Christian Vaccine Exemption Form

The Automation Guy

Getting comfortable
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
382
Reaction score
642
Location
USA
I can't imagine anyone having a good reason to refuse to take the vaccine.

I know there are plenty of people that won't take it, but it's always based on unfounded unwarranted fear and/or conspiracy theories.

EDIT - perhaps unwarranted fear is a better term to use than unfounded fear. I'm splitting hairs here, but there is a difference between the two. People have a reason for their fear (so it's not unfounded). What I am trying to say is that fear is based on some "worse case scenario" or statistically irrelevant outcome rather than the actual results/statistics/benefits.
 
Last edited:

TVille

Getting comfortable
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
523
Reaction score
1,248
Location
Virginia
I can't imagine anyone having a good reason to refuse to take the vaccine.

I know there are plenty of people that won't take it, but it's always based on unfounded fear and/or conspiracy theories.
That is the beauty of a supposedly free country. If you think the risks associated with the shortest vaccine testing and approval in history, with a totally new delivery method (mRNA), with limited positive results (less than 50% for me according to my MD), for a disease with a survivabiity rate of 98.5% or better, and now considerably better based on the number of cases, then you can take the shot, the follow up shot, the booster, and the daily pills that are coming.

Others of us may chose not to do so.
 

The Automation Guy

Getting comfortable
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
382
Reaction score
642
Location
USA
As far as "limited positive results" go, it's clear that you have not spoken to any doctor in any practice/hospital about this. So I guess it is unfounded unwarranted fear for you. I guess that is better than conspiracy theories. (Or perhaps you really do think the Government is tracking you through the vaccine).
 
Last edited:
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
7,379
Reaction score
15,854
Location
New Jersey
The vaccine is not a vaccine in the traditional sense. That, by itself makes many people hesitant. It seems vey strange that people can refuse to have their children vaccinated for the "standard" threats and not be persecuted/harassed by the media and public but in this case it is SOP. I am "fully vaccinated", high risk for a few reasons, age and compromised immunity. If I wasn't as old as I am there is no question that I wouldn't take it. The jury is still out on long term effects and there are more than enough bad reactions, including death, to keep me from taking it.
 
Last edited:

bigredfish

Known around here
Joined
Sep 5, 2016
Messages
8,998
Reaction score
20,221
Location
Florida USA
Some of us have indisputable proof that the vaccine can in some cases be worse than The disease. And I have a number of docs in my personal sphere that agree. Hardly unfounded fear.
If one gets all of their information from the MSM I can understand the unfounded fear of the unvaxxed.

… and it didn’t come from bat soup.
 

TVille

Getting comfortable
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
523
Reaction score
1,248
Location
Virginia
As far as "limited positive results" go, it's clear that you have not spoken to any doctor in any practice/hospital about this. So I guess it is unfounded fear for you. I guess that is better than conspiracy theories. (Or perhaps you really do think the Government is tracking you through the vaccine).
Assuming things is not good. The 50% effectiveness for me came straight from on of my MDs. He actually recommended, if I was going to get a shot, for another, more conventional (non mRNA) vaccine which is undergoing tests. I have never seen this other vaccine discussed in the news, never.

Throwing out innuendos about conspiracy theories just shows that you are more about mud than facts. The vaccine does indeed have limited positive results. It only reduces the magnitude of the symptoms, does not prevent you from getting or spreading the virus. I consider that limited, you may not.

Here are some facts that MSM and our government do not want to admit:
--Number of people who have had the virus is much larger than current estimates used to calculate survival rates. Much higher, which puts the death rate much lower than previously thought.
--Ivermectin is NOT a horse drug. It is approved for human use and has been for decades. It is legal to prescribe it for the virus, as off label. Drugs are prescribed off label all the time - 20% of all prescriptions are off label.
--Ivermectin has around 80 studies showing its effectiveness in treating the virus.
 

Swampledge

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
57
Reaction score
74
Location
Connecticut
I can't imagine anyone having a good reason to refuse to take the vaccine.

I know there are plenty of people that won't take it, but it's always based on unfounded fear and/or conspiracy theories.
45 years ago, when I was still in college, my father underwent gastric surgery. Several months later, his doctor told him it was vital that he get the swine flu vaccine. He did, and two weeks later, he started losing feeling in his hands and feet. It progressed to where he was hospitalized and on a ventilator. They diagnosed it as Guillain-Barré syndrome. He was about 58 yo at the time, and never fully recovered. He was a machinist, and never regained feeling in his hands and feet, and was forced to retire on disability. He required assistance with many things for the next 22 years of his life. If you do a web search you will see that the link between GBS and the swine flu vaccine is widely acknowledged. Atleast 2 of the COVID vaccines have also been associated with GBS. The medical community cannot tell us what the link is, so they cannot tell me it is not genetic. They will only say that any one individual’s chance of contracting GBS are miniscule. Tell me I don’t have a good reason for refusing the vaccine.
 

