The Military Religious Exemption History and its Dealings with the Ongoing Pandemic (COVID-19)
One of the most vital contributions to the public healthcare sector during the last century has been the introduction of vaccines against infectious diseases. Illnesses such as mumps, measles, smallpox, whooping cough, polio, and rubella were major disasters that contributed to many deaths until the early 20th century; vaccination programs mainly focused on maintaining the herd immunity phenomenon. The Department of Defense creates and implements various force health protection measures to protect, promote, conserve, improve and restore the well-being and health of military personnel.[1] The measures include education and health promotion programs, regular health assessments, vaccinations, medical countermeasures, and preventive therapies. The United States military initiated its first vaccination program in 1777. During this time, General George Washington ordered the vaccination of the Continental Army to protect soldiers from smallpox. Since then, the Department of Defense has employed various situational or enduring force health protection measures to protect military officers from infection. Some vaccines are needed for all military personnel, while others may only be needed for those deployed in specific locations. Some vaccines may also be available based on recommendations by public health bodies or voluntary will. Congress has experienced interest in the vaccination policies implemented b Department of Justice since the late 1990s, particularly the ones on mandatory vaccinations. One of the main factors affecting the acceptance of mandatory vaccines among military members is religion. In some instances, service members feel that being vaccinated violates their religious beliefs, but they have no choice, and they fear that refusing to be vaccinated will lead to discharge from the Army. Therefore, the issue of military, religious exemptions needs to be reviewed based on the recent arguments made by the Supreme Court and military leaders on religious exemption during the mandatory Covid-19 vaccination program.
Religious exemptions have been implemented in the military since the Civil War. During the War, people were exempted from bearing arms if their religious beliefs did not allow it. The religious objectors who could not offer military service were assigned other duties or asked to pay some amount of money to fund the Civil War. Congress made this move to protect religious liberty, important government interests, and the rights of third parties. In 1864, Congress reviewed the religious exemption of conscientious objectors.[3] It passed the Conscription Act of 1864, which allowed a religious exemption for members of a religious group who, by affirmation or oath, declared that they conscientiously opposed bearing arms and who were prohibited from bearing arms by the articles and rules of faith. Such individuals would be considered non-combatants and were assigned by the Secretary of War various duties in hospitals, as taking care of the service members. The Act has played a significant role in formulating federal laws governing military service since then.[4]
During the First World War, religious exemptions were granted to military service members. The service members who could not fight due to their religious beliefs were assigned non-combat tasks that accommodated their religious beliefs, such as taking care of the injured soldiers. Judaism recognized the right of a military service member to claim religious exemption from military service in any war to which the service member could give his pledged support and moral assent. During the Second World War, many Seventh-Day Adventist objectors were sent to mental institutions or concentration camps, while others were executed for refusing to participate in the War. However, some of them volunteered in Operation Whitecoat. The operation was a medical research program initiated by the United States Army for medical research.[5]. The participants were known as conscientious participants because they were willing to put their lives at risk by participating in life-threatening medical experiments.
Peace churches and Mennonites also promoted religious exemption in Canada during the First and Second World Wars. The Mennonites were exempted from military service during Canada’s participation in the First World War by provisions of the 1873 Order in Council, but initially, most of them were imprisoned for refusing to participate in the War. Conscientious objectors in Canada’s participation in the Second World War were allowed to offer non-combat military services by helping in the medical centers under military control or working on roads and parks under the supervision of civilians. Men were assigned forestry, road construction, and firefighting roles, while women worked in medical camps. In Russia, Mennonites were allowed to maintain and run forestry service units under the control of the church. After the 1917 Russian Revolution, religious objectors whose sincerity was determined after examination were allowed alternative services. During this time,8000 conscientious objectors were freed from military service in the Russian Civil War. However, the laws were not applied uniformly because many objectors were imprisoned and others executed. Currently, Russian laws allow people to choose alternative civilian services for ideological or religious reasons. Most of those who request exemption are employed in the healthcare sector within the military, such as in military medical camps.
