even if it's illegal in a state?

What do you believe is the criteria for demonstrating a valid religious belief that must be accommodated if possible, and what reasonable accommodations that will not impose an undue hardship on the employer should be offered instead?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They are also now removing people from the organ donors list if you refuse to get vaccinated. I heard this locally and also appears to be going on nationwide now...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If I was going to argue on religious grounds it wouldn't be based on the fetal cell line. As a New Yorker, I would totally argue that taking the vaccine is equivalent to drinking the Kool Aid re: Jim Jones/ Kathy Hochul who has placed herself in the position of being a cult leader. She opened the door Bing, she should be compelled to answer. I bet she's NXIVM branded.

https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/ny-governor-hochul-christians-god-wants-you-to-be-vaccinated

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BTW I'm not the only one who thinks this...talking to friends at a wedding shower yesterday...most Catholic...they are not impressed with the cult like tenor this pandemic has elicited.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, ginger said:

BTW I'm not the only one who thinks this...talking to friends at a wedding shower yesterday...most Catholic...they are not impressed with the cult like tenor this pandemic has elicited.

Certainly fair. With that said, there's not a chance in hell "I just really didn't like the governor's snotty attitude" is going to pass muster anywhere as a sincerely-held religious belief. Whether or not anyone is impressed is also not relevant.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BING DID YOU EVEN WATCH THAT VIDEO?! 

She said she wanted people to be her apostles. Have you ever heard of Apostolic Socialism? That's Jim Jones and then some.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/11/2021 at 9:23 AM, Bingoloid said:

 

Which judge has granted a TRO against the entire NYS mandate?

Why do you believe it is unconstitutional?

Aren't all employers free to terminate employees for any reason not explicitly forbidden by law, including for no reason at all?

New York law previously allowed religious exemptions for vaccination, but that law was abolished in 2019 by a large margin in the legislature. Even Akshar voted for it, after polling showed almost nobody in this county believes that vaccination laws should have religious exemptions. Do you believe that abolishing this exception was unconstitutional, or that it violates the Civil Rights Act of 1964?

If so, how, and on what other exercises of the state's police power are people entitled to religious exemptions? For example, can we not enforce funeral and burial regulations at Islamberg?  Do Rastafarians have a constitutional right to possess marijuana even if it's illegal in a state?

What do you believe is the criteria for demonstrating a valid religious belief that must be accommodated if possible, and what reasonable accommodations that will not impose an undue hardship on the employer should be offered instead?

I just noticed I'd never responded to this.
I didn't say a judge had granted a TRO against the entire NYS mandate. Re-read what I wrote.
I believe compelling an American citizen to subject themselves to an unapproved - other than by EUA - genetic therapy mislabeled as a "vaccine" violates the Constitution. America's Frontline Doctors and many others seem to agree. https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2/?s=unconstitutional mandate
Yes, I'm aware of the 2019 legislative decision on religious exemptions. I'm also aware that the vast majority of states in the union still allow for them. So there seems to be a little bit of a disconnect going on. Removing the exemptions for religious people IS a violation of their civil rights, but the erasing of rights is happening so frequently now that nobody seems to notice or care. No government should be able to force an adult to get any kind of medical procedure as a condition of continued employment, period. And two years ago, most people would have said the same thing. Now all of a sudden, the brainwashing has worked so well that a lot of people actually think we SHOULD give up rights "for the greater good." It's even made Democrats stop using the "my body, my choice" slogan to kill unborn babies.
I'm not going to speculate on the question you asked about funeral and burial regulations at Islamberg or what Rastafarians can do. I don't know enough about either of these to offer an informed opinion and don't really care enough to research it. Constitutional attorneys should be raking in the bucks right now but I don't see an awful lot of them being very public in guiding the people's thoughts about these unusual circumstances in which we find ourselves.
Those criteria for demonstrating valid religious beliefs have already been spelled out and agreed upon. Certainly, any medical concoction that involved testing with tissues and cells from aborted fetuses would be off limits to anyone who truly believes in what their faith teaches them. I've always believed that some vaccinations SHOULD be required for children to attend schools, but my thinking has changed on that. It sure seems to me that the more I learn about the history of school vaccination requirements, the more it seems it was more about making money than keeping kids healthy and safe.
Hope I passed your quiz.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Catholic church’s position on this is very clear.  Vatican say Vaccine is a social responsibility - no religious exemption.  https://www.ncronline.org/news/opinion/catholics-seeking-religious-exemptions-vaccines-must-follow-true-church-teaching

