adplus-dvertising
Connect with us

Politics

Perspective | Religious opposition to vaccines is rooted in politics, not tradition – The Washington Post

Published

 on


On Thursday, the Supreme Court blocked the Biden administration’s coronavirus vaccine mandate for the nation’s largest employers but allowed the policy to stand for health-care workers at facilities that receive Medicare and Medicaid funding. As a result, only 17 million — rather than 84 million — workers will be required to get vaccinated against the coronavirus.

The court questioned President Biden’s legal authority to impose a mandate, placing decisions in the hands of businesses, individuals and state governments rather than the federal government. But the court notably avoided adjudicating the claim that vaccine mandates violate religious liberty — an assertion passionately deployed by religious opponents of vaccines.

Religious exemptions to vaccinations, however, have generally lacked a coherent basis, and those seeking them for coronavirus vaccination face an uphill battle. Religious beliefs have not historically been used as a justification to avoid vaccination, and the recent emergence of religious-based exemptions — animated by partisan politics, fear and debunked scientific studies — is an anomaly. This is not surprising, given that getting vaccinated (to protect yourself and others, especially the most vulnerable) fits neatly into the moral logic of the world’s major religions. This is one reason Pope Francis has called getting vaccinated against the coronavirus an “act of love.”

Mandated public health measures date to the beginning of American history. During the Revolutionary War, Gen. George Washington required his troops to be inoculated against smallpox, a process that involved exposing people to the smallpox virus itself. The goal was to produce a mild infection to build immunity, but it carried a non-trivial risk of serious illness or death. Where people objected to inoculation, their concerns were rooted in the potential physical risks.

The first official vaccine mandate in the United States was an 1809 Massachusetts law that granted local health officials the authority to require vaccination against smallpox. Vaccination was safer than inoculation — it consisted of cowpox, a related but less dangerous virus that conferred cross-immunity for smallpox — but it was not without risk, either, and again this inspired some wariness toward it.

Early vaccine hesitancy was thus largely animated by fear of immunization itself. Opposition centered on the claim that the state was forcing individuals to undertake a treatment that was potentially dangerous or, at least, ineffective. And though there were early and small pockets of religious hostility to vaccines, the concept of a “religious exemption” effectively did not exist, and it wouldn’t for some time.

Religious support for vaccinations began to build in the 20th century. After Jonas Salk developed a polio vaccine in 1955, many religious believers viewed vaccinations as a gift from God. John Fea, a historian at Messiah University, recently marveled over how newspapers from the 1950s and 1960s chronicled religious leaders of all faiths and denominations, “including evangelical Christians,” talking about the polio vaccine “as a special gift” from God to fight disease.

And this made sense. Before the development of the vaccine, polio ravaged the United States, killing 3,000 children and paralyzing thousands more in 1952 alone. If you were a parent living in the 1950s who viewed the world through a religious prism, it was hard to interpret Salk’s medical innovation in any other way.

But by the 1990s, widespread vaccine hesitancy grounded in religious reasons emerged, growing out of popular anti-vaccine movements that were not religious in nature. Spearheaded by disgraced former physician Andrew Wakefield and endorsed by B-list celebrities such as Jenny McCarthy, these movements emphasized the supposed “impurity” of vaccines and the imagined (and sometimes fabricated) risks they posed to children.

The message resonated with some religious communities. Among these groups, vaccine ingredients were objects of particular scrutiny, and anything “unnatural” was seen as a threat to the sacredness of the human body: If your “body is a temple,” everything that enters it needs to be aboveboard.

In the face of this worrying trend, religious authorities of various faiths continue to encourage vaccination, but evidently to limited effect. Today, as we struggle through the worst pandemic in a hundred years, the reality we face is as grim as ever. The people who are vaccine-hesitant no longer constitute a small minority, and more and more are claiming religious exemptions.

As soon as coronavirus vaccine mandates were announced this past summer, affected people petitioned their employers for religious exemptions in droves. A recent survey suggests that as many as 3 in 10 unvaccinated Americans have sought a religious exemption from the coronavirus vaccines. White evangelicals have proved particularly resistant. A Pew Research Center survey from September indicated that up to 40 percent had declined the shot, the highest of any religious group surveyed.

