- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Response from my Human Resources Department
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:05 pm to Wolfhound45
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:05 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:Wow, and the list continues. I am shocked that they replied with a probable rogue fanatic priests forwards on a blog.
21 BY FR. MATTHEW P. SCHNEIDER, LC
For years, the Church has generally encouraged vaccines while noting issues with certain ones grown on fetal cell lines. She allowed people to give prophetic witness against abortion by not taking such vaccines (I have defended the right to a prophetic stance in this case). Vaccines help both one’s own health and the health of those around you. However, in the discussion of COVID vaccines, some have taken this further. They have rejected every vaccine tested (not grown on) on fetal cell lines like HEK-293. However, if we reject a medication merely for being tested on a fetal cell line, most of a standard pharmacy would be immoral.
These people who argue against vaccines like Pfizer and Moderna which are only tested on fetal cell lines have a pretty straightforward argument. They identify “abortion as an evil which is in a horrendous class all its own, a class that excludes the normal rules of moral reasoning.” The main rule excluded is the rule that remote material cooperation can be licit. They want nothing that could in any way indicate a possible approval of abortion or drawing good from abortion. If that is the standard, that standard should be applied across the board to all drugs.
Below I will list out a sample of drugs tested on HEK-293 like the Moderna and Pfizer vaccines, point out errors in their reasoning, point to two ethical things we should do as Catholics, and conclude with a point on over-thinking remote cooperation in evil.
Medications Tested on HEK-293
Say no to all pills
Say no to almost all pills (2 images: both CC0 pixabay)
To make this investigation manageable, only those tested on HEK-293 will be included as it’s most commonly used fetal cell line; and also it’s the line Pfizer and Moderna used. There are 66,000 published studies using HEK-293 and its derivative cell lines. Other drugs may be tested on Per-6, WI-38, and MRC-5, although these are used less often. If you are going to reject a vaccine for testing on HEK-293, you need to reject all of these by that same logic.
Thanks to Dr. Lisa Gilbert, MD, for pointing me in this direction and sharing her research on the topic. She summarized her findings, “I believe all the Top Twenty medications prescribed in the US are tested on HEK293.” And “Every medication I’ve researched so far appears to have some connection to HEK.” In the end, I found a single over-the-counter drug not tested on HEK-293, which Dr. Gilbert had not previously reviewed.
The List of Medications
Common over the counter medicines tested on HEK-293 cells or derivative cell lines.
Tylenol / Acetaminophen (1, 2)
Advil / Motrin / Ibuprofen (1, 2)
Aspirin / Acetylsalicylic Acid (ASA) (1, 2)
Aleve / Naproxen (1, 2)
Pseudoephedrine / Sudafed / / SudoGest, Suphedrine (1, 2)
Diphenhydramine / Benadryl (it is used so much with HEK293 that it has a page for using it and HEK293 together for further studies on the FDA site, 2)
Loratadine / Claritin (1, 2)
Dextromethorphan / Delsym / Robafen Cough / Robitussin (1, 2)
Guaifenesin / Mucinex (1)
Tums / Calcium Carbonate (1, 2)
Maalox / Aluminum Hydroxide and Magnesium Hydroxide (1)
Docusate / Colace / Ex-Lax Stool Softener (1, 2)
Senna Glycoside / Sennoside / Senna / Ex-Lax / Senokot (1)
Pepto-Bismol / Bismuth Subsalicylate (1)
Phenylephrine / Preparation H / Vazculep / Suphedrine PE (1, 2)
Mepyramine / Pyrilamine (1, 2)
Lidocaine / Lidoderm / Recticare (1, 2)
Common prescription drugs tested on HEK-293 cells or derivative cell lines.
