Dear fellow Vaccination Choice advocates,
Today, (Monday, 11/26/12) the decision will likely be made regarding the Senate Voting session for this Thursday.
Senate President Sweeney (Dist 3) makes the final decision as to the agenda. Please call this morning, both his district office as well as his Trenton office and leave a message.
Sweeney, Stephen – Senate President
(856) 251-9801
(609) 292-5388
sensweeney@njleg.org
Tell Him NOT to Post S1759 for a Vote on Thursday.
NJ has enough to deal with right now following hurricane Sandy. We do not need to burden parents with the fact that their children may be kicked out of school. There is no need for this bill at this time.
Key talking points to why S1759 should not be passed:
-
This bill has many serious concerns, and it is troubling that it seems to be moving forward so quickly. What is the rush?
-
Where is the emergency coming from that this bill needs to go into effect immediately? The regulations will not yet be in place. Who in the state is going to determine and judge bona fide religious tenets or practices?
-
With final passage of the bill everyone with a religious exemption will be out of compliance as a notarized statement is not currently required. What will this mean? Will every child who currently qualifies for a religious exemption now be prohibited from attending school, effective immediately?
-
By requiring all applicants for religious exemption to provide their “bona fide religious tenet” the State is effectively setting itself up as the arbiter of religious belief.
-
Permitting and authorizing the State to decide what constitutes a religious belief, by any view, is clearly a violation of the doctrine of separation of church and state and pierces the very heart of religious freedom.
-
Several years ago, when the regulations included similar wording, there was no uniformity and parents were being harassed, intimidated and discriminated against. What is the mechanism to make sure that this does not happen again?
-
This bill requires parents to obtain notary services and possible legal services to fulfill the requirements. This unfairly discriminates against those who cannot afford these costs.
-
The provisions of this bill are cumbersome and extend well beyond what state involvement should be in a person’s religious beliefs and practices.