The Automation Guy

Getting comfortable
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
382
Reaction score
642
Location
USA
45 years ago, when I was still in college, my father underwent gastric surgery. Several months later, his doctor told him it was vital that he get the swine flu vaccine. He did, and two weeks later, he started losing feeling in his hands and feet. It progressed to where he was hospitalized and on a ventilator. They diagnosed it as Guillain-Barré syndrome. He was about 58 yo at the time, and never fully recovered. He was a machinist, and never regained feeling in his hands and feet, and was forced to retire on disability. He required assistance with many things for the next 22 years of his life. If you do a web search you will see that the link between GBS and the swine flu vaccine is widely acknowledged. Atleast 2 of the COVID vaccines have also been associated with GBS. The medical community cannot tell us what the link is, so they cannot tell me it is not genetic. They will only say that any one individual’s chance of contracting GBS are miniscule. Tell me I don’t have a good reason for refusing the vaccine.
There is a miniscule chance of something bad happening with EVERYTHING you do. (You might slip in the bathroom and hit your head on the tub and die, etc, etc, etc). It doesn't prevent you from getting up in the mornings and going about your day like normal. Yet given your father's experience, this is causing you to have a unwarranted fear of the vaccine. The benefits far exceed the risks. That is statically a fact. Sure it is ultimately your choice, but my initial statement holds true - people who don't want to get the vaccine have an unwarranted fear.

It's like people saying they don't wear their seat belt because they might be in an accident where their car go into water and they don't want to be trapped in the car. It doesn't matter that statics prove that wearing your seat belt saves lives, they will always come up with a "worse case sceario" where wearing a seat belt might have done more harm than good.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
7,379
Reaction score
15,854
Location
New Jersey
Life is a series of choices regarding how much danger each of us wants to accept and what those dangers may be. Given that the CCP Virus has a death rate well under 1%, and significantly lower for younger, healthier, people, mitigating that risk versus the risk of bad outcomes from the vaccine, which isn't actually a vaccine as defined by NIH, not wanting it is totally reasonable.

Claiming that an unvaccinated person is endangering people is a political talking point. Anyone, previously CCP Virus infected, vaccinated, or unvaccinated, can transmit the virus. In fact those previously infected and those who are vaccinated can carry a much higher viral load and, therefor, transmit it much more easily.

Again, each person is entitled to, and should make, their decision based on their own perceptions and risks. Being well informed is the key, both to the alleged benefits and risks involved.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
7,379
Reaction score
15,854
Location
New Jersey
One other thing that makes me scratch my head (and my head is bleeding already from all of the others) is the wash the hands thing. The virus has been shown to be transmitted as an aerosol not through physical contact. There have been studies published supporting that airborne is the only way it is transmitted, yet the wipe down and wash everything mentality seems to be roaring back yet again. It's like social distancing. Try 60 feet or more if you want to actually reduce the risk, six feet is a joke.
 

The Automation Guy

Getting comfortable
Joined
Feb 7, 2019
Messages
382
Reaction score
642
Location
USA
Assuming things is not good. The 50% effectiveness for me came straight from on of my MDs. He actually recommended, if I was going to get a shot, for another, more conventional (non mRNA) vaccine which is undergoing tests. I have never seen this other vaccine discussed in the news, never.
I'm not going to become argumentative here. If it dissolves to that, I will simply stop posting. It has never been my intent with these posts to be argumentative or talk down to people.

That being said, you only have to look at the current hospitalization numbers to realize the vaccine is much more effective than just "50%". If it was only 50% effective, there would be no statistical difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. In reality, unvaccinated people make up 90-95% of the COVID patients in the hospital. That's not chance. That's not random. That's proof the vaccine is effective.
 
Joined
Dec 28, 2019
Messages
7,379
Reaction score
15,854
Location
New Jersey
That 90% figure promulgated by the CDC and hawked by the media is based on numbers from January through June of 2021 when most people were not vaccinated. Being well informed is important and with all the constant drumbeat of MSM that can be hard to do, but the real facts are out there. From what I have seen the number of vaccinated being hospitalized is constantly rising at a pretty rapid rate which makes the effectiveness of the vaccine questionable. On top of that if it were really that effective a booster shot after six to eight months wouldn't be needed in the first place.
 

user8963

Known around here
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Christmas Island
I am wondering ...

are jehovas wittnesses are taking the vac ??
they dont want blood from someone but shit from pfizer is OK ? hahah...
 

Swampledge

Getting the hang of it
Joined
Apr 9, 2021
Messages
57
Reaction score
74
Location
Connecticut
I don’t mean to be argumentative either. If there’s going to be a discussion, all sides should be heard.