White evangelicals also exemplify the growing politicization of religious identity. They are among the most steadfast supporters of the Republican Party, and around 80 percent voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 and 2020 presidential elections. This makes it difficult to discern whether individuals are seeking a coronavirus vaccine exemption for a “sincerely held” religious or philosophical belief or oppose vaccination for political or ideological reasons. There is already emerging evidence that flu vaccine uptake has become a partisan issue, indicating that the blending of religious and political beliefs could create serious public health problems in the future.

The trend may be reversible if religious conservatives begin to dissociate their views on vaccines from their political identity. If they look to the moral reasoning and sources of authority within their traditions, they will hear a message on vaccines that differs considerably from those on offer by many Republican leaders. Building on a long history of religious support for vaccination, the message might go something like this: “For the love of God, don’t seek religious exemptions from vaccines.”

Adblock test (Why?)

728x90x4

Source link

Politics

Polls close for byelections in Montreal and Winnipeg

Published

 on

 

The NDP has a slight early lead in Winnipeg while remaining in a three-way race with the Liberals and the Bloc Québécois in Montreal as ballots continue to be counted in two crucial federal byelections.

Laura Palestini, the Liberal candidate in the party’s Montreal stronghold of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun, gave a speech thanking her volunteers just a little over an hour after the polls closed and early results showed her trailing in third spot.

The NDP are so far also holding on to their own seat in the Winnipeg riding of Elmwood — Transcona. The first 7,210 ballots reported by Elections Canada show 48.1per cent of votes have gone to the NDP and 43.8 per cent to the Conservatives, with the vast majority of votes yet to be counted.

While byelections aren’t usually credited with much significance on Parliament Hill, the votes in Winnipeg and Montreal are being treated as bellwethers of the political shifts happening in Canada.

The Elmwood — Transcona seat has been vacant since the NDP’s Daniel Blaikie left federal politics.

The New Democrats are hoping to hold onto the riding and polls suggest the Conservatives are in the running.

LaSalle—Émard—Verdun opened up when former justice minister David Lametti left politics.

Polls suggested the race was tight between the Liberal candidate and the Bloc Québécois, but the NDP were hopeful it could win.

Palestini thanked her volunteers as the results rolled in Monday night.

“Thanks to your efforts, our message resonated,” she said in French at a Liberal gathering in Dilallo Burger, a Ville-Émard institution dating back to 1929.

“Perhaps tomorrow morning, early, we will hear what the people of LaSalle—Émard—Verdun want as their member of parliament.”

She departed shortly after.

Meanwhile at the NDP headquarters, cries of joy erupted as the first poll results were showed.

Montrealer Graham Juneau said that despite all the campaigning, he and many of his friends are “relatively disengaged.”

He opted to vote for no one, to make a point about “a lack of confidence in the political establishment in Canada.”

“At least amongst my peers, there hasn’t been a groundswell of enthusiasm for any of the particular parties,” he said.

Liberal ministers have visited the area several times as the party worked hard to keep the riding it has held for decades.

Ahead of the results, Liam Olsen, a volunteer with the Young Liberals of Canada, said he was feeling optimistic.

He had travelled to Montreal from Ottawa to knock on doors on byelection day.

“It’s going to be a close one,” he said.

“Unpredictable things can happen. But definitely good vibes at the doors today.”

Outside the headquarters of the Bloc Québécois in Verdun, volunteer Sarah Plante, 21, said she was feeling similarly confident.

A Bloc victory in Montreal would prove that the Bloc has a place in Montreal and would send a “strong message” to the federal government that the party represents the interests of all Quebecers, she said.

The stakes are particularly high for Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, who faced calls for his resignation last June when the Conservatives took over a Liberal stronghold seat in a Toronto byelection.

The loss sent shock waves through the governing party, as the Liberals were faced with the stark reality of their plummeting poll numbers.

C.B. Singh, an 85-year-old Montrealer who has been volunteering for the Liberals since Pierre Elliott Trudeau was prime minister, said he still supports Justin Trudeau.

“I know his father, so I’m for him,” he said. “He is still popular among the immigrants.”

Some strategists have suggested that Jagmeet Singh’s leadership could come under similar scrutiny if the NDP fails to hold onto the Winnipeg seat.

As early results rolled in there were cheers from supporters in the NDP camp in Winnipeg.

Singh took a political gamble on signing a pact with Trudeau in 2022 to prevent an early election in exchange for progress on NDP priorities.

