Vaccination required

[Witness1970]

14 hours ago, lovjahupepl said:

I think since everyone's body is different it could affect each person differently. 

 

I do know that one of the friends that recently past after taking shot had cancer in past (but it was in remission).  Their white blood count was found to be at extremely high levels and it seemed to be in the bone marrow area only.  Leukemia was mentioned.  They were fine before taking shot.  The mere fact that this is a new type of vaccine that is experimental (and authorized for emergency use) means who really knows right now if it will simply not be effective or make the person sicker.  Those faced with the decision to or not to subject their family member to shot because of the unknown effects is a difficult one.  It's just not so cut and dry since everyone's experience is different. 

It sounds like the leukemia had started back up.  That may have happened before or after taking the shot.  More data might be required to find out if the leukemia had started back up before the shot.

White blood cells are produced in the bone marrow.  In leukemia, the bone marrow produces a lot of useless white blood cells that fill up the system.  These white blood cells are constantly dividing and crowds out red blood cells and everything else in the blood.  These white blood cells do not fight off diseases as they are supposed to.  They just continually divide.

It does seem as if my son (who is now 40 years old and has been in remission since right after the chemotherapy was started at 2 years old) might have to avoid taking the shot.  He has not taken it yet.

 

My son did not have chronic lymphocytic leukemia, but had acute lymphocytic leukemia.  I think when it is acute, it is easier to treat.  But again, to be on the safe side, I think my son may have to avoid taking the vaccine.

[Witness1970]

The Pfizer and Moderna vaccine both use the same system to show the immune system what the virus looks like.  They replicate the spike protein (whatever that means) and the immune system reacts by building antibodies.  The J&J vaccine is the old style where dead cells are introduced and the immune system learns to recognize it.  Basically they give the immune system a head start at building antibodies.

 

When a person gets infected with the coronavirus, the body does not have this head start.  The immune system starts building antibodies and the virus starts replicating.  It is a race to see if the body builds antibodies faster or the virus replicates faster.  Which one wins sometimes depends on how much of the virus the person inhaled.  It might also depend on how healthy the immune system is to begin with.

 

The truth is all of these vaccines depends on the immune system which Jehovah gave us.  The idea is to trigger the immune response before the person is infected.

 

Going back to the supposed "refusal" of CDC employees to take the vaccine.  It is basically a lie.  Fauci was asked how many CDC employees had taken the vaccine.  His response was basically I'm not sure, it was at least 50% and probably about 60%.  Some of the CDC employees might have gone to a local pharmacy and got the vaccine.  The head of the CDC would not be aware of those vaccinations.  The number that Fauci gave (probably 60%) would match what the general population has been given.  Fauci never mentioned anyone in the CDC that had refused the vaccine.  Anti-vax lobbyist will use any kind of lie to stop people from getting the vaccine.  To say that everyone that has not yet had the vaccine is refusing to take the vaccine is a lie.  Vaccines are ongoing.  Some states have already reached the 70% mark.  Other states, mainly in the southeastern United States, are lower.  Mississippi is about 40% the last I heard.  But vaccines are ongoing.  We might hear next week that CDC employees have reached the 70% threshold or we may hear nothing.  We should not perpetuate this lie that CDC employees are refusing the vaccine without proof.  The fact that some have not gotten it yet does not indicate refusal.

 

 

[Shawnster]

6 hours ago, Beggar for the Spirit said:

Or have any or all of the vaccines already been denied FDA approval?

I think we can rule this option out. This would be big news if it happened and we'd see all kinds of news articles. 

[Qapla]

It is entirely possible that we could be involved in an auto accident that could kill or cripple us for life when we drive to or from work/shopping/meetings or any other activity ...  The NHTSA reports that approximately 52 percent of all accidents occur within a five-mile radius of home and 69 percent of all car accidents occur within a ten-mile radius from home - how many of us refuse to get in a car due to the "possibility"?

 

Yes, the decision to accept a vaccination is a personal one ... we should just make sure either way we decide is not based on hysteria, social finger-pointing, conspiracy theory or political propaganda.