During the Vietnam War, a religious exemption was granted, allowing military service members to withdraw from the armed forces or refuse to bear arms on the grounds of their religious beliefs. They could be excused from military duty and be assigned other roles as conscientious objectors. All eligible service members had a legal obligation to carry their draft cards, which specified they were exempted from military duty. The main requirements for exemption were claiming for classification as a conscientious objector after getting a notice on qualification for military service, appearing before the local draft board to explain beliefs, and providing written documentation or including personal appearances by people who can attest to an individual’s claims. The written statement would explain how the individual arrived at his or her beliefs and the influence the beliefs have on the individual’s life. The courts realized that the religious exemption of conscientious objectors could influence an individual to go to peace churches and demonstrated concerns that converting to a religion of convenience could happen on a wide scale resulting in a negative impact on the administration of the selective service system. The greatest fear was that if many military service members converted to a religion prohibiting the bearing of arms, there would be a shortage of fighters, thus losing the War. Therefore, Catholics were punished for spreading religious beliefs about just wars, religious non-conformists were punished for failing to attend any church, members of the mainstream denominations were punished for attending church, and atheists were punished for lack of belief in a Supreme being. Since then, religious exemptions have been embraced in the military on religious grounds, such as serving as clergy or adhering to religious dress codes. The rise in new religious exemptions is mainly attributed to the growing acknowledgment of religious beliefs and the recognition that everyone has the right to profess and practice their religious beliefs.
One of the new religious exemptions made in the military was the exemption allowing military service members to wear religious clothing such as skullcaps and turbans while on duty. The exemption was allowed after the Army issued a policy acknowledging the importance of the dress code in religious practice. The policy passed in 2017, allows members of other religious groups and Sikhs to adhere to their religious rules while in uniform. The exemption for Sikhs was made permanent, and it allowed them to wear a turban while in uniform, even when deployed in different regions. [6]The military also introduced religious exemptions allowing body art, facial hair, and other physical expressions of religious belief.[7] For instance, a Sikh can have a full beard while serving as a military service member. However, the size of the beard is limited to no longer than 2 inches unless it is tied up or rolled.[8]Brigade-level commanders are required to grant religious exemptions to any military service member requesting to wear a religiously mandated Muslim hijab, turban, or beard while in uniform. The hijab and scarves should be of the same color as the service member’s uniform and be free of markings or design unless they are concealed or worn with a concealing uniform. The new religious exemptions are implemented in collaboration with the Chaplain Corps, which is in charge of training military service members on the available exemptions and qualification criteria. For instance, Sikhs need to prove that they are Sikhs and demonstrate a clear understanding of Islamic teachings and beliefs. Female military service members requesting to wear a Muslim Hijab also have to prove that they are Muslims.
consequences and processes associated with refusing to get vaccinated. Theeleased the NAVADMIN 225/21. The NAVADMIN 225/21 clarified that any Navy service member who refused the COVID-19 vaccine and did not complete the vaccination schedule by the stated deadline without an approved or pending vaccination exemption request would be subject to discharge. All separation proceedings linked to a refusal to get the COVID-19 vaccination would be characterized under the Consolidated Clinical Document Architecture[9]. allowed in military vaccination programs, according to the NAVADMIN 225/21, including medical, religious, and administrative exemptions. The medical exemptions are applicable if a military member’s medical history indicates that getting a certain vaccine would negatively affect their health. The NAVADMIN also provides that military personnel can request a waiver from being vaccinated if the vaccine substantially burdens their Sincerely-held beliefs, which are beliefs that an individual has been practicing since they joined a religious group. The beliefs are tested through an interview session where a religious leader or expert from the person’s religion ass the individual questions about their beliefs. The exemption is requested through a military personnel’s commanding officer to the Deputy Chief of Naval Operations.[10].The package includes specific reasons for exemption.[11]
The Department of Defense prescribes procedures, policies, and responsibilities to accommodate religious practices in the military service. It operates under the instruction that the United States Constitution prohibits Congress from enacting any law that prohibits the free practice of religion. The Department of Defense places high value on service members’ rights to observe the doctrines of their respective religions. The Department of Defense policy for religious accommodations is that it will not negatively impact military readiness, mission accomplishment, standards, unit cohesion, or discipline. Five factors need to be taken into consideration when determining whether to make a request to accommodate religious practices. The first set of factors includes military readiness, mission accomplishment, discipline, standards, and unit cohesion. The second factor is the cumulative impact of repeated accommodation of the same nature. The third factor is the religious significance of accommodation to the person requesting it. The fourth factor is the previous treatment of a similar request, including treatment of the same requests made for other religious purposes. The fifth factor is alternative means available to meet the accommodations requested [12]
Most of the legal history on religious exemptions revolves around mandates put in place by local towns, communities, and states. Massachusetts was among the first states to issue mandates for smallpox vaccines in the 19th century. the United States Supreme Court decided that a law regulating vaccination in Massachusetts did not violate the 14th Amendment. The Court ruled this after some service members presented a case requesting exemption from the vaccination against smallpox. A state could constrain people’s liberties to protect public safety against smallpox infections[13]. Oppositions on religious grounds emerged after the Civil War and before the Second World War as religious organizations tried to justify why their followers should not get vaccinated. The main religious sects against vaccination were in the late 19th century and early 20th century. Christian Scientists were under intense because their children were dying in schools, and the smallpox infection spread in the community. [14]The founder of the Christian Scientists’ group, and they accepted.[15]Therefore, the implementation of religious exemptions may be divided into waves, with the first wave representing a period where there was a limited acknowledgment of religious exemption from vaccination, the second wave representing the period where religious exemptions were gradually being recognized in society, and the third and fourth wave being the period when religious exemptions were being embraced in government regulation and the fourth wave where religious exemptions have been embraced in all sectors of society.
