Note: Since this episode was recorded on Sunday, August 22nd, the Food and Drug Administration has approved the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 Vaccine. Due to the case Klaassen v. Trustees of Indiana University (which I explain in the episode), this approval does not significantly change the current legal standards or the analysis set out in this episode.

Over the last week, I have received a number (i.e., a deluge) of calls and emails about government, employer and university vaccine mandates and the nuts and bolts of religious exemptions from those mandates. Many committed Christians are wrestling through this issue, and many church leaders are doing their best to navigate this issue and provide spiritual/ethical guidance to their members and attendees. In response to these developments, we put together a comprehensive episode explaining (1) the key ethical and legal issues surrounding vaccine mandates and religious exemptions and (2) setting out some practical ideas for navigating these developments.

Key topics covered in this episode:

1. The Biblical/moral arguments concerning the COVID-19 vaccine.
2. The general legal standards (and recent cases) concerning vaccine mandates and religious exemptions.
3. Practical thoughts on (1) whether or not Christians should object to the mandate and (2) how church leaders should navigate this issue and especially requests for support letters.

Key Resources/Cases

• Nebraska Medical article on fetal cell lines used in the creation or testing of the COVID-19 vaccines: You asked, we answered: Do the COVID-19 vaccines contain aborted fetal cells? (Mar. 2, 2021).
• Resource listing other common vaccines that contain these cell lines: Children’s Hosp. of Phila., Vaccine Ingredients—Fetal Cells (Last visited Aug. 11, 2021).
• Joe Carter, The FAQs: Are Fetal Cells Being Used in COVID-19 Vaccines and Treatments?, The Gospel Coalition (Nov. 18, 2020). Note: In the article, I stated that Carter analogized taking a vaccine that includes aborted fetal cell lines to receiving an organ donation from a murder victim that is an organ donor. This statement was an oversimplification. Here is the full paragraph from Carter’s article: “To determine the morality of using the cells, it is helpful to compare it to another situation: the use of organs from a person who has been murdered. If a doctor were to offer to transplant a kidney or heart from the murder victim into a Christian, we would likely not have any objection. The primary concern would be whether the victim consented to organ donation prior to their death.”
• As explained in the episode, the fact that an individual only recently developed a religious belief does not render it insincere. EEOC v. Ilona of Hungary, Inc. 108 F.3d 1569, 1575 (7th Cir. 1997).
• A key U.S. Supreme Court case relevant to vaccine mandates: Jacobson v. Massachusetts, 197 U.S. 11 (1905).
• EEOC guidance on COVID-19 related issues, including religious accommodations.
• Information from the FDA on Emergency Use Authorizations.
• A copy of an Order denying a Motion for Preliminary Injunction in Klaassen v. Trustees of Indiana University, the most comprehensive review (to date) of vaccine mandates and religious exemptions. The Court has, thus far, upheld the general vaccine mandate and the religious exemptions offered by the university.
• A news article explaining Magliulo v. Edward Via College of Osteopathic Medicine, which sided with students against the college’s overly burdensome requirements for students seeking and exercising religious exemptions.
• Alliance Defending Freedom recently produced the attached sample requests for an exemption from an employee, sample request from a student, and a sample support letter from a pastor.