Levothyroxine / Synthroid / Tirosint / Levoxyl (1, 2)
Atorvastatin / Lipitor (1, 2)
Amlodipine / Norvasc (1, 2)
Metoprolol / Toprol XL / Lopressor (1, 2)
Omeprazole / Prilosec OTC / Zegerid OTC / OmePPi (1, 2)
Losartan / Cozaar (1, it is used so much in testing the FDA has a page on using it with HEK293)
Albuterol / Salbutamol / ProAir / Ventolin (1, 2)
Sacubitril / Valsartan / Entresto (2 studies mentioned in FDA application)
Tenapanor / Ibsrela (1 study mentioned in FDA application, 2)
Enbrel / Etanercept (1, 2)
Azithromycin / Zithromax (1, 2)
Hydroxychloroquine / Plaquenil (1, 2)
Remdesivir / Veklury (1, 2)
Dapagliflozin / Farxiga / Ipragliflozin / Suglat / Enavogliflozin / Jardiance (1)
Ivermectin / Stromectol (1, 2)
Canagliflozin / Invokana / Sulisent / Prominad (1 study mentioned in FDA application)
Metformin / Glucophage / Riomet / Glumetza (1, 2)
Cerivastatin / Baycol / Lipobay / Fluvastatin / Lescol / Pitavastatin / Livalo / Pravastatin / Pravachol / Rosuvastatin / Crestor (1)
Simvastatin / FloLipid / Zocor (1)
Oxbryta / Voxelotor (1 study mentioned in FDA application)
Lisinopril / Qbrelis / Zestril / Prinivil (1, 2)
You know better. This response means you are not going to win. Gobbledy goop govt speak for take the vax or else bye bye. I would prepare to make a decision but they may find a way to can you unless you comply. You are on the naughty nasty gram list now.
Some may tell you to fight and call you a patriot. But the writing is on the wall. It is your bread and butter and family's livelihood. Your choice.
Unless someone can give you another avenue of religious exemption. But something tells me Uncle Govt is all ready to refute it all. Which brings us back to square one-they are prepped for any and all refutes-it is futile.
What vax are they accepting proof for? One they give or CVS?
0
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:06 pm to CaptainPanic
quote:
The Religious exemptions are going to be tough to prove. There basically has to be proof in the actual teachings of your religion that it goes against all vaccines.
So you better hope you've never been vaccinated for anything in your life.
i just converted.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:06 pm to Wolfhound45
just remember that you can be truthful the moment you sign,
but change your mind later
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:07 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:They only have to accommodate if a belief is sincerely held. Employees have to do a little more than just say "I believe this I promise!" Especially in this situation.
Interrogating him is not part of that process.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:10 pm to Wolfhound45
Faith is a lifelong task and at any time in your life things change your perspective the more you learn about your religion. Especially if you have had kids and understand how precious life is and how innocent they are.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:10 pm to Wolfhound45
Just respond with
“Yes.”
And be done with it. They can’t prove what medications you take.
“Yes.”
And be done with it. They can’t prove what medications you take.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:11 pm to HailToTheChiz
quote:
I would reply with...
I agree.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:12 pm to Wolfhound45
Wouldn’t be the direct response to their overreaching inquiry granted, but has the use of any of those other listed medications ever been mandated for your continued employment?
By who’s authority are any of these companies portending to judge the sincerity of one’s faith?
If even one person is granted an exemption and can be accommodated by “safely masking”, maintaining distance, etc. then why can’t everyone who requests such an exemption so long as they can be provided the same accommodation(s)?
Again, no input helpful to your question at hand unfortunately but this stuff burns me up.
By who’s authority are any of these companies portending to judge the sincerity of one’s faith?
If even one person is granted an exemption and can be accommodated by “safely masking”, maintaining distance, etc. then why can’t everyone who requests such an exemption so long as they can be provided the same accommodation(s)?
Again, no input helpful to your question at hand unfortunately but this stuff burns me up.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:13 pm to imjustafatkid
quote:
The list of medicines is a lie.
This is also true.
They are including medications that existed long before fetal stem cells were able to be isolated and used in any form of research. Researchers have since tested aspirin using fetal stem cell lines so now it's disqualified?
This study tested oxygen on fetal stem cells. Send that to HR and ask if they are also requiring you to stop breathing to make sure you stay aligned with your religious beliefs?