In the early 50s, a new wave of religious exemptions began after the measles and polio outbreak. The government required children to get vaccinated, and some religious exemptions were not so active during this time because most religious organizations acknowledged that the measles and polio vaccines were necessary to protect children. A whereby religious exemptions became widely acknowledged in the medical field after the enactment of the Civil Rights Act in 1964, which promoted the introduction of religious exemptions in the political and legal sphere by prohibiting employment discrimination based on religion, sex, race, color, and national origin [17]People had the right to protect their religious beliefs and could therefore refuse to get vaccinated on the grounds that Religious exemptions have since then been accommodated in the medical field. Currently, most especially due to the revelation of the negative impacts of vaccines such as the mumps, measles, and rubella vaccine, which are [18]
Every religion has its own beliefs that dictate the believer’s acceptance or non-acceptance of vaccines. The main foundations of the non-acceptance of vaccines are ethical dilemmas associated with the use of human tissue cells to create vaccines, the belief that the human body is sacred and should not be added any chemicals, tissues, or blood from animals, and the beliefs that only God can heal and looking for artificial ways to heal or prevent a disease undermine God’s authority and could lead to severe punishment. The beliefs vary based on religion. For instance, the Catholic religion acknowledges the value of vaccines and the important role they play in protecting human life and community health. However, it encourages members to look for alternatives to vaccines made using cells drawn from aborted fetuses because it does not condone abortion and views it as murder. On the other hand, Christian scientists are against vaccines because they believe that only God has the power to heal and that people should turn to prayer for healing rather than relying on artificial medicine. They believe that medical interventions, including vaccines, are not necessary as long as an individual has faith that their prayers will be heard and they will be healed.
Some Orthodox protestants believe that vaccination is an act of interfering with divine power and undermining God’s authority because God is the giver of life and can take it away at His will. Muslims also hold some strong beliefs against vaccination, although these beliefs are gradually transforming with the increase in the understanding of how vaccines are created and the vital role they play in saving humanity. Muslim concerns that yield resistance against vaccines include the concern that vaccines may not be Halal. According to them, Halal medicine or pharmaceuticals should only contain the ingredients allowed by Sharia laws. They must not contain impurities, must be free of derivatives of or parts from animals considered non-Halal by Sharia law or not slaughtered according to Sharia laws, and must not be intoxicating, poisonous, or pose a health risk to users when the prescription provided is followed.
The military has maintained a long history of vaccination requirements. Less than a year after the start of the American Revolution, George Washington issued an order on the vaccination of all soldiers against smallpox.[19] After the Second World War began, there was a huge federal push that resulted in the development of novel vaccines for more than a third of the infections that can be prevented with a vaccine, including influenza, which was routinely administered during the war, and yellow fever, smallpox, typhus, scarlet fever, plague and diphtheria vaccines. In the 1990s, the Clinton government authorized vaccination against anthrax to ensure that the military was ready for the biological attack aimed at wiping out soldiers using an infectious disease. After the September 11th attack, authorized vaccination against smallpox to prevent biological attacks on the military. Currently, the United States adheres to the directive that requires the National Guard to adhere to state, federal, and host nation regulations, laws, and guidelines governing training exercises and peacetime in non-deployed conditions to sustain and enhance optimal levels of fitness and health of all military personnel. The National Guard also ensures that all military service members are vaccinated before deployment. However, some military members are reluctant to get vaccinated, particularly if the vaccine is new and has not been tested to determine whether it has any side effects.
This is why the resistance expressed by military members to the COVID-19 vaccine is not unusual or surprising. Military service members have sought to decline vaccination on religious grounds to increase their chances of being exempted due to the fear of the vaccines’ side effects. For instance, in the 1990s, many soldiers refused to be vaccinated against anthrax. This is because of the circulated conspiracy theories that suggested the anthrax vaccine was not FDA and also contained squalene, causing the autoimmune diseases linked to Gulf War Syndrome.