Other religions seem to share this view. https://apnews.com/article/health-religion-united-states-coronavirus-pandemic-coronavirus-vaccine-9c947acecd6ba26b4c78827b7b87c185  
 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^Don't mind if I say the Vatican and Kathy Hochul are acting outside the scope of their knowledge,education and experience. Furthermore I didn't hear the Pope, Hochul or Cardinal Dolan shooting their big mouths off when Cuomo was murdering thousands of seniors. I didn't hear a one of them say a word when he issued a directive to EMS to not perform CPR.

Don't even think about lecturing me or any other health-care providers about social responsibility. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Common Sense said:

I just noticed I'd never responded to this.
I didn't say a judge had granted a TRO against the entire NYS mandate. Re-read what I wrote.
I believe compelling an American citizen to subject themselves to an unapproved - other than by EUA - genetic therapy mislabeled as a "vaccine" violates the Constitution. America's Frontline Doctors and many others seem to agree. https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2/?s=unconstitutional mandate
Yes, I'm aware of the 2019 legislative decision on religious exemptions. I'm also aware that the vast majority of states in the union still allow for them. So there seems to be a little bit of a disconnect going on. Removing the exemptions for religious people IS a violation of their civil rights, but the erasing of rights is happening so frequently now that nobody seems to notice or care. No government should be able to force an adult to get any kind of medical procedure as a condition of continued employment, period. And two years ago, most people would have said the same thing. Now all of a sudden, the brainwashing has worked so well that a lot of people actually think we SHOULD give up rights "for the greater good." It's even made Democrats stop using the "my body, my choice" slogan to kill unborn babies.
I'm not going to speculate on the question you asked about funeral and burial regulations at Islamberg or what Rastafarians can do. I don't know enough about either of these to offer an informed opinion and don't really care enough to research it. Constitutional attorneys should be raking in the bucks right now but I don't see an awful lot of them being very public in guiding the people's thoughts about these unusual circumstances in which we find ourselves.
Those criteria for demonstrating valid religious beliefs have already been spelled out and agreed upon. Certainly, any medical concoction that involved testing with tissues and cells from aborted fetuses would be off limits to anyone who truly believes in what their faith teaches them. I've always believed that some vaccinations SHOULD be required for children to attend schools, but my thinking has changed on that. It sure seems to me that the more I learn about the history of school vaccination requirements, the more it seems it was more about making money than keeping kids healthy and safe.
Hope I passed your quiz.

"I didn't say a judge had granted a TRO against the entire NYS mandate. Re-read what I wrote."

Alright, as long as we're being honest about the limits of what happened there.

---

"I believe compelling an American citizen to subject themselves to an unapproved - other than by EUA - genetic therapy mislabeled as a "vaccine" violates the Constitution. America's Frontline Doctors and many others seem to agree. https://americasfrontlinedoctors.org/2/?s=unconstitutional mandate"

I'm assuming you are aware that there is an option that is no longer approved under an EUA. (This is a fair enough point, in the sense that while states using the police power to mandate vaccination is well-established law, there was no federal approval mechanism at all at the time the law was first settled on this. Whether federal approval means anything to a state government hasn't really been tested.) Claims about it being "rushed" or "rubber-stamped" aside, it is a fact that there is a fully-approved alternative.

