VivaBarnesLaw
Politics • Culture • News
This is the VivaBarnesLaw Community.
Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
Employer Letter Example: Vaccine Mandate Objection

No authorship claim or copyright asserted...A letter that also came to me via a route like a letter in a bottle.

Dear Boss,
First, I request a religious exemption. "Each of the manufactures of the Covid vaccines currently available developed and confirmed their vaccines using fetal cell lines, which originated from aborted fetuses. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) For example, each of the currently available Covid vaccines confirmed their vaccine by protein testing using the abortion-derived cell line HEK-293. ( https://lozierinstitute.org/an-ethics-assessment-of-covid-19-vaccine-programs/ ) Partaking in a vaccine made from aborted fetuses makes me complicit in an action that offends my religious faith. As such, I cannot, in good conscience and in accord with my religious faith, take any such Covid vaccine at this time. In addition, any coerced medical treatment goes against my religious faith and the right of conscience to control one’s own medical treatment, free of coercion or force. As fellow governments recognize: "Religion includes all aspects of religious observance and practice, as well as belief. Religious beliefs are not only those beliefs held by traditional, organized religions, but also include moral or ethical beliefs as to what is right or wrong which are sincerely held with the strength of traditional religious views." (https://www.tn.gov/content/dam/tn/hr/documents/Religion_Accommodation_Guidelines.pdf) Please provide a reasonable accommodation to my belief, as I wish to continue to be a good employee, helpful to the team.

Equally, compelling any employee to take any current Covid-19 vaccine violates federal and state law, and subjects the employer to substantial liability risk, including liability for any injury the employee may suffer from the vaccine. Many employers have reconsidered issuing such a mandate after more fruitful review with legal counsel, insurance providers, and public opinion advisors of the desires of employees and the consuming public. Even the Kaiser Foundation warned of the legal risk in this respect. (https://www.kff.org/coronavirus-covid-19/issue-brief/key-questions-about-covid-19-vaccine-mandates/)
Three key concerns: first, informed consent is the guiding light of all medicine, in accord with the Nuremberg Code of 1947; second, the Americans with Disabilities Act proscribes, punishes and penalizes employers who invasively inquire into their employees' medical status and then treat those employees differently based on their perceived medical status, as the many AIDS related cases of decades ago fully attest; and third, international law, Constitutional law, specific statutes and the common law of torts all forbid conditioning access to employment, education or public accommodations upon coerced, invasive medical examinations and treatment, unless the employer can fully provide objective, scientifically validated evidence of the threat from the employee and how no practicable alternative could possible suffice to mitigate such supposed public health threat and still perform the necessary essentials of employment. As one federal court just recently held, the availability of reasonable accommodations like accounting for prior infection, antibody testing, temperature checks, remote work, other forms of testing, and the like suffice to meet any institution’s needs in lieu of masks, public shaming, and forced injections of foreign substances into the body that the FDA admits we do not know the long -term effects of.
For instance, the symptomatic can be self-isolated. Hence, requiring vaccinations only addresses one risk: dangerous or deadly transmission, by the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic employee, in the employment setting. Yet even government official Mr. Fauci admits, as scientific studies affirm, asymptomatic transmission is exceedingly and "very rare." Indeed, initial data suggests the vaccinated are just as, or even much more, likely to transmit the virus as the asymptomatic or pre-symptomatic. Hence, the vaccine solves nothing. This evidentiary limitation on any employer's decision making, aside from the legal and insurance risks of forcing vaccinations as a term of employment without any accommodation or even exception for the previously infected (and thus better protected), is the reason most employers wisely refuse to mandate the vaccine. This doesn't even address the arbitrary self-limitation of the pool of talent for the employer: why reduce your own talent pool, when many who refuse invasive inquiries or risky treatment may be amongst your most effective, efficient and profitable employees?
This right to refuse forced injections, such as the Covid-19 vaccine, implements the internationally agreed legal requirement of Informed Consent established in the Nuremberg Code of 1947. (http://www.cirp.org/library/ethics/nuremberg/ ). As the Nuremberg Code established, every person must "be able to exercise free power of choice, without the intervention of any element of force, fraud, deceit, duress, overreaching, or other ulterior form of constraint or coercion; and should have sufficient knowledge and comprehension of the elements of the subject matter involved as to enable him to make an understanding and enlightened decision" for any medical experimental drug, as the Covid-19 vaccine currently is.

Second, demanding employees divulge their personal medical information invades their protected right to privacy, and discriminates against them based on their perceived medical status, in contravention of the Americans with Disabilities Act. (42 USC §12112(a).) Indeed, the ADA prohibits employers from invasive inquiries about their medical status, and that includes questions about diseases and treatments for those diseases, such as vaccines. As the EEOC makes clear, an employer can only ask medical information if the employer can prove the medical information is both job-related and necessary for the business. (https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/questions-and-answers-enforcement-guidance-disability-related-inquiries-and-medical). An employer that treats an individual employee differently based on that employer’s belief the employee’s medical condition impairs the employee is discriminating against that employee based on perceived medical status disability, in contravention of the ADA. The employer must have proof that the employer cannot keep the employee, even with reasonable accommodations, before any adverse action can be taken against the employee. If the employer asserts the employee’s medical status (such as being unvaccinated against a particular disease) precludes employment, then the employer must prove that the employee poses a “safety hazard” that cannot be reduced with a reasonable accommodation. The employer must prove, with objective, scientifically validated evidence, that the employee poses a materially enhanced risk of serious harm that no reasonable accommodation could mitigate. This requires the employee's medical status cause a substantial risk of serious harm, a risk that cannot be reduced by any another means. This is a high, and difficult burden, for employers to meet. Just look at the all prior cases concerning HIV and AIDS, when employers discriminated against employees based on their perceived dangerousness, and ended up paying millions in legal fees, damages and fines.