 

As far as who we can hire in our private business - if the criteria was that a person would not hire anyone who smokes or uses drugs (drug free environment) would we be objecting to the employers stand?

[navco]

covid spread at my job for the city everyone got in my office but me everyone at my office was out for 2 weeks one was for three weeks another person in another dept was out for 3 months evrybody is back now my supervisor in a test showed he was exposed to the covid virus ...maybe i was as well but i keep my distance and always wore my mask.My wife is 100 percent against it because of lawsuits of manufactures in the past after making their billions get sued for effects from their medicines years later....im 95 percent against taking it this world is corrupt and the trust really is not there i wear my mask and i cool with that.human guine pigs is how i see it so take it if you must thats your choice i differ.i work for the city in florida at a wastewater plant .

[Tortuga]

On 6/13/2021 at 6:03 PM, Tortuga said:

A federal judge has ruled that an employer can require employees to be vaccinated.

 

https://news.yahoo.com/federal-judge-sides-houston-hospitals-020713664.html

This topic was originally about a federal judge ruling that an employer can require employees to be vaccinated. I think we will see more of that and more disagreement about it. 

[On the huh]

On  a related note, Covid vaccine to be compulsory for England care home staff

Covid vaccine to be compulsory for England care home staff - BBC News

 

Care home workers were offered the vaccine earlier than most people.  I am surprised at how many have not had it yet, especially given how many care home residents have died from covid this past year.  And some would rather lose their job than to take the vaccine.

[Hope]

Regarding @lovjahupepl's comment about returning to door-to-door activity- I think any "are you vaxxed" issues would come more from the public asking us, not the other way round.

 

Of course we will preach to all, I imagine.  But it wouldn't be strange, imo, if people wanted to know the status of who was standing at their door.  Our effectiveness my be hindered..

Edited June 16, 2021 by Hope

[trottigy]

And it's not just vaccinations for COVID. State mandates for various vaccinations have been in place for decades. This is already well established case law. This site has a lot of good information on where and for who various vaccinations have been mandated. I'll include a small snap shot (let's call that "fair-use" eh).

 

https://www.immunize.org/laws/

 

[bystander]

Thank God, I'm retired, so I don't have to deal with this.

[trottigy]

7 hours ago, lovjahupepl said:

I am so glad that Jehovah and Jesus will not be separating people based on if they "are vaccinated" or "not vaccinated" and nor by percentages and numbers that can not possibly be measured because everyone's body is different.   Based on the CDC's own website vaccinated people can still get the virus.  So suppose a business has all vaccinated people they still can have an infection.  My concern would not be the percentages it would be that it's  a possibility.  https://www.cdc.gov/vaccines/covid-19/health-departments/breakthrough-cases.html.  Asymptomatic infections among vaccinated people will also occur.

 

It's so sad to see that satan has finally found something to build a wedge between Jehovah's people.  It makes me think of how lepers must have felt.  They were not responsible for getting sick but they were treated as outcasts.  With a leper it was usually clearly visible that they had a disease by the deformity the disease caused.  However, this virus is invisible therefore no one knows who has it by simply looking at the person.  So the government's solution is to make "unvaccinated people" the modern day "lepers" with no proof they have it and despite the fact "vaccinated people" can still catch and spread said virus. This situation clearly emphasizes what the Bible says that man made governments are not equipped to handle mankind's problems.

 

Many of the rules imposed on lepers were man made.  It's so comforting to know that;

 

....

 

How would Jesus treat those unvaccinated, vaccinated, etc? 

 

WOW! there is a lot here that is not correct. I'm only going to cover a small portion (for time and space sake - and for what MUST be addressed IMO) The Mosaic law is where most of the leprosy "rules" came from - and I feel I have to defend my God here - that's NOT "man-made". (see Lev 13):

 

Quote

43 The priest will examine him, and if the swelling from the infection is reddish-white on the bald spot on top of his head or on his forehead and it looks like leprosy on his skin, 44 he is a leper. He is unclean, and the priest should declare him unclean because of the disease on his head. 45 As for the leper who has the disease, his garments should be torn and his head should be left ungroomed and he should cover over his mustache and call out, ‘Unclean, unclean!’ 46 He will be unclean the whole time that he has the disease. Since he is unclean, he should live in isolation. His dwelling place will be outside the camp.