Exemptions have been embraced in the United States. Some political leaders have encouraged military personnel to disobey vaccination requirements. For instance, he declared the right to exempt his state’s National Guard from receiving the Covid-19 vaccine. The governor stated that 10% of the military personnel in Oklahoma have died due to personal and religious reasons and that it is irresponsible for the federal government to place mandatory vaccine requirements on military personnel. This could [20]
Currently, the military is doing a good job honoring these religious beliefs because military service members deserve the right to practice their religious beliefs even though they have dedicated their lives to serving the country. However, the extent to which the military has embraced religious exemptions is still limited. This is evident from the lawsuits filed against the military by service members who have been denied religious exemptions. For instance, a Navy lawsuit in 2021 focused on religious exemption policies to exempt service members from the COVID-19 vaccination. The lawsuit involved 35 Navy officers who wanted the military to exempt them from COVID-19 vaccination due to their religious beliefs.[21]The lawsuit argued that the Navy failed to grant them religious exemption hence violating their rights under the Religious Freedom Restoration Act. [22]The Act provides that in failing to grant the requests for religious exemptions, the government fails to follow the least restrictive means of furthering its interests in preventing COVID-19 infections among service members and maintaining military operations.
The military is also doing a good job honoring religious beliefs on vaccination because it shows that the country respects religion. The practice of religion in the military may seem ignored, especially because military service members deployed in war zones spend most of their time fighting and may not have time to visit places of worship or express their religious beliefs. However, honoring their religious beliefs demonstrates the military’s acknowledgment of religious freedom and enables the service members to honor their religious beliefs and associate themselves with their religion, no matter their area of deployment. However, it is important to conduct background checks to confirm the validity of a service member’s religious affiliation claims to ensure that their religious exemption concerns are genuine because some may state that their religion is against vaccination, but they do not hold any religious beliefs and are only using religion as an excuse to avoid being vaccinated.
The Joint Regulation on Immunization and Chemoprophylaxis for the Prevention of Infectious Diseases clarifies vaccination requirements for military personnel and service-specific processes for implementing the requirements. Generally, the Department of Defense vaccination requirements follow the recommendations of the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices and the United States Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The Department of Defense vaccination requirements are routine adult vaccinations, vaccinations during basic training or initial entry, and special occupation-specific or risk-based vaccinations.[23] The Defense Health Agency manages the Department of Defense vaccination program, and it coordinates the vaccination of military personnel and other Department of Defense beneficiaries. Vaccinations are generally available in military treatment centers and specific military-specific settings such as basic training camps. The Defense Health Agency is also responsible for relevant documentation of medical records, surveilling patient safety, and coordinating with the Defense Logistics Agency and commercial manufacturers to purchase vaccines. The Department of Defense healthcare providers typically document military personnel vaccinations and any related adverse health incidents in the electronic health record system and the corresponding medical readiness
Some military personnel may ask to opt out of mandatory vaccination. Upon such a request, The administrative exemption is the planned retirement or separation within 180 days provided if a service member is not deployed, assigned, or scheduled to perform duties in a region where specific vaccination is indicated or if the commander has not directed vaccination because of overriding medical requirements. A medical exemption is an exemption made due to medical reasons such as allergic reactions to a vaccine or a negative reaction to medication that a person could be taking. Unit commanders may authorize an administrative exemption for a military member within 180 days of retiring or separating from the military within 30 days of leaving a permanent location deployment. The military applies the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, allowing administrative exemptions for religious purposes. The military physician advises a military member on the risks and benefits of bypassing the required vaccination.[25] Unit commanders may withdraw a religious exemption if the unit or individual is at imminent risk of being exposed to a disease for which a vaccine is available. Unit commanders may also administratively initiate disciplinary proceedings or separate military personnel under the Uniform Code of Military Justice without an official exemption if they do not comply with a compulsory vaccination.
The highest population of military service members refusing to get vaccinated were junior and young service members. Their reason for not being vaccinated was the fear that the vaccine could affect them negatively based on the misconceptions being spread through social media platforms. For instance, the twenty-seven service members discharged from the Air Force had worked for less than six years in the United States military. This trend matched with an analysis conducted by the Defense Health Agency in April 2021 on vaccine resistance among military members. During the first three months of the Department of Defense’s vaccination campaign, 10% of the women in the military service were less likely to be vaccinated. Another study indicated that the members of the Navy were more likely to accept being vaccinated than those in the Coast Guard or Army. The difference in acceptability was attributed to the occupational specialists of the Navy because Their enhanced familiarity and medical role in dealing with vaccines contributed to their high acceptance rate. The study also found that by May 2021, the general vaccine acceptance was higher among deployed military service members than that reported in the United States population.[27]
The main factors associated with the hesitance are higher education level, age, and rank. Another critical factor contributing to hesitance among military service members is misinformation, and also that military service members express an overall sense of mistrust of non-military and military public institutions. Mistrust is usually deep and influenced by different historical factors, making it more difficult to overcome. For instance, most Christian religious institutions preach that it is against God’s will to use science to prevent diseases that may be a punishment from God. Vaccination hesitance among military service members is also influenced by personalization of risk, especially among young members. For example, in the late 1900s and early 2000s, the military mandated the anthrax vaccine. The service members who were resistant to the vaccination program stated that their decision was influenced by the reported side effects of the vaccine.[28] In the current vaccination program, there is a view that healthy and young people are at lower risk of being infected, hence changing risk assessments.
