Expediency is No Excuse for Violating Constitutional Rights: Oppose SB 132 The threats to our Constitutional Rights are all around us and are even coming from us. Just as “national security” is being used by the federal government to justify invading the privacy of citizens, the “greater good” is used to justify infringing upon the religious freedoms of Oregonians under proposed SB 132. SB 132 eliminates the specific religious exemption for mandatory vaccines and requires anyone who wishes to claim an exemption for any nonmedical reason, (including religious reasons)to obtain a signature from a health care practitioner that they have reviewed “approved” information on the risks and benefits of vaccines. During testimony on the bill before the House Rules Committee, proponents of the bill argued that many who claim an exemption based on “religion” aren’t truly “religious reasons.” I once believed that to be true. Since I do not belong to a church that teaches opposition to vaccines, at my request in 2001, SB 450 was introduced which would have added a philosophical exemption to mandatory vaccines. However, what I learned at the public hearing on that bill was of the wisdom of the drafters of the Administrative Rules defining “religion,” which protects Oregonian’s rights as set out in Article 3 of the Oregon Constitution. Article 3 provides, “No law shall in any case whatever control the free exercise, and enjoyment of religeous [sic] opinions, or interfere with the rights of conscience.” The Oregon Administrative Rules define “religion” as “any set of beliefs, practices, or ethical values.” The Oregon Health Department testified against SB 450 saying it was unnecessary since philosophical exemptions were protected under the Administrative definition of “religion.” The Administrative definition of “religion” encompasses the “rights of conscience.” SB 132 was specifically requested by the Oregon Pediatric Society with the intention of making the vaccine exemption process more burdensome on parents, not to ensure parents are better educated. There is no requirement in the bill that those who blindly follow the recommended vaccine protocol provide proof of the same education. Their hope is that parents will just give in and vaccinate their children rather than go through the trouble and expense of getting that signature. Let’s not forget what vaccines mean to the bottom line of pediatricians. If SB 132 passes, Oregonians wishing to claim an exemption, “religious” or otherwise of conscience, will be charged with yet another office visit to obtain the required signature and “education” on the risks and benefits of vaccines. To quote Barbara Loe Fisher of the National Vaccine Information Center, “Whether or not I put my child’s life on the line for you and your vaccines is between me and my God and not between me and you, Doctor.” Proposed SB 132 clearly interferes and burdens the rights of conscience and will violate the Oregon Constitution if passed. As citizens, we must demand accountability of our government and demand our government protect our rights, not disregard them for “the greater good.” For more information, or to have your personal legislator’s contact information automatically displayed with a copy of this alert, please register with or sign in to the NVIC Advocacy Portal at NVICAdvocacy.org and link to the Oregon state team page.
Posted on: Thu, 20 Jun 2013 03:44:10 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015