As to judging people regarding everlasting life - NOTHING in Bob's statement was in reference to that - was it? He was only talking about employment with HIS company, right? As a business owner doesn't he have a right to decide who he hires and who would fulfill the assigned duties the best? Or do you believe the government should dictate who he should hire - perhaps they could mandate sex, race, religion, gender (or lack of..), etc as well? Do we want that? Also shouldn't he make sure his other employees and customers are safe? Isn't that what Christians who value life do?

 

To your last question "how would Jesus treat those?" Um, in the New System - eliminate all sickness? (Is 33:24) I'm not sure Bob can do that, though; so, I'm not sure how that is connected. Although, for now, Jesus is NOT doing that. Instead he has appointed a Faithful Slave and through that channel he is laying out the options and leaving it to each of us to make a personal choice. Along with the choice, they are reminding us that each will have to bear our own load or consequences that may come from those decisions. That's what Jesus is doing. I just see Bob doing the same.

 

 

 

[Tortuga]

8 hours ago, lovjahupepl said:

am so glad that Jehovah and Jesus will not be separating people based on if they "are vaccinated" or "not vaccinated"

You might be interested in looking at this in a different context. LDC is currently being told to only use fully vaccinated volunteers unless it's absolutely necessary to use an unvaccinated volunteer. So in that sense, the vaccinated and unvaccinated are being separated. We look forward to the time that we can all be one happy family again.

[lovjahupepl]

21 minutes ago, trottigy said:

WOW! there is a lot here that is not correct. I'm only going to cover a small portion (for time and space sake - and for what MUST be addressed IMO) The Mosaic law is where most of the leprosy "rules" came from - and I feel I have to defend my God here - that's NOT "man-made". (see Lev 13):

I think you misunderstood me.  I posted a link to the article that says how "Jewish religious leaders" devised rules that went beyond what the Bible stated.  That is essentially man made rules and lepers were treated unfairly. 

 

https://www.jw.org/en/library/magazines/watchtower-no4-2016-july/leprosy-divorce-in-the-bible/

 

The Jewish religious leaders devised rules about leprosy that went beyond what was stated in the Scriptures, making life unnecessarily hard for the victims. For example, rabbinic regulations prohibited anyone from coming within 4 cubits, or about 6 feet (2 m), of a leper. But if a wind was blowing, no one was to come within 100 cubits, or about 150 feet (45 m). Certain Talmudists interpreted the Scriptural requirement that lepers live “outside the camp” to mean that they should be excluded from walled cities. Hence, one rabbi, when he saw a leper within a city, would throw stones at him and say: “Go to your place, and do not defile other people.”

How different was Jesus’ approach! Rather than chasing lepers away, he was willing to touch them?—and even heal them.?—Matthew 8:3.

 

Yes the Bible says they must be quarantined and explained the reasons.  Not being vaccinated doesn't mean someone has a disease and should be treated like they have a disease.  The sad thing is for example all the medical staff that put their lives on the line (before there was a vaccine) trying to help covid patients are now being treated as outcasts if they don't want the vaccine. 

 

 

[lovjahupepl]

17 minutes ago, Tortuga said:

You might be interested in looking at this in a different context. LDC is currently being told to only use fully vaccinated volunteers unless it's absolutely necessary to use an unvaccinated volunteer. So in that sense, the vaccinated and unvaccinated are being separated. We look forward to the time that we can all be one happy family again.

But they didn't say "don't use them at all".  I can see their cautious reasoning but they still didn't rule out using an unvaccinated person.  Sorry to offer a different viewpoint that it's not ok to make people feel they are doing something wrong by their choice of not getting said shot.  It seems only one side's viewpoint is the preferred.  I too would love to see the same thing with regards to unity of God's people.