[29] However, religious institutions are emphasizing the lack of transparency in vaccine trials and development. The speed of vaccine trials and development undermined service members’ confidence that enough testing for safety and effectiveness had been carried out before the approval of their use. There have also been widespread uncertainties about the COVID-19 variants, undermining the service members’ confidence that it is possible to successfully manufacture effective and safe vaccines while still lacking a proper understanding of the virus. Different types of COVID-19 vaccines are also being manufactured using new platforms, potentially increasing service members’ reservations. The vaccines also lack safety records, thus making some military service members nervous about being vaccinated until they are certain about their adverse effects. The duration of the new vaccines’ immunity is still unknown, and as new vaccines continue being approved, information about the type of protection may decrease. Pharmaceutical companies are also not straightforward on trial protocols and do not release trial results, thus compromising the vaccine trial period. This has created a lack of confidence among army service members, who refuse to get vaccinated.
By the beginning of 2022, the Air Force Department had received more than 11,000 religious exemption requests because the applicants failed to provide convincing information on how vaccination affects their religious beliefs. and The total exemptions provided in the Air Force include approximately 1500 temporary medical exemptions and more than 2,000 administrative exemptions, including nine religious exemptions. In the Navy, less than 4,000 religious exemptions had been approved, but there were approximately 250 temporary exemptions and 11 permanent medical exemptions. The Navy also granted 500 administrative exemptions, including temporary exemptions for sailors intending to leave the military or in the middle of a permanent change of location move.[30] The Army reported around 1300 requests for religious exemptions, but none had been approved by the beginning of 2022, and six medical exemptions. The Marine Corps had reviewed 3500 religious exemption requests and granted three and around 250 medical exemptions and 400 administrative exemptions [31]
Unit commanders must initiate involuntary administrative separation processes against military service members who refuse COVID-19 vaccination without a pending or approved exemption following a directive issued by the Secretary of the United States Army. The order applies to regular military service members, cadets, and reserve-component soldiers serving on active duty Title 10. The Secretary stated that the readiness of the Army relies on soldiers who are prepared to deploy, fight, train and win United States’ wars. She added that unvaccinated military service members present a risk to the military force and endanger military readiness. An Army Directive was issued to outline how Army commanders should proceed with separation proceedings. They are required to process separation actions within the shortest time possible. Military service members separated due to refusing to get the COVID-19 vaccine will not qualify for involuntary separation pay and may recoup any incentive or unearned special pay.[32] As an exception, soldiers who will complete their retirement or separation or start transition leave on or before July 1st, 2022, will be granted a temporary exemption and allowed to complete their retirements or separations. The least favorable service characterization that may be issued is General unless extra misconduct provides separation with an Other than Honorable service classification.
The main potential threat to those who do not get vaccines in a unit is getting infected. Vaccines are administered to prevent infection even when an individual is exposed to the virus causing the infection. Therefore, being unvaccinated increases the risk of infection. For military service members, the risk of infection may be high because they may be exposed to infected individuals during their service line. For instance, in Spain, the military was assigned the role of burying the dead bodies of those who died from Covid-19. The risk of exposure was high, especially if the body was not well covered, thus leading to the infection of unvaccinated service members. Service members may also infect other unvaccinated members and civilians they may interact with. The second threat is being discharged from service. According to the 14th Amendment, if a service member refuses to be vaccinated, their commander can issue a non-judicial punishment or administrative reprimand. [33]An administrative reprimand is a written complaint that is added to a service member’s permanent file and can have a significant impact on their promotions and career advancement. The main threat for those who refuse to get vaccinated within the terms of their religious institution is being moved into another job. A commander may assign a service member another job that does not expose the service member and members of his or her unit to the risk of being infected. The second threat is being denied overseas deployment to limit traveling, which could increase the risk of exposure to infection. Another threat is limited unit access. For instance, the service member may have limited access to the unit library and places of worship within the military base.