Third, conditioning continued employment upon participating in a medical experiment and demanding disclosure of private, personal medical information, may also create employer liability under other federal and state laws, including HIPAA, FMLA, and applicable state tort law principles, including torts prohibiting and proscribing invasions of privacy and battery. Indeed, any employer mandating a vaccine is liable to their employee for any adverse event suffered by that employee. The CDC records reports of the adverse events already reported to date concerning the current Covid-19 vaccine.(https://www.cdc.gov/coronavirus/2019-ncov/vaccines/safety/vaers.html )

Finally, forced vaccines constitute a form of battery, and the Supreme Court long made clear "no right is more sacred than the right of every individual to the control of their own person, free from all restraint or interference of others." (https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/141/250)

With Regards,

Employee of the Year,
Thomas Paine"

Interested? Want to learn more about the community?
What else you may like…
Videos
Podcasts
Posts
Articles
Bowling league night!

Going to try to forget about the back-to-back gutter balls from the last game of last week!

00:00:10
Jack Smith BUSTED!

Like Alex Jones says, they keep using the same move over and over again.

00:10:46
October 05, 2025
Ostrich Farm Update

It's not good news. It's actually criminal animal abuse in my opinion .

00:11:59
February 17, 2024
Appearance on Richard Syrette

I did a quick hit on Richard Syrette yesterday. Gotta keep Canadians apprised of the U.S. madness.

Appearance on Richard Syrette
The Barnes Brief, Podcast Format: Monday, July 17, 2023

Closing Argument: Birthright citizenship is deeply American, and wholly Constitutional.

The Barnes Brief, Podcast Format: Monday, July 17, 2023
Declaration of Independence

Audio podcast style.

Declaration of Independence
Questions for Bourbon with Barnes: Tuesday, October 7, 2025

Ask in replies and answering Live at 9ish eastern tonight.

Board Poll: Sunday Topics

Pick your favorite, if any, and add your own topic, comment or question in the replies below as the Show Notes for the Sunday Show.

Tamara Lich and Chris Barber sentenced

For those of you who were not following, Tamara and Chris were still called organizers of the Ottawa trucker protest. They were arrested and tried for mischief charges, among other bogus charges.

They were convicted.

Today they were sentenced.

Ezra Levant lays out the details in the screengrab, but bottom line: 12 months house arrest, and other conditions.

My thoughts:

The understandable reaction is going to be “well, the crown was asking for much more, so this is actually a victory”.

Bullshit.

Having to tolerate injustice and rationalize it as being acceptable because it’s less of an injustice than what could’ve been is bullshit.

It’s the boiling frog analogy.

You tolerate injustice, you rationalize injustice, you will get more injustice.

The sentence is absolute judicial horseshit.

“it could’ve been worse” will pretty much always be true.

Call it out for what it is.

This sentence is an absolute outrageous injustice.

The sentence should have been time served, with an apology from the ...

post photo preview
post photo preview
The Barnes Brief: Weekend Edition, Friday, October 3, 2025

I.   INTRODUCTION

A. Art of the Day

Conversations in the café, the coffee house, or the local diner. A great way to spend any afternoon, often engaged in dialogue, discussion or debate over any range of subjects, as the course of the conversation only constricted by the imagination and intelligence of its conversant compatriots, a deeply human exploration and expression of understanding the world as is and as it can be.

B. Wisdom of the Day

“We need to trim the fat between their brains as much as around their waistline.” Colonel Macgregor on needed military reforms.

C. Cultural Recommendation

The Sandbaggers. Uncloaking the nature of cover operations. Recommended by a board member. https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0077078/

D. Appearances

 

 *Note: A reminder — links are NOT endorsements of the ideas contained therein. The Library is big, and it mostly consists of ideas I do not personally share.  

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
The Barnes Brief: Wednesday, October 1, 2025

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Art of the Day 

Venezia. The city of seduction and romance, of masked balls and cinematic backdrops, where quiet back-alley restaurants and boutique shops await for you to uncover and discover, as the magic of this modern-day Atlantis invites at every turn. Arrive at the airport to an awaiting long wooden boat across the water to the city dancing with the sea, and dance amidst the history and beauty of ancient Cathedrals, in handmade shoes from the world’s greatest shoemakers. My favorite city to visit.  

B. Wisdom of the Day

“War does not determine who is right – only who is left.” Bertrand Russell.

C. Cultural Recommendation

Bitter Fruit: history of American interventions in creating the Banana Republics of our southern neighbors. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/102729.Bitter_Fruit?

 

 *Note: A reminder — links below are NOT endorsements of the ideas contained therein. The Library is big, and it often consists of ideas I do not personally share.  

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
post photo preview
The Barnes Brief: Monday, September 29, 2025

I. INTRODUCTION

A. Art of the Day 

Banksy’s brilliance, the pseudonymous muralist of public walls worldwide,  masterfully expresses the opposition to war, with the simplest of images: a little girl holding a bomb, and demanding NO.

B. Wisdom of the Day

Foreign war is nothing more than "the blood of many being shed to enrich a few.” William Jennings Bryan.

C. Cultural Recommendation

War is a Racket by the legendary General. https://www.goodreads.com/book/show/201300863-war-is-a-racket

 *Note: A reminder — links are NOT endorsements of the ideas contained therein. The Library is big, and it mostly consists of ideas I do not personally share.  

 

Only for Supporters
To read the rest of this article and access other paid content, you must be a supporter
Read full Article
See More
Available on mobile and TV devices
google store google store app store app store
google store google store app tv store app tv store amazon store amazon store roku store roku store
Powered by Locals