---

"Yes, I'm aware of the 2019 legislative decision on religious exemptions. I'm also aware that the vast majority of states in the union still allow for them. So there seems to be a little bit of a disconnect going on."

Well, that's how the 10th Amendment works. The settled law on vaccination is that this is an exercise of the police power, which devolves to the states. It's a legislative decision because it's a legislative question.

---

"Removing the exemptions for religious people IS a violation of their civil rights, but the erasing of rights is happening so frequently now that nobody seems to notice or care."

I'll come back to this.

---

"No government should be able to force an adult to get any kind of medical procedure as a condition of continued employment, period. And two years ago, most people would have said the same thing."

Well, two years ago, Senator Akshar's office says that 70% of our legislative district believed state government should force children to get vaccinated as a condition of going to school against their parents' claimed religious views, so I'm not entirely sure that's true, although I accept that it could be.

---

"Now all of a sudden, the brainwashing has worked so well that a lot of people actually think we SHOULD give up rights "for the greater good." It's even made Democrats stop using the "my body, my choice" slogan to kill unborn babies."

OK, but you keep saying this is a Constitutional right. Compulsory vaccination for adults - including religious claims - went before the Supreme Court a century ago. Do you believe you previously had this right - as a matter of real American law, not a theory about what you wish it was?

---

"I'm not going to speculate on the question you asked about funeral and burial regulations at Islamberg or what Rastafarians can do. I don't know enough about either of these to offer an informed opinion and don't really care enough to research it."

One reason that I brought it up is because this is broadly understood to be a political question which belongs with elected legislatures, and courts have given states broad discretion on public health laws since the beginning of this country.

Until the 14th Amendment, the Bill of Rights did not apply to state governments at all, so these questions never came up because the police power of the states was understood to be almost absolute, but even since then, the police power is broadly intact on public health laws. Even at the federal level, where there is no recognized police power, Congress had to specifically pass a carve-out to legalize peyote for the Native American Church, because merely claiming that your religion requires you to violate a law is not a magic wand.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peyote_Way_Church_of_God,_Inc._v._Thornburgh

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Employment_Division_v._Smith

---

"Constitutional attorneys should be raking in the bucks right now but I don't see an awful lot of them being very public in guiding the people's thoughts about these unusual circumstances in which we find ourselves."

That might be because constitutional law is not as helpful as you think here, and credible attorneys familiar with this area realize there isn't much to say about it.

Now, if you want to talk about the OSHA mandate, I'd agree with you. There is no federal police power to pass public health laws, but there is an authority to regulate interstate commerce, and the limits of that are a long-running argument that goes back to the beginning of the country. In the recent past, the Supreme Court has (wrongly, in my opinion) interpreted it broadly in order to allow federal marijuana enforcement in states that have legalized it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gonzales_v._Raich

That may not happen here. Biden's team absolutely knows this, and they probably expect that it will fail, but that they're under pressure from their base to "do something", even though there's very little the law allows them to do. They they can blame the courts for their own political helplessness.

(They've done this before, with the eviction moratorium. It's politically unpopular, they couldn't even get Democrats to unite around it, so they made a show of issuing an order that would never stand up. Then they point fingers at judges, blaming them for doing their job correctly. It's theater.)

---

"Those criteria for demonstrating valid religious beliefs have already been spelled out and agreed upon."

You'd be surprised. In employment law, it's very subjective, and it also gives a lot of deference to employers. Even if you are able to demonstrate a sincerely-held belief (or the employer is simply afraid to question it), a de minimis rule applies for what constitutes a "reasonable accommodation". If it's even a moderate nuisance to your employer, the "reasonable accommodation" is often the employee finding a job somewhere else.

---

"Certainly, any medical concoction that involved testing with tissues and cells from aborted fetuses would be off limits to anyone who truly believes in what their faith teaches them."

