[2 of 3]

except in limited circumstances where you may be legally entitled to an accommodation for a medical condition or sincerely held religious belief.

I've thought of a couple of things on this issue.

First, you could have someone you know become an ordained minister, and then write you a letter on your behalf. This can be done quickly and cheaply by anyone (18 or older) and online at the Universal Life Church:

https://www.ulc.org/

Second, I might tell them that it is against my religious belief to bear false witness, and to participate in anything that bears false witness. This is basic Bible 101, 10 Commandments. They can't argue that it is not a valid religious belief. Congress has recognized the Bible as an important foundation upon which the laws of the United States of America are derived:

https://www.nationallibertyalliance.org/sites/default/files/public_law_97-280_oct._4_1982_0.pdf

By using "false witness," you are necessarily bringing into the discussion that what they are doing is fraud. It is ALL based on lies. So, you are not just using a religious reason, but also forcing the issue of fraud into it.

One thing to keep in mind (or at least, this would be my position) is that if the company is acting due to government regulation, then the company is acting as an agent of government. (This is a legal issue that they would challenge, and would have to be decided in court, possibly taken up on appeal.)

At the very least, it is likely to get them to think long and hard about whether they have PERSONAL liability -- the CEO, all executives involved in this decision, legal department individuals, and members of the Board of Directors.

They likely think they have immunity from personal lawsuit or criminal charges. Make them question that assumption, but WITHOUT making those claims.

I would not do this in a first email. I would also not ONLY give it to my boss or HR. Those people are insignificant, and will not have the resources to investigate and find out what is what. I would send it to those people, but ALSO copy it to the higher ups, including legal department individuals (claim they are acting in their individual capacities, and not as attorneys for the company). Such as --

It is my understanding [Note: not saying it is law, just my personal understanding, right or wrong] that the company is acting on behalf of a government entity. As such, the company is an agent of government, and is therefore subject to all limitations imposed on government.

The law is quite clear on this issue. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission puts the burden of proof on YOU, not on me:

"Because the definition of religion is broad and protects beliefs, observances, and practices with which the employer may be unfamiliar, the employer should ordinarily assume that an employee’s request for religious accommodation is based on a sincerely held religious belief. If, however, an employee requests religious accommodation, and an employer has an objective basis for questioning either the religious nature or the sincerity of a particular belief, observance, or practice, the employer would be justified in seeking additional supporting information."

https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/section-12-religious-discrimination#h_984461328691610748665504

I would like to make it clear that I deny that the commission has ANY authority to issue edicts regarding religion, for reasons stated below. However, I am pointing out that even they state that the burden of proof is on YOU, not me. You cannot question my religious beliefs unless you have an objective basis that is specific to me. If you do attempt to question my beliefs, I will need proof of your objective basis, which I do not believe you could possibly have.

Furthermore, you are violating my First Amendment rights, secured by the Constitution. The law of the land, as decided by the United States Supreme Court, is clear on this issue:

"Religious speech is at the apex of protected speech under the First Amendment." Lovell v. City of Griffin, 303 U.S. 444 (1938)

“Man’s relation to his God was made no concern of the state. He was granted the right to worship as he pleased and to answer to no man for the verity of his religious views. The religious reviews espoused by [the sect that followed the religious leader] might seem incredible, if not preposterous, to most people. But if those doctrines are subject to trial before a jury charged with finding their truth or falsity, then the same can be done with the religious beliefs of any sect. When the triers of fact undertake that task, they enter a forbidden domain.” United States v. Ballard, 322 U.S. 78 (1944)

What the United States Supreme Court is saying is that you have NO AUTHORITY to question my religious beliefs, regardless of what any government commission or agency might say to the contrary. No authority means NO AUTHORITY. Doing so is a clear violation of my First Amendment Rights.

Violating my constitutional rights is a felony, for ALL individuals involved in such activity, including officers, directors, and attorneys for corporations.

“Where rights secured by the Constitution are involved, there can be no rule-making or legislation, which would abrogate them”
Miranda v. Arizona 384 US 436 (1966)

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one because of his exercise of Constitutional Rights." Schware v. Board of Examiners 353 U.S. 238.

Under federal law, 18 USC 241 and 18 USC 242, it is a FELONY to deprive, or to conspire with others to deprive, any individual of their constitutional rights.

"Color of law" include acts not only done by federal, state, or local officials within their lawful authority, but also acts done beyond the bounds of that official's lawful authority, if the acts are done while the official is purporting to or pretending to act in the performance of his/her official duties.

Persons acting under color of law within the meaning of this statute include police officers, prisons guards and other law enforcement officials, as well as judges, care providers in public health facilities, and others who are acting as public officials. It is not necessary that the crime be motivated by animus toward the race, color, religion, sex, handicap, familial status or national origin of the victim.

The offense is punishable by a range of imprisonment up to a life term, or the death penalty, depending upon the circumstances of the crime, and the resulting injury.

“When a state officer acts under a state law in a manner violative of the Federal Constitution, he comes into conflict with the superior authority of that Constitution, and he is in that case stripped of his official or representative character and is subjected in his person to the consequences of his individual conduct. The state has no power to impart to him any immunity from responsibility to the supreme authority of the United States” Scheuer v. Rhodes 416 US 232 (1974)

"Loss of First Amendment Freedoms, for even minimal periods of time, unquestionably constitutes irreparable injury."
Elrod v. Burns, 427 U.S. 347 (1976)

"There can be no sanction or penalty imposed upon one, because of his exercise of constitutional rights."
Miller v. U.S., 230 F. 2d. 486 (5th Cir., 1956)

" ... the assertion of federal rights, when plainly and reasonably made, is not to be defeated under the name of local practice."
Davis v. Wechsler, 263 US 22 (1923)

("Local practice" would include company policies, though the court here was talking about state laws. This is why you want to ASSERT your CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS, namely the First Amendment rights of religion and free speech. This assertion preserves them, according to the courts -- or at least, that is how it is supposed to work.)

Anyone who deprives another person of his constitutional rights is subject to personal liability in a civil lawsuit. The limited liability protection of a state corporation does not protect anyone against personal liability for violations of constitutional rights secured under federal and fundamental law.

[Company] has been taking steps to comply with the U.S. government’s COVID-19 vaccine requirements for federal contractors as well as policies implemented by more than 150 of our customers in the U.S.

Please provide me with the government requirement(s) to which you refer here. I am not aware of any government requirement that is applicable to this company, and especially to me.

(Make them show you what they are relying on. Most likely, you will be able to take it apart the way I did the OSHA thing, and it will not actually apply to this company. That is how MOST "unconstitutional" law is done. They make it seem like it applies to everyone, but it really does not. You have to dig through it, though, and most attorneys won't because they get paid by the People being ignorant.)

Regarding the "policies implemented by more than 150 of our customers in the U.S." please provide me with those policies. If you are basing your policy on the policy of another company that does not have any authority to issue such policies, then no authority exists for you or them.

No policy, whether by a private company or by any government agency, is enforceable if it violates law.

[To be continued]