While that deal has yielded a national dental care program, legislation to ban replacement workers and a bill that would underpin a future pharmacare program, the results haven’t translated to gains in the polls.

Singh pulled out of that deal just weeks ago in a bid to distance his party from the Liberals and try to make the next election a two-way race between himself and Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre.

The Conservatives have made an aggressive play for the riding by appealing to traditional NDP voters on issues related to labour and affordability.

“Jagmeet Singh and Justin Trudeau are the same person,” Poilievre said in a social media video posted Sunday ahead of Monday’s vote.

A vote for the Conservative candidate in Elmwood — Transcona is a vote to “fire Justin Trudeau and axe the tax,” he said.

Elections Canada warned on social media Monday evening that the results in the Montreal riding could take longer than usual to be counted because of the record number of candidates.

There are 91 names on the ballot, making it the longest list in the history of federal elections. Most are affiliated with a group protesting Canada’s first-past-the-post voting system.

“Results will be available tonight or early tomorrow. Thank you for your patience,” Elections Canada said on X Monday.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Tensions, rhetoric abound as MPs return to House of Commons, spar over carbon price

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Liberal House leader Karina Gould lambasted Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre as a “fraudster” Monday morning after he said the federal carbon price is going to cause a “nuclear winter.”

Gould was speaking just before the House of Commons is set to reopen following the summer break. Monday is the first sitting since the end of an agreement that had the NDP insulate the Liberals from the possibility of a snap election, one the Conservatives are eager to trigger.

With the prospect of a confidence vote that could send Canadians to the polls, Bloc Québécois Leader Yves-François Blanchet cast doubt on how long MPs will be sitting in the House of Commons.

“We are playing chicken with four cars. Eventually, one will eat another one, and there will be a wreckage. So, I’m not certain that this session will last a very long time,” Blanchet told reporters on Monday.

On Sunday Poilievre said increasing the carbon price will cause a “nuclear winter,” painting a dystopian picture of people starving and freezing because they can’t afford food or heat due the carbon price.

He said the Liberals’ obsession with carbon pricing is “an existential threat to our economy and our way of life.”

The carbon price currently adds about 17.6 cents to every litre of gasoline, but that cost is offset by carbon rebates mailed to Canadians every three months.

The Parliamentary Budget Office provided analysis that showed eight in 10 households receive more from the rebates than they pay in carbon pricing, though the office also warned that long-term economic effects could harm jobs and wage growth.

Gould accused Poilievre of ignoring the rebates, and refusing to tell Canadians how he would make life more affordable while battling climate change.

“What I heard yesterday from Mr. Poilievre was so over the top, so irresponsible, so immature, and something that only a fraudster would do,” Gould said from Parliament Hill.

The Liberals have also accused the Conservatives of dismissing the expertise of more than 200 economists who wrote a letter earlier this year describing the carbon price as the least expensive, most efficient way to lower emissions.

Poilievre is pushing for the other opposition parties to vote the government down and trigger what he calls a “carbon tax election.”

Despite previously supporting the consumer carbon price, NDP Leader Jagmeet Singh has been distancing himself from the policy.

Singh wouldn’t say last week whether an NDP government would keep the consumer carbon price. On Monday, he told reporters Canadians were already “doing their part” to fight climate change, but that big polluters are getting a “free ride.”

He said the New Democrats will focus this fall on affordability issues like housing and grocery costs, arguing the Liberals and Conservatives are beholden to big business.

“Their governments have been in it for CEOs and big corporations,” he told reporters Monday on Parliament Hill.

Poilievre intends to bring a non-confidence motion against the government as early as this week but would likely need both the Bloc and NDP to support it. Neither have indicated an appetite for triggering an election.

Gould said she has no “crystal ball” over when or how often Poilievre might try to bring down the government.

“I know that the end of the supply and confidence agreement makes things a bit different, but really all it does is returns us to a normal minority parliament,” she said.

“That means that we will work case-by-case, legislation-by-legislation with whichever party wants to work with us,” she said, adding she’s already been in touch with colleagues in other parties to “make Parliament work for Canadians.”

The Liberals said at their caucus retreat last week that they would be sharpening their attacks on Poilievre this fall, seeking to reverse his months-long rise in the polls.

Freeland suggested she had no qualms with criticizing Poilievre’s rhetoric while having a colleague call him a fraudster.