So, if we're talking about Catholic faith, the Vatican disagrees. The good news is that this is not the test. You can be mistaken about a religious belief, or even be an open and outright schismatic heretic, and that belief still be sincerely-held, and protected by law.

Yet, Googling quickly, it would appear that the MMR vaccine and the rabies vaccine are both manufactured (not just developed) using fetal cells.

It would also appear that Tylenol, Advil, Benadryl, Aleve, Ex-Lax, Sudafed, and Aspirin, Claritin, Tums, and Mucinex, Lipitor, Prilosec, Albuterol, Crestor as well as zithromax, hydroxychloroquine, and ivermectin, have all been tested on the same HEK-293 fetal stem cells used in testing the COVID-19 vaccines.

All of these should, then, by your own words, be "off limits to anyone who truly believes". Doesn't this imply that anyone who knowingly uses virtually any medication at all, including any of the popular "alternative" therapies for COVID - or at least continues to do so now that they know - does not have a sincerely-held belief, and is therefore not entitled to an accommodation? What if an employee allowed their child to get the MMR vaccine in order to attend school? Does that demonstrate that their claimed belief is a scam and they don't really care at all?

---

The reason I'm bringing all of this up is because there's a recent pattern in our politics - on both sides - of people clinging to completely imaginary legal theories, pinning all their hopes on them, and then being shocked and outraged when they predictably fail. Words like "unconstitutional" already got thrown around in ways that don't mean anything at all, and it's only getting crazier.

The law is actually pretty settled that states have significant power to use their own judgment in mandating vaccination (including jailing people who refuse), and to set rules on whether or not hospital employees are fit for work. Whether or not they should do this here is a legitimate political question, but that's why it's called the "political question doctrine": courts generally leave these types of things to the legislature, because if the people didn't want that power used that way, it's their responsibility to elect legislators who change those rules. That's exactly what the 10th Amendment was referring to when it said that powers are "reserved to the States respectively, or to the people ". It's between us and Albany to work out, by design.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, Bing, I appreciate all the time and effort you took in your post.

Very informative. It's nice to learn new things - or at least read differing perspectives because you don't know what you don't know.

I'm not exactly sure what your purpose was in crafting a mini-novel on a small-town chat board, though.

Perhaps you think you'll change my mind about believing a government OF, FOR, and BY the people has no right to force me to get an injection I don't want or need for a virus that I've already had and survived just fine, and that globally kills less than 1% of the people who get it. I don't care how long and articulate your posts are, I'm not budging on that. I still cling to the pleasant fantasy that I live in a free country with God-given rights.

I don't "pin all my hopes" on imaginary legal theories. I do pin my hopes on careful research, keen instincts to separate fact from fiction, and perhaps the work of good and decent, and patriotic attorneys and Constitutional experts who are willing to do battle to - among other things - keep employers from completely losing their minds and sense of decency. All of the people they employ went through an application and interview process and got the job. And they've probably kept the jobs for years, with raises and good reviews. Now, all of a sudden because some Munchkin named Tony decides it's time to begin the global depopulation program, all those valued employees are cattle? Demand they all get a vaccine that's proven not to work and appears to be killing people?

I will never ever qualify as a legal or constitutional expert, but there are people in the world who ARE, and we should listen to their sage advice, should they choose to begin sharing it.

That's the thing about our world today. I think the vast majority of us know deep down that COVID has never been a real pandemic. It was used as political dynamite to get rid of Donald Trump and install someone willing to be the face of America's destruction. I think we also all know that Joe Biden didn't really win the election, but we're all going about our lives as though he did. This can't keep up. We can't keep living this way. We seem to be under attack on all sides, even by "our" government. It's getting harder and harder just to find a hint of something to be optimistic or hopeful about. Maybe that's why some people DO talk about what they perceive to Constitutional rights and legal positions that aren't necessarily accurate. They're trying to find some way out of this mess without a second revolution or civil war.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×