This Summary Guidance is provided  merely as a courtesy and is not intended to provide legal information or  advice to any person or entity. The information provided herein should  not be used except in conjunction with the individualized advice of  legal counsel familiar with the user’s specific situation. This is a  fluid and rapidly changing area of the law, and, therefore, the accuracy  of the information contained herein should always be verified by  independent research. 


 Title VII of The Civil Rights Act of 1964 is broad.  One of the objectives of the Civil Rights Act is protect people against discrimination in the workplace based on a  person’s race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, transgender  status, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older),  disability or genetic information.

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is  responsible for enforcing federal law such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  It is a violation of federal law to  discriminate against a job applicant or employee because of the  person’s race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, transgender  status, and sexual orientation), national origin, age (40 or older),  disability or genetic information.

Most employers with at least 15 employees are covered by EEOC laws  (20 employees in age discrimination cases). Most labor unions and  employment agencies are also covered.

The laws apply to all types of work situations, including hiring, firing, promotions, harassment, training, wages, and benefits.


There are countless reasons people are objecting to adenoviral and mRNA COVID-19 vaccines, the most obvious of which is the overall survival rate for COVID-19 which has been consistently over 99% according to John Hopkins University.  It is  also undisputed that the vaccinated are contracting and spreading COVID-19 shortly after receiving the vaccination (efficacy begins to wane as early as 4 months after injection and continues to diminish thereafter).  Vaccine efficacy lasting less than a year is typically viewed as an epic failure but is now being characterized as “breakthrough” cases coupled with the need for additional booster shots that seem to never end while the adverse reactions and death toll mounts.

Most people do not understand that mRNA & DNA technology utilized for COVID-19 vaccines is nothing like that which has been used for traditional vaccines.  It is a new and experimental technology that delivers the SARS-2 covid-19 virus into the body through mRNA which is responsible for transcribing DNA which makes up the human genome (who you are).  The adverse effects (not always immediate) have proven to be injurious and sometimes fatal, and the evidence is mounting. 

A groundbreaking preprint paper by the prestigious Oxford University Clinical Research Group, published  Aug. 10 in The Lancet, includes alarming findings that confirmed vaccinated individuals who later contracted covid-19 carry 251 times the viral load in their nostrils compared to the unvaccinated individuals who contracted covid-19 before the vaccines had become available.  The conclusion being drawn by many scientists is that the vaccinated seem to be super spreaders who have forced mutation as a result of mass vaccination which accelerated the inevitable mutation of the virus exponentially.  

Sweden was widely criticized for protecting the elderly and most vulnerable without shutting down and destroying the economy and schools, destroying  businesses and preventing the education of the children, also causing serious and irreparable psychological harm in the process.  

The Great Barington Declaration was an effort to disclose the fact that “shut downs” have no scientific basis for managing a virus and appear to be politically motivated.  The effort to disclose the truth at whatever cost, after having been banned and censored by all of social media, was spearheaded by  (1) Dr. Martin Kulldorff, professor of medicine at Harvard  University, a biostatistician, and epidemiologist with expertise in  detecting and monitoring infectious disease outbreaks and vaccine safety  evaluations., (2)  Dr. Sunetra Gupta, professor at Oxford University, an  epidemiologist with expertise in immunology, vaccine development, and  mathematical modeling of infectious diseases, and (3)  Dr. Jay Bhattacharya, professor at Stanford University Medical  School, a physician, epidemiologist, health economist, and public health  policy expert focusing on infectious diseases and vulnerable  populations.  

The Declaration was signed by countless  Medical and Public Health Scientists and Medical Practitioners along with concerned citizens in over 44 countries, totaling 860,000 to date.

Despite all the compelling reasons to avoid COVID-19 vaccinations, the religious objection is paramount for those who value the sanctity of life (from beginning to end) in particular.  COVID-19 vaccine manufacturers Pfizer, Moderna, and Johnson & Johnson utilize an aborted fetal cell line for testing, efficacy and/or the manufacture of COVID-19 vaccines.   Title VII of the Civil Rights Act provides relief by requiring the employer to provide reasonable accommodate to any employee whose sincerely held religious belief prevents them from accepting a COVID-19 vaccine for this reason.

There are numerous other religious objections that prevent people from receiving covid-19 vaccines.  The scriptures teach that  a Christian’s body is inhabited by the Holy Spirit.  It is the temple of the Holy Spirit according to Christian doctrine.  Tampering with mRNA and DNA, the complex and specific coding that tells your body how to make more of you is viewed as sacred, designed by the hand of God Himself.  Experimenting with DNA, mRNA or any other aspect of what makes a human “human” is viewed as immoral and unethical by many Christians and highly qualified doctors and scientists who adhere to a code of ethics that prevent them from engaging in gene manipulation.   You may not be aware of most of them because they have been banned and censored by social media platforms who do not allow any dissent to the vaccine agenda. Christians are also obliged to care for their bodies through proper nutrition and healthy living.  The scriptures teach that Christians are to be good stewards of their bodies which are a gift.  The body is inhabited by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit .   


-Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended  by the Equal Employment Opportunity Act of 1972, prohibits many private  and government employers from discriminating against their employees on  the basis of—among other things—religion. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq.

– Title VII entitles an employee to request exemptions from the  employer’s directives that would violate the employee’s sincerely held  religious beliefs. 42 U.S.C. § 2000e(j).

– Employers imposing vaccination mandates must recognize legitimate  requests from their employees to be exempted from such vaccination  programs based upon the objecting employee’s sincerely held religious  beliefs, unless to do so would impose an undue hardship on the employer.  What constitutes an undue hardship may depend on the work setting at  issue.