Military service members denied religious or medical exemption requests will have seven days from the denial to consider two options. The first option is beginning a Covid-19 vaccination schedule. If a military service member intends to start the vaccination schedule, unit commanders may use their discretion to amend the timeline based on local supplies of the vaccine. The second option is submitting an appeal to the final petition authority. If the appeal is denied, the military service member will have seven days to notify them about the denial to start the COVID-19 vaccination schedule. Unit commanders will ensure that all unvaccinated military service members comply with the COVID-19 testing and screening requirements and appropriate safety standards. They will continue counseling all unvaccinated individuals on the health benefits of being vaccinated.[34]
In conclusion, the ongoing Covid-19 pandemic has influenced many sectors to introduce mandatory vaccination for their employees. One of the sectors where employees have been subjected to mandatory vaccination requirements is the military sector. The Department of Defense introduced mandatory vaccination to prevent resistance to vaccination programs and protect military service members against infection to remain healthy and defend the country. However, not all military personnel are ready to embrace the mandatory requirement. Some of them requested religious exemption, hoping that the military seniors would honor the acceptance of religious practices in the military, as has been the case in the past, such as in the early 1950s when religious exemptions were considered for measles and polio vaccines. Since early this year, religious exemptions have been embraced by various military units such as the Navy, the Air Force, the Army, and Marine Corps. However, the implementation of religious exemptions is still limited, and there are ongoing debates on whether they should be abolished. Those supporting its abolishment argue that unvaccinated military service members are not fully prepared to defend the country against attack. In contrast, those against its abolishment argue that everyone has a right to practice their religious beliefs, and all religious beliefs should be protected regardless of a person’s career. Therefore, the Department of Defense needs to thoroughly review the long-term
Bibliography
Alexander, David. “Sikh U.S. Army Captain Allowed to Wear Beard, Turban in Uniform.” U.S (blog). April 1, 2016. https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-sikhs-idUSKCN0WY56C.
Chervinsky, Linda. “The Long History of Mandated Vaccines in the United States.” Governing (blog). August 5, 2021. https://www.governing.com/now/the-long-history-of-mandated-vaccines-in-the-united-states.
Dembek, Zygmunt F. Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare. Textbooks of Military Medicine, 2008.
Geppert, Cynthia M. “Mistrust and Mandates: COVID-19 Vaccination in the Military.” Federal Practitioner, no. 38 (6) (2021). doi:10.12788/fp.0143.
Gillett, Henry T. “Vaccination or Inoculation Against Small-pox?” The Lancet 214, no. 5540 (1929), 952-953. doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)57369-3.
Higginson, Jason D., Dmitry Tumin, Timothy C. Kuehhas, Susan E. DeLozier-Hooks, Carl A. Powell, Dale D. Ramirez, Anja Dabelić, and Michael R. Basso. “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Deployed Personnel in a Joint Environment.” Military Medicine, (2021). doi:10.1093/milmed/usab518.
Knopf, Alison. “Vaccines do not cause autism: Pediatricians fight back against anti-science.” The Brown University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter 33, no. S2 (2017), 1-2. doi:10.1002/cbl.30195.
MDParadis. “Federalism and Coronavirus Vaccination Mandates for Military Personnel.” Lawfare (blog). December 20, 2021. https://www.lawfareblog.com/federalism-and-coronavirus-vaccination-mandates-military-personnel.
Milvert, Kaitlynn. “Vaccine Mandates in the Military: Litigation Over Religious Exemptions.” Bill of Health (blog). March 29, 2022. https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/03/30/vaccine-mandates-in-the-military-litigation-over-religious-exemptions/.
Myers, Meghann. “Could the Supreme Court Strike Down the Military’s Vaccination Mandate?” Military Times (blog). February 18, 2022. https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2022/02/18/could-the-supreme-court-strike-down-the-militarys-vaccination-mandate/.
National Security Law Firm. “Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations in the Military: Constitutionality, Exemptions, and Consequences for Refusing to Comply.” National Security Clearance Denial Appeals Attorneys (blog). September 22, 2021. https://www.nationalsecuritylawfirm.com/mandatory-covid-19-vaccinations-in-the-military-constitutionality-exemptions-and-consequences-for-refusing-to-comply/.
Navy.mil, From. “Timeline, Discharge Details for Service Members Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine.” DC Military (blog). October 28, 2021. https://www.dcmilitary.com/tester/news/local/timeline-discharge-details-for-service-members-refusing-covid-19-vaccine/article_2093b1c5-747d-5b49-9a6c-366617f735f2.html.
Pierik, Roland. “On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers.” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016. doi:10.2139/ssrn.2807903.