She said Monday that the Liberals must “be really clear with Canadians about what the Conservative Party is saying, about what it is standing for — and about the veracity, or not, of the statements of the Conservative leader.”

Meanwhile, Gould insisted the government has listened to the concerns raised by Canadians, and received the message when the Liberals were defeated in a Toronto byelection in June, losing a seat the party had held since 1997.

“We certainly got the message from Toronto-St. Paul’s and have spent the summer reflecting on what that means and are coming back to Parliament, I think, very clearly focused on ensuring that Canadians are at the centre of everything that we do moving forward,” she said.

The Liberals are bracing, however, for the possibility of another blow Monday night, in a tight race to hold a Montreal seat in a byelection there. Voters in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun are casting ballots today to replace former justice minister David Lametti, who was removed from cabinet in 2023 and resigned as an MP in January.

The Conservatives and NDP are also in a tight race in Elmwood-Transcona, a Winnipeg seat that has mostly been held by the NDP over the last several decades.

There are several key bills making their way through the legislative process, including the online harms act and the NDP-endorsed pharmacare bill, which is currently in the Senate.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

Source link

Continue Reading

Politics

Gould calls Poilievre a ‘fraudster’ over his carbon price warning

Published

 on

 

OTTAWA – Liberal House leader Karina Gould lambasted Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre as a “fraudster” this morning after he said the federal carbon price is going to cause a “nuclear winter.”

Gould was speaking just before the House of Commons is set to reopen following the summer break.

“What I heard yesterday from Mr. Poilievre was so over the top, so irresponsible, so immature, and something that only a fraudster would do,” she said from Parliament Hill.

On Sunday Poilievre said increasing the carbon price will cause a “nuclear winter,” painting a dystopian picture of people starving and freezing because they can’t afford food or heat due the carbon price.

He said the Liberals’ obsession with carbon pricing is “an existential threat to our economy and our way of life.”

The carbon price currently adds about 17.6 cents to every litre of gasoline, but that cost is offset by carbon rebates mailed to Canadians every three months. The Parliamentary Budget Office provided analysis that showed eight in 10 households receive more from the rebates than they pay in carbon pricing, though the office also warned that long-term economic effects could harm jobs and wage growth.

Gould accused Poilievre of ignoring the rebates, and refusing to tell Canadians how he would make life more affordable while battling climate change. The Liberals have also accused the Conservatives of dismissing the expertise of more than 200 economists who wrote a letter earlier this year describing the carbon price as the least expensive, most efficient way to lower emissions.

Poilievre is pushing for the other opposition parties to vote the government down and trigger what he calls a “carbon tax election.”

The recent decision by the NDP to break its political pact with the government makes an early election more likely, but there does not seem to be an interest from either the Bloc Québécois or the NDP to have it happen immediately.

Poilievre intends to bring a non-confidence motion against the government as early as this week but would likely need both the Bloc and NDP to support it.

Gould said she has no “crystal ball” over when or how often Poilievre might try to bring down the government

“I know that the end of the supply and confidence agreement makes things a bit different, but really all it does is returns us to a normal minority parliament,” she said. “And that means that we will work case-by-case, legislation-by-legislation with whichever party wants to work with us. I have already been in touch with all of the House leaders in the opposition parties and my job now is to make Parliament work for Canadians.”

She also insisted the government has listened to the concerns raised by Canadians, and received the message when the Liberals lost a Toronto byelection in June in seat the party had held since 1997.

“We certainly got the message from Toronto-St. Paul’s and have spent the summer reflecting on what that means and are coming back to Parliament, I think, very clearly focused on ensuring that Canadians are at the centre of everything that we do moving forward,” she said.

The Liberals are bracing, however, for the possibility of another blow Monday night, in a tight race to hold a Montreal seat in a byelection there. Voters in LaSalle—Émard—Verdun are casting ballots today to replace former justice minister David Lametti, who was removed from cabinet in 2023 and resigned as an MP in January.

The Conservatives and NDP are also in a tight race in Elmwood-Transcona, a Winnipeg seat that has mostly been held by the NDP over the last several decades.

There are several key bills making their way through the legislative process, including the online harms act and the NDP-endorsed pharmacare bill, which is currently in the Senate.

This report by The Canadian Press was first published Sept. 16, 2024.

The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

Source link

Continue Reading

Trending