– Religious accommodation requests should be in writing and clearly  articulate the religious basis for the accommodation request. Religious  accommodation requests should avoid asserting non-religious objections  to the vaccines or the vaccination program, such as health, medical, or  political objections.

– It is inappropriate for an employer to demand that an employee  support their religious accommodation request with statements from the  employee’s church or clergy.

– Conduct of an employee that appears to be inconsistent with the  religious beliefs underlying the employee’s religious objection to the  COVID-19 vaccines may undermine the employee’s religious accommodation  request. E.g., the employee asserts a religious objection to a  COVID-19 vaccine on the ground that his body is the “temple of the Holy  Spirit” but ingests other medications, foods, or substances with  potentially harmful effects.

– Employers who grant religious accommodations might be able to  require unvaccinated employees to wear masks, socially distance, undergo  COVID-19 testing, telework, or be reassigned. EEOC, What You Should Know About COVID-19 and the ADAthe Rehabilitation Act, and Other EEO Laws – Technical Assistance Questions and Answers (updated May 28, 2021), https://www.eeoc.gov/wysk/what-you-should-know-about-covid-19-and-ada-rehabilitation-act-and-other-eeo-laws.


– Generally speaking, mandatory student vaccination  programs are not unconstitutional and do not violate the religious free  exercise rights of either the students or the students’ parents.

– Students may be entitled to a religious exemption from a mandatory student vaccination program if:

– the school voluntarily offers religious exemptions;

– there is a state statute providing students with religious exemptions; or

– the student vaccination program provides non-religious exemptions to students, but not religious exemptions.


– Although the fluidity of the COVID-19 pandemic and  related government restrictions has resulted in an evolving legal  landscape over the last 18 months, the Supreme Court has established  that government mandates that treat church gatherings worse than similar  non-religious activities are unconstitutional. Legal challenges based  on disparate treatment of churches and comparable secular activities  have been successful in the COVID-19 context (and other contexts). Thus,  churches may want to consider challenging any vaccination requirements  that treat church gatherings less favorably than similar non-religious  activities.

– Some churches are receiving questions from their members about supporting a member’s religious objection to an employer or school vaccine mandate. Under the  law generally, religious objectors cannot be required to provide  supporting statements from clergy, and thus such a letter is not a  necessary component of an accommodation request. Nonetheless, such a  letter can be helpful in some circumstances.

– Clergy should exercise care when asked to provide a letter in  support of someone’s religious objections to COVID-19 vaccines. As  discussed elsewhere in this Summary, a religious accommodation request  must be based on religious concerns, not medical, health, cultural, or  political concerns. The pastor or priest should ensure that the church  member has a bona fide religious objection to the vaccine. In addition,  unless the clergy statement will, in fact, support the objector’s  religious beliefs about the COVID-19 vaccines, such a statement may  actually harm the objector’s request. (Under the law, it is the  objector’s personal religious beliefs that are at issue, which is why  employers are legally not permitted to inquire whether church doctrine  supports the objector’s religious belief. Nonetheless, if the objector  voluntarily includes a clergy letter in support of her accommodation  request, the letter may harm the objector’s position if it contradicts  or only equivocally supports her stated religious belief.)

– Because every religious objector’s case is different, it is not  possible to provide clergy with specific advice on how best to handle  individual requests without knowing the specific facts of each case.  However, clergy and churches may obtain the advice of a religious  liberty attorney on letters supporting specific religious accommodation  requests, and other matters pertaining to protection of the church’s  religious liberty.


– The U.S. military recognizes that service members  have the right to observe the tenets of their religion. DoD Instruction  1300.17—Religious Liberty in the Military Services.

– Active-duty service members have the right to request a religious  accommodation from a mandatory COVID-19 vaccination program established  and administered by the U.S. military.

– Section 3 of DoD Instruction 1300.17 sets forth the procedures for  service members requesting religious accommodations, how such requests  are reviewed, factors for consideration, and appeal processes.

– An active-duty service member facing a general or special court  martial will be appointed military counsel, at no cost to the service  member. However, a service member also has the right, at the service  member’s expense, to hire civilian legal counsel of the service member’s  own choosing. 10 U.S.C. § 838(b)(2), (3) and (4).


ADDITIONAL PROTECTION UNDER STATE LAW:  Please be aware that each state generally has state law that may equal or supersede federal law by way of protection against religious discrimination in the work place.  It is important to identify your applicable state law and provide it to your employer as additional grounds to protect you against employer discrimination based on your religious beliefs.



The Fair Employment and Housing Act (California Government Code Section  12900-12951 & 12927-12928 & 12955 – 12956.1 & 12960-12976)  also provides protection if your employer is discriminating against you based on your religion.  from harassment or discrimination in employment because of: age (40 and over), ancestry, color, creed, denial of family and medical care leave, disability (mental and physical) including HIV and AIDS, marital status, medical condition (cancer and genetic characteristics), national origin, race, religion, sex, and sexual orientation.       





CHAPTER 3. Findings and Declarations of Policy [12920 – 12923]

Section 12920

It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that it is necessary to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or abridgment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status.

It is recognized that the practice of denying employment opportunity and discriminating in the terms of employment for these reasons foments domestic strife and unrest, deprives the state of the fullest utilization of its capacities for development and advancement, and substantially and adversely affects the interests of employees, employers, and the public in general.

Further, the practice of discrimination because of race, color, religion, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, sexual orientation, marital status, national origin, ancestry, familial status, source of income, disability, veteran or military status, or genetic information in housing accommodations is declared to be against public policy