Edited June 16, 2021 by lovjahupepl

[lovjahupepl]

1 hour ago, trottigy said:

As to judging people regarding everlasting life - NOTHING in Bob's statement was in reference to that - was it? He was only talking about employment with HIS company, right? As a business owner doesn't he have a right to decide who he hires and who would fulfill the assigned duties the best? Or do you believe the government should dictate who he should hire - perhaps they could mandate sex, race, religion, gender (or lack of..), etc as well? Do we want that? Also shouldn't he make sure his other employees and customers are safe? Isn't that what Christians who value life do?

 

To your last question "how would Jesus treat those?" Um, in the New System - eliminate all sickness? (Is 33:24) I'm not sure Bob can do that, though; so, I'm not sure how that is connected. Although, for now, Jesus is NOT doing that. Instead he has appointed a Faithful Slave and through that channel he is laying out the options and leaving it to each of us to make a personal choice. Along with the choice, they are reminding us that each will have to bear our own load or consequences that may come from those decisions. That's what Jesus is doing. I just see Bob doing the same.

 

He has a right to hire whomever he chooses.  He has the right to consider the pro/cons of who he hires.  However, openly calling people morons, being antivaxxers or being on the left or right isn't loving even if those people are not God's people.  I don't agree that people should loose their jobs over  being unvaccinated and since we can't read minds we can't assume everyone has a political agenda if they choose to not take a shot. 

 

No one expects Bob or anyone else to cure anything.  The question about "how would Jesus treat the vaccinated or unvaccinated" wasn't pretaining to curing sickness in the New System it was about being compassionate and being understand today/right now.

Edited June 16, 2021 by lovjahupepl

[zoebarry]

1 hour ago, trottigy said:

And it's not just vaccinations for COVID. State mandates for various vaccinations have been in place for decades. This is already well established case law. This site has a lot of good information on where and for who various vaccinations have been mandated. I'll include a small snap shot (let's call that "fair-use" eh).

 

https://www.immunize.org/laws/

 

Even such “mandates” can be avoided.

 

I live in California, both my children were born here. NEITHER of my children received a Hep B vaccine....I refused it.

 

Neither child was sexually active, nor a needle user, so I felt the vaccine was totally unnecessary.

 

Edited June 16, 2021 by zoebarry

[Tortuga]

We would like to stay on topic. This topic is about companies requiring their employees to be vaccinated. Apparently some individuals have quit their job or have been terminated because they were not vaccinated.

 

I'm sure there will be more developments as more employers decide whether or not their employees are required to be vaccinated.

[Shawnster]

Ohio AG says businesses requiring COVID vaccination is legal, but unsure if it's ethical

 

News 5 brought the issue up to Ohio’s top legal authority: Attorney General Dave Yost.

 

"Private businesses get to do what private businesses want to do," he explained. "If they don’t want to do business with you, the marketplace will react to that."

 

Whether or not he believes private businesses should mandate vaccinations, is a different answer.

 

"I think there’s an ethical problem when you take something cleared only for emergency use and require someone to do it,"he said. "I’m not sure about the ethics, but that doesn’t make it illegal."

[AH173]

3 hours ago, Tortuga said:

LDC is currently being told to only use fully vaccinated volunteers

I guess I should update my profile. Thanks 

[carlos]

If I were to hire someone to do a job inside my home, I would require that they are vaccinated. I don't want a person in my home who can infect me with the virus, the same as I wouldn't want a person in my home who doesn't wear a mask. I don't care about their reasons, I have to protect my family. Once all my family are fully vaccinated I wouldn't mind anymore. So I understand Bob perfectly. He can lose jobs if his workers are not vaccinated.

 

Taking a vaccine is a personal decision. But as with all decisions, it will have some consequences. When we evaluate our options, the possibility that no one will want to hire an unvaccinated person is another factor that must be included in the equation.

