On a recent post over at her own Substack, Dr Monica Hughes was kind enough to quote a comment of mine relating to the attitude that many of us seem to have towards the medical profession in relation to saving us when we determine we face a mortal peril.
Perhaps an interesting question is whether the behavior of the government does not in fact violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Because this is really a religion - in what ways is it not? - and the allegiance of everyone to it is being obligated.
Thank you for your writing and reflection! I found my way here via Monica Hughes.
I know deeply this inner conversation that I read in your essay.
I was, not all that long ago, faced with question of choosing between the mandated shot(s), and my job. I sought a religious exemption, feeling as you do, that to acquiesce would run counter to my beliefs, counter to the way in which I live.
I attend no church, though the temple of nature constantly speaks to me when I am in it; a walk in the woods, swimming in the ocean, feeling the wind and rain touch my skin; all of these (and many more) are not so different from a spiritual experience, if one is open to the creation that surrounds us.
Asked to defend my application for an exemption, I was asked what ‘religion’ I subscribed to. In my heart, I ordinarily would not give it a label or name. But knowing the lens through which the state views these things, I responded, “I am a Taoist.” Having been an avid reader of the Tao Te Ching, reflecting on its verses for 30 years, this didn’t seem so divorced from the truth.
The interviewer asked me: “Is there a specific church or temple where you attend services regularly?”
I replied, that no, this was not a significant practice, but as is common with Taoists, personal reflection and meditation on life is a constant, and more vital for me than a house of worship. I noted that if one reads the Tao Te Ching, then one might eventually realize that the pages there hardly encompass the true depth of meaning that is implied in the verses. The journey of the Taoist comes through living each moment, every day.
The interviewer then asked me: “Is there a principle or tenet, or scripture that conflicts with the policy?”
I replied, yes: there is the tenet of wu-wei. Wu-wei is “the practice of taking no action that is not in accord with the natural course of the universe.” Genetic engineering is an example of an endeavor that is not in alignment with the natural course of things. Just as I choose not to consume genetically engineered foodstuffs, so I would not choose to have genetically engineered nano lipid encased mRNA, or a genetically engineered adenovirus, injected into my body.
The interviewer then asked me: “Do you know that the Dalai Lama is in support of the vaccine?”
I replied, yes, I have read that; but the Dalai Lama is a well-known Buddhist. That is not the same thing as a follower of the Tao, and he has no authority over me.
Many more questions were asked. In the end, the interviewer could not find inconsistency in my beliefs, or a lack of sincerity. Perhaps this is because it was not an argument I offered. My employer formally acknowledged that my belief was sincere and the reviewer recommended approval of a religious exemption.
But the hollowness of what this really meant was not made evident until 2 months later. I was placed on a temporary unpaid leave of absence. And then, a month after that, summarily terminated without cause.
The ‘approved’ exemption, in actuality, meant nothing. Never mind how strange it is to have an interviewer, who doesn’t understand what you believe, act as a kind of arbiter of one’s sincerity. It was all merely a formality; a way of gesturing to demonstrate compliance with anti-discrimination laws. The real goal was to obtain compliance with the policy.
Exemption was never a way out.
But despite this, a truth was revealed. What is important here, for me, was the act of looking into my Self to understand my sincerity, my beliefs, and to unapologetically embrace my own integrity. It is that kernel within that makes me who I am, connects me to my actions, my choices, and everything around me. Without it, I am not me.
Perhaps we all know this, deep down.
But, in spite of the disruption brought by the loss of employment, this has reaffirmed for me, all of the myriad choices I have made that have brought me to where I am at this moment, connected to everything around me. And that is an encouraging thought.
Perhaps an interesting question is whether the behavior of the government does not in fact violate the establishment clause of the First Amendment. Because this is really a religion - in what ways is it not? - and the allegiance of everyone to it is being obligated.
Thank you for your writing and reflection! I found my way here via Monica Hughes.
I know deeply this inner conversation that I read in your essay.
I was, not all that long ago, faced with question of choosing between the mandated shot(s), and my job. I sought a religious exemption, feeling as you do, that to acquiesce would run counter to my beliefs, counter to the way in which I live.
I attend no church, though the temple of nature constantly speaks to me when I am in it; a walk in the woods, swimming in the ocean, feeling the wind and rain touch my skin; all of these (and many more) are not so different from a spiritual experience, if one is open to the creation that surrounds us.
Asked to defend my application for an exemption, I was asked what ‘religion’ I subscribed to. In my heart, I ordinarily would not give it a label or name. But knowing the lens through which the state views these things, I responded, “I am a Taoist.” Having been an avid reader of the Tao Te Ching, reflecting on its verses for 30 years, this didn’t seem so divorced from the truth.
The interviewer asked me: “Is there a specific church or temple where you attend services regularly?”
I replied, that no, this was not a significant practice, but as is common with Taoists, personal reflection and meditation on life is a constant, and more vital for me than a house of worship. I noted that if one reads the Tao Te Ching, then one might eventually realize that the pages there hardly encompass the true depth of meaning that is implied in the verses. The journey of the Taoist comes through living each moment, every day.
The interviewer then asked me: “Is there a principle or tenet, or scripture that conflicts with the policy?”
I replied, yes: there is the tenet of wu-wei. Wu-wei is “the practice of taking no action that is not in accord with the natural course of the universe.” Genetic engineering is an example of an endeavor that is not in alignment with the natural course of things. Just as I choose not to consume genetically engineered foodstuffs, so I would not choose to have genetically engineered nano lipid encased mRNA, or a genetically engineered adenovirus, injected into my body.
The interviewer then asked me: “Do you know that the Dalai Lama is in support of the vaccine?”
I replied, yes, I have read that; but the Dalai Lama is a well-known Buddhist. That is not the same thing as a follower of the Tao, and he has no authority over me.
Many more questions were asked. In the end, the interviewer could not find inconsistency in my beliefs, or a lack of sincerity. Perhaps this is because it was not an argument I offered. My employer formally acknowledged that my belief was sincere and the reviewer recommended approval of a religious exemption.
But the hollowness of what this really meant was not made evident until 2 months later. I was placed on a temporary unpaid leave of absence. And then, a month after that, summarily terminated without cause.
The ‘approved’ exemption, in actuality, meant nothing. Never mind how strange it is to have an interviewer, who doesn’t understand what you believe, act as a kind of arbiter of one’s sincerity. It was all merely a formality; a way of gesturing to demonstrate compliance with anti-discrimination laws. The real goal was to obtain compliance with the policy.
Exemption was never a way out.
But despite this, a truth was revealed. What is important here, for me, was the act of looking into my Self to understand my sincerity, my beliefs, and to unapologetically embrace my own integrity. It is that kernel within that makes me who I am, connects me to my actions, my choices, and everything around me. Without it, I am not me.
Perhaps we all know this, deep down.
But, in spite of the disruption brought by the loss of employment, this has reaffirmed for me, all of the myriad choices I have made that have brought me to where I am at this moment, connected to everything around me. And that is an encouraging thought.