I did not mention that COVID has occurred within our family. In March, my 38 yo son-in-law (unvaccinated at the time) contracted COVID. So did my 10 yo granddaughter. SIL recovered within in a week. Granddaughter had sore throat one day, one day no symptoms,then one day of fever and sniffles. Both completely recovered. SIL told me the flu he had 2 years earlier was much more debilitating than the COVID. My daughter and grandson went through the period without getting sick or testing positive. My 38 yo daughter didn’t see the point in getting vaccinated. Two weeks ago, she learned that 2 co-workers she attended a business function with had COVID. One of the 2 was fully vaccinated. My daughter felt ill, and tested positive for COVID a week ago Monday. She felt fully recovered on Saturday. She described her symptoms as similar to a bad cold. The grandchildren came and stayed with my wife and I last week so as not to get sick and interfere with their return to school today.

Wife and I are both in our mid-60’s. If we had irrational fears, do you think we would welcome our COVID-exposed grandchildren to live with us for a week? We would both rather take our chances with a 99%+ survivable illness that we may or may not get than a government-advocated experimental cocktail injected into our veins.
 

TVille

Getting comfortable
Joined
Apr 26, 2014
Messages
523
Reaction score
1,248
Location
Virginia
I'm not going to become argumentative here. If it dissolves to that, I will simply stop posting. It has never been my intent with these posts to be argumentative or talk down to people.

That being said, you only have to look at the current hospitalization numbers to realize the vaccine is much more effective than just "50%". If it was only 50% effective, there would be no statistical difference between vaccinated and unvaccinated people. In reality, unvaccinated people make up 90-95% of the COVID patients in the hospital. That's not chance. That's not random. That's proof the vaccine is effective.
I appreciate the not being argumentative. Finding actual facts about this virus is tough. I don't buy what I see on most government or news sites. In the beginning, and even now, I hear how if everyone were vaccinated, this would all go away. Remember the "two weeks" line over a year ago? When the vaccine started to roll out, I don't remember anything about it not preventing you from getting and spreading the virus. Now it is apparent that it does one thing, and only one thing - reduces your symptoms. I have not heard that it makes you less likely to spread it, or makes you less contagious. So all of the hoopla about "the pandemic of the unvaccinated" is horse hockey.

But, what is new? It goes with not being able to find real facts. Just like the 90-95% of patients are not vaccinated. In reality, the numbers are probably more like 50% now, but again, unless I go collect the numbers and crunch them myself, I'm not sure. Or the Rolling Stone much repeated story about Oklahoma hospitals having gunshot victims lining and waiting because ERs are full of ivermectin ODs. Yeah, some doctor did say that, but turned out he was flat out lying.

For me, once I go looking in detail at what I find, I determine, for me, now, that I don't want the vaccine. You chose otherwise. Fine for me. What is not fine is the pressure and stigma associated with folks who make a choice.

Bottom line, not much of what government or MSM pushes relating to this virus is accurate. It varies from twisted, like the 90-95% unvaccinated in hospitals, to outright lies from the Oklahoma doctor pushed by a dishonest media.
 

user8963

Known around here
Joined
Nov 26, 2018
Messages
1,130
Reaction score
1,756
Location
Christmas Island
In reality, unvaccinated people make up 90-95% of the COVID patients in the hospital. That's not chance. That's not random. That's proof the vaccine is effective.
Yeah... if you believe this bullshit than you are right...
Now tell me how many of unvaccinated people in hospital

  • have comorbidities
  • are over 60
  • are overweight
  • taking real drugs
  • taking alcohol, tobacco ....
  • no sport activities for whole life
  • never go to a doctor
  • never took any other vac
.............................and so on

or better tell me how many of unvaccinate are REAL healthy people and got hospitalized.
so in reality you are telling that stupid people with bad behaviours are more likely to get hospitalized after infection ?

WOW .

so in your opinion it should be better to forbid everything... sugar, fat, alcohol, tobacco, force anyone to do sport ,
then install a real health system, where any preventive medical check-up, any medical supplies ................. is free for everyone ?

haha...

people who in one of the above categories should get pfizers best mix. but anyone else? children ? what are their risks ?! most of them dont even get it LOL
 

mat200

IPCT Contributor
Joined
Jan 17, 2017
Messages
8,123
Reaction score
9,281
FWIW:

the mRNA vaccines by Moderna and Pfizer have a very good safety record and many people have been vaccinated, especially when compared to Covid-19 exposure for those who are older ...


also.. the most accurate info I have found so far on what works is posted at the flccc:
( vaccines are one of those that work, and ideally you should be not looking for one solution, as some who are immuno compromised can still get hit hard by covid-19 as they are unable to properly respond to Covid-19 )

 
Last edited:
Top