Segal, David, Yonatan I. Arzi, Maxim Bez, Matan Cohen, Jacob Rotschield, Noam Fink, and Erez Karp. “Promoting Compliance to COVID-19 Vaccination in Military Units.” Military Medicine, 2021. doi:10.1093/milmed/usab183.
Soumonni, Elisée. “Disease, religion and medicine: smallpox in nineteenth-century Benin.” História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos 19, no. suppl 1 (2012), 35-45. doi:10.1590/s0104-59702012000500003.
Supreme Court of the United States. BRIEF OF MILITARY HISTORIANS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS. 2020. https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-431/141069/20200408093626122_Military%20Historians%20Amicus%20Brief%20Final.pdf.
The Guardian. “US military eases uniform rules to allow turbans and beards.” 2009.
[1] Frank J. Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents,” Encyclopedia of Bioterrorism Defense, 2011, xx, doi: 10.1002/0471686786.ebd0199.pub2.
[2] Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents
[3] Supreme Court of the United States, BRIEF OF MILITARY HISTORIANS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS, (2020), https://www.supremecourt.gov/DocketPDF/19/19-431/141069/20200408093626122_Military%20Historians%20Amicus%20Brief%20Final.pdf.
2. Supreme Court of the United States
[4] Supreme Court of the United States, BRIEF OF MILITARY HISTORIANS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF RESPONDENTS
[5] Zygmunt F. Dembek, Medical Aspects of Biological Warfare (Textbooks of Military Medicine, 2008)
[6] David Alexander, “Sikh U.S. Army Captain Allowed to Wear Beard, Turban in Uniform,” U.S, April 1, 2016, https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-military-sikhs-idUSKCN0WY56C.
[7] The Guardian, “US military eases uniform rules to allow turbans and beards,” .2009,
[8] Alexander, “Sikh U.S. Army Captain Allowed to Wear Beard, Turban in Uniform
[9] From Navy.mil, “Timeline, Discharge Details for Service Members Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine,” DC Military, October 28, 2021, https://www.dcmilitary.com/tester/news/local/timeline-discharge-details-for-service-members-refusing-covid-19-vaccine/article_2093b1c5-747d-5b49-9a6c-366617f735f2.html.
[10] Navy.mil, “Timeline, Discharge Details for Service Members Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine,”
[11] Navy.mil, “Timeline, Discharge Details for Service Members Refusing COVID-19 Vaccine,”
[12] Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents
[13] Linda Chervinsky, “The Long History of Mandated Vaccines in the United States,” Governing, August 5, 2021, https://www.governing.com/now/the-long-history-of-mandated-vaccines-in-the-united-states.
[14] Elisée Soumonni, “Disease, religion and medicine: smallpox in nineteenth-century Benin,” História, Ciências, Saúde-Manguinhos 19, no. suppl 1 (2012)
[15] Roland Pierik, “On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers,” SSRN Electronic Journal, 2016, xx, doi:10.2139/ssrn.2807903.
[16] Roland Pierik, “On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers
[17] Roland Pierik, “On Religious and Secular Exemptions. A Case Study of Childhood Vaccination Waivers
[18] Alison Knopf, “Vaccines do not cause autism: Pediatricians fight back against anti-science,” The Brown University Child and Adolescent Behavior Letter 33, no. S2 (2017): xx, doi:10.1002/cbl.30195.
[19] HenryT. Gillett, “Vaccination or Inoculation Against Small-pox?” The Lancet 214, no. 5540 (1929): xx, doi:10.1016/s0140-6736(00)57369-3.
[20] MDParadis, “Federalism and Coronavirus Vaccination Mandates for Military Personnel,” Lawfare, December 20, 2021, https://www.lawfareblog.com/federalism-and-coronavirus-vaccination-mandates-military-personnel.
[21] Kaitlynn Milvert, “Vaccine Mandates in the Military: Litigation Over Religious Exemptions,” Bill of Health, March 29, 2022, https://blog.petrieflom.law.harvard.edu/2022/03/30/vaccine-mandates-in-the-military-litigation-over-religious-exemptions/.
[22] Milvert, “Vaccine Mandates in the Military: Litigation Over Religious Exemptions,” Bill of Health
[23] Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents,”
[24] Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents
[25] Lebeda, “Department of Defense Policies on Force Health Protection: Medical Defense Against Biological Warfare Agents,”
[26] Jason D. Higginson et al., “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Deployed Personnel in a Joint Environment,” Military Medicine, 2021, xx, doi:10.1093/milmed/usab518
[27] Higginson et al., “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Deployed Personnel in a Joint Environment”
[28] MDParadis, “Federalism and Coronavirus Vaccination Mandates for Military Personnel,” Lawfare, December 20, 2021, https://www.lawfareblog.com/federalism-and-coronavirus-vaccination-mandates-military-personnel.