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:14 pm to CaptainPanic
quote:
They only have to accommodate if a belief is sincerely held. Employees have to do a little more than just say "I believe this I promise!" Especially in this situation.
Not really. He works from home. Getting vaxxed doesn’t mean shite. It never meant shite. It doesn’t mean shite especially in this situation.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:17 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
Do you attest that you also abstain from all of the listed medications from the above paragraph based on your religious beliefs?"
"Based on this, I intend to abstain from all those medications in the future. Thank you for highlighting the evil of man and the lies of Satan and this priest in his argument that the murder of children is worth stopping minor aches and pains."
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:17 pm to CaptainPanic
quote:
There basically has to be proof in the actual teachings of your religion that it goes against all vaccines.
This is false. It does not have to be against official church teaching. Rather, the official church teaching based on Scripture is that whatever is not from faith is sin. Meaning, if your conscience is telling you it would be sin, then in fact it would be sin because of that fact.
This post was edited on 11/24/21 at 2:19 pm
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:18 pm to Wolfhound45
They are pushing this book on their site. Don’t know anything about it other than what it says but here’s your start...
quote:
Benjamin L. Corey’s Best Features About a Christianity That’s Changing When it comes to commentary that inspires inclusion, love and equality, it doesn’t get much better than this! This is a special collection of the best articles from Benjamin L. Corey, one of our most popular voices at Patheos Progressive Christian. These features provide a unique view of the Progressive Christian faith and culture—where it is today and where it’s going tomorrow—and what it means to be a real Christian in a world that’s often rife with hate, xenophobia, bigotry, sexism, homophobia and racism.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:18 pm to Wolfhound45
I would respond with,
"per long-standing ADA and HIPPA laws, which as an HR executive, you are well aware of, my personal medical records are personal and employees are under no obligation to share this information with anyone except my medical professional. Conversely, you're under a legal directive by federal guidance not to inquire.
The government is allowing the question to be raised and answered as to my legal objection. I am under no other obligation to share any additional personal information outside of that question. If you have an explanation, in the form of an enumerated and filed legal federal guidance, rather than a blog post, that defines the extent and limitations of your inquiry as well as the required extent and limitations of a response, please share those with me within the next 24 hours or I shall consider this matter has been fully addressed as required by federal law."
"per long-standing ADA and HIPPA laws, which as an HR executive, you are well aware of, my personal medical records are personal and employees are under no obligation to share this information with anyone except my medical professional. Conversely, you're under a legal directive by federal guidance not to inquire.
The government is allowing the question to be raised and answered as to my legal objection. I am under no other obligation to share any additional personal information outside of that question. If you have an explanation, in the form of an enumerated and filed legal federal guidance, rather than a blog post, that defines the extent and limitations of your inquiry as well as the required extent and limitations of a response, please share those with me within the next 24 hours or I shall consider this matter has been fully addressed as required by federal law."
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:20 pm to Wolfhound45
A friend of mine who works for Insight Global (yes, I’ll disclose the name bc what they are doing is egregious) also got push back for her religious exemption claim. They sent her a letter with the same list of medication and she was supposed to then sign an affidavit stating she will reject all of the listed medicine for future use. She put in her resignation.
My wife is in HR and when she thought they might be bullied by OSHA to implement this BS, she came home saying that she would not be rejecting anyone’s religious or medical exemption bc who was she to determine someone’s religious, philosophical or medical exemption. And why should she care? It’s unbelievable these HR departments deciding who they deem sincere or not.
anyone whose OK with someone losing their livelihood over a jab.
those who voted for this administration. & most of all, Joe Biden!
My wife is in HR and when she thought they might be bullied by OSHA to implement this BS, she came home saying that she would not be rejecting anyone’s religious or medical exemption bc who was she to determine someone’s religious, philosophical or medical exemption. And why should she care? It’s unbelievable these HR departments deciding who they deem sincere or not.
anyone whose OK with someone losing their livelihood over a jab. those who voted for this administration. & most of all, Joe Biden!Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:20 pm to FlexDawg
He’s under no obligation to answer their question, and answering it opens up an entirely new line of inquiry, and gives the company a new opportunity to deny him.