[rocket]

I was young, preteen, in the late 50's and early 60's when polio vaccine was being given out.  I don't remember anyone refusing the vaccine but news didn't travel as fast then.  I don't think very many teachers, doctors or nurses  would have refused or even thought of putting others at risk by refusing.  Today it is all about "ME" not "OTHERS" so it is definitely a different world.  Sad that so many get caught up in fake news and conspiracy theories.  Not to say that there is no danger with vaccines but it is proven to be beneficial to most people, risk vrs benefit.

[Fallbrookian]

35 minutes ago, rocket said:

I was young, preteen, in the late 50's and early 60's when polio vaccine was being given out.  I don't remember anyone refusing the vaccine but news didn't travel as fast then.  I don't think very many teachers, doctors or nurses  would have refused or even thought of putting others at risk by refusing.  Today it is all about "ME" not "OTHERS" so it is definitely a different world.  Sad that so many get caught up in fake news and conspiracy theories.  Not to say that there is no danger with vaccines but it is proven to be beneficial to most people, risk vrs benefit.

My mother refused to give the polio vaccine to me and my sister when we were young children back in the late ‘50’s early 60’s, thankfully! Looking forward to seeing her in the resurrection and thanking her mostly for teaching me the truth but for never vaccinating me also. She would have read the “Golden Age” where the brothers at that time were strongly against vaccinations. I do realize the brothers changed their stance in the early 50’s and said vaccines were a personal choice. She was also very health minded and lived to be 99. What a great day that will be when Jehovah brings her back to life!

[Shawnster]

28 minutes ago, Nancy M said:

She would have read the “Golden Age” where the brothers at that time were strongly against vaccinations.

I would l to read those articles if anyone knows how or where

[bagwell1987]

This is one I'm familiar with, here is a very good bit of information. 

https://medicine.yale.edu/news/yale-medicine-magazine/breaking-the-back-of-polio/

 

Then there was a problem and you can see why here

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1383764/

 

I can understand the concern. It was a bad time.

[Ms. Piffle]

15 hours ago, lovjahupepl said:

It's so sad to see that satan has finally found something to build a wedge between Jehovah's people. 

 

People have real reasons why they can't or won't take said shot.  It's not their fault that this situation happened and they are only trying to navigate and make the right choice for their family.  We definitely shouldn't be lumping Jehovah's people with the world that have agendas and push certain theories.  I would like to believe that anyone of the friends choosing not to take said shot would take the precautions needed to keep themselves and others safe.  Those in the world would be my concern because their decisions are not in line with Jehovah's thinking and don't have the same appreciation for life. 

 

I'm so thankful that the GB announced that we "as Jehovah's people" are not antivaxxers and in cooperation with the government many have chosen to be vaccinated but also added that it's a personal choice and we should be loving and respectful of each other.   They didn't take sides.  They said "many" not "almost all of" have chosen to take said shot.  So there's no way to know how many did or didn't take said shot.  We don't have all the facts why someone makes the decision they do.

 

However the CDC clearly says on their website that asymptomatic infections among vaccinated people will also occur.  Therefore both vaccinated and unvaccinated people can get and spread said virus.  

 

Having the shot is not a guarantee you are safe. 

I really appreciated these comments.  Sadly, it does seem like Satan is using this to drive a wedge between Jehovah's people. 

 

I do feel that most of Jehovah's people are trying to make the right decision for their personal/family situation. One that is NOT  based on politics, or conspiracies, etc, but decisions based on Jehovah's principles, for love of family, neighbor, etc.  Yes, I have heard about some postings on different brothers' or sisters' sites where clearly that is not the case.  But I feel those are few in comparison.  Thankfully, most of Jehovah's people have not adopted the world's thinking, so should they decide not to get vaccinated at this time, because they love their brothers and sisters, and dearly love Jehovah, they WILL continue to take extra precautions for themselves as well as for others. 

 

The GB did indeed state many, not most have chosen to get vaccinated.  And they lovingly reminded us to respect the decision of our brothers and sisters.  Not trying to make them feel like they are not as worthy, or not as spiritual minded if they make decisions different from ours.  We are a diverse group of people.  So it only seems natural that in this too, we will see different choices made.