[29] Higginson et al., “COVID-19 Vaccine Hesitancy Among Deployed Personnel in a Joint Environment”
[30] David Segal et al., “Promoting Compliance to COVID-19 Vaccination in Military Units,” Military Medicine, 2021, xx, doi:10.1093/milmed/usab183.
[31] Meghann Myers, “Could the Supreme Court Strike Down the Military’s Vaccination Mandate?” Military Times, February 18, 2022, https://www.militarytimes.com/news/pentagon-congress/2022/02/18/could-the-supreme-court-strike-down-the-militarys-vaccination-mandate/.
[32] Segal et al., “Promoting Compliance to COVID-19 Vaccination in Military Units”
[33] National Security Law Firm, “Mandatory COVID-19 Vaccinations in the Military: Constitutionality, Exemptions, and Consequences for Refusing to Comply,” National Security Clearance Denial Appeals Attorneys, September 22, 2021, https://www.nationalsecuritylawfirm.com/mandatory-covid-19-vaccinations-in-the-military-constitutionality-exemptions-and-consequences-for-refusing-to-comply/.
[34] Segal et al., “Promoting Compliance to COVID-19 Vaccination in Military Units”
ORDER A PLAGIARISM-FREE PAPER HERE
We’ll write everything from scratch
Question 
Write a term paper and a presentation based on the topic of your choice related to religions and pandemics. You interview people and use their testimony/words in your paper.
The Military Religious Exemption History
topic chosen: The Military Religious Exemption History and its dealings with the ongoing pandemic (COVID-19). Go over the Armed Forces’s religious exemption history in the US (for example, the Vietnam War and people trying to dodge the draft or serving as noncombatants like in Hacksaw Ridge). Go into wonder times with the military trying to get religious exemptions from the vaccine for COVID-19 and the ramifications of this. (Some military who are refusing to get vaccines or claiming religious exemption are being kicked out of the military for their non-compliance)
Course Schedule
January 10 – Course Introduction and Comparative Religions Framework
January 24 – Thinking of Narration: Uncertainty and Loss when “Things Fall Apart”
January 31 – Plagues, Fires and Floods, Oh My! Facing the Planetary Apocalypse
https://www.google.com/books/edition/Facing_Apocalypse/16MlEAAAQBAJ?hl=en&gbpv=0
Catherine Keller, Facing Apocalypse: Climate, Democracy and Other Last Chances (2021). I’m assuming about 100 pages per week, so I’d have students read from the PreScroll (vii) through chapter 4 (up to p. 108).
February 7 – Plagues in DSS and Rabbinical Literature
In our unit on the Bible, we will look at the account of Exodus in the Bible, whereby God delivered the Israelites, who were slaves to the Egyptians by means of sending plagues upon Pharaoh and his people until he set them people free. There is a rich history of interpretation of the Biblical account in later writings by Jews, Samaritans, Christians, and Muslims.
Read:
A. Exodus, chapters 1-15. Exodus is the second book of the Bible. You may choose any version of the Bible. I will be using the New Revised Version of the Bible. It is available online at:
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Exodus%201&version=NRSV
After you finish with Chapter 1, do a new search for Chapter 2, etc.
B. James Kugel has written a fine book on the history of interpretation of the Bible. It is called The Bible as It Was (Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1997). It is available for free online at:
archive.org
This is an online, open library. Simply create an account (which is free) and then search for Kugel Bible as It Was. Then, you can “borrow” the book to read the following:
Chapter 1 (pp. 1-50) on the history of Biblical Interpretation
Chapter 17 (pp. 311-329) on the interpretation of the plagues and the Exodus.
Write:
Come to class having written down some notes about what you think are the most important points in the Biblical account (don’t worry about the history of interpretation yet; we will cover that in class), whether these are historical, literary or theological. Try to come up with one of each. Then, make a short list of what questions you have after reading Exodus 5-12. Please bring these written notes to class since they will form the basis for our discussion!
February 14 – Ottoman Empire: Plagues and Pandemics
February 21 – Pope Francis, the Vatican action, and COVID-19
March 7 – East Asian Buddhist Responses to Plagues and COVID
March 14 – Contemporary Jewish Responses to Covid in Israel and the Jewish Diaspora
March 21 – Islam: Plagues and Pandemics
March 28 – Thirukkural and Thiruvarutp: Plagues and Pandemics
April 4 – COVID and Witchcraft