Answering their fishing expedition of a question puts him on the defensive, repeating his demand for an accommodation, forces them to say yes or no.
Answering their fishing expedition of a question puts him on the defensive, repeating his demand for an accommodation, forces them to say yes or no.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:21 pm to the808bass
quote:Well there is a mandate behind it now...so regardless of how you feel about it, there is an obligation to get one unless you pick a hoop to try and jump through.
Getting vaxxed doesn’t mean shite. It never meant shite. It doesn’t mean shite especially in this situation
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:23 pm to DingLeeBerry
Another “blog post” on that site. Some of it below but it rambles on and on. I’d do my best to get whomever pulled that site and gave it to you for reference fired.
Let’s Revisit the Steele Dossier JULY 18, 2021 BY SUSAN WRIGHT 44 COMMENTS The Steele dossier was right.
Let’s Revisit the Steele Dossier JULY 18, 2021 BY SUSAN WRIGHT 44 COMMENTS The Steele dossier was right.
quote:
Over the years, I’ve covered the Russia dossier, compiled and constructed by former British intelligence officer, Christopher Steele, extensively. For those who, either by choice or by effect of burnout from the Trump regime, may have forgotten, the Steele dossier emerged months before the 2016 election. In its pages, Steele warned that there was a preference for then-presidential candidate Donald Trump by the Russian government. Since we know Russia is not our friend, and they do not have our best interests at heart, we should always be leery of any “help” they offer. We should be especially vigilant in regards to those politicians that may fall in favor with Vladimir Putin and his band of thugs.
quote:
At the time, Steele also asserted that Russia had kompromat – damaging information – about candidate Trump, and would likely use that to manipulate him, were he to become president. Fast forward, and as we now know, Trump won. For four years, he alienated our allies, embraced our geopolitical foes, and in general, did everything you would expect of a Russian asset working within our borders. He was Putin’s loyal, mindless dog. Sadly, he proved the pack leader for an entire party of frothing, anti-American curs. These mongrels bent to his will, and in doing so, the will of an ex-KGB agent, in an attempt to break our republic on January 6, 2021. We should have saw it coming. Some of us spent four years under that dark, foreboding cloud. Some of us shouted the warning, without ceasing, only to lose jobs, friends, and hope. We endured the dull witted calls of, “Trump Derangement Syndrome” from the gilded toad’s loyal cult members. Maybe that “TDS” they’re so fond of spewing would more aptly be turned to refer to those who are so devoted to their cult leader, that they’re fine with the collapse of our republic, as long as Putin’s pet is installed as dictator. But I digress… A recent article in The Guardian suggests that newly leaked documents out of Russia give weight to the claims that Christopher Steele so adamantly detailed in his dossier. According to The Guardian: The report – “No 32-04 \ vd” – is classified as secret. It says Trump is the “most promising candidate” from the Kremlin’s point of view. The word in Russian is perspektivny. There is a brief psychological assessment of Trump, who is described as an “impulsive, mentally unstable and unbalanced individual who suffers from an inferiority complex”. There is also apparent confirmation that the Kremlin possesses kompromat, or potentially compromising material, on the future president, collected – the document says – from Trump’s earlier “non-official visits to Russian Federation territory”. The paper refers to “certain events” that happened during Trump’s trips to Moscow. Security council members are invited to find details in appendix five, at paragraph five, the document states. It is unclear what the appendix contains. “It is acutely necessary to use all possible force to facilitate his [Trump’s] election to the post of US president,” the paper says.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:24 pm to Aquila
quote:The employer and they must have a good faith and objective basis for rejecting it.
Who decides
It's harder to reject than a medical exemption, no doubt.
Posted on 11/24/21 at 2:25 pm to Wolfhound45
quote:
I am working on my response. Would appreciate insights and advice from those on this board.
Your response should be: “my medical choices are non of your damn business. Continue with this line of questioning and I’ll sue you for harassment.”
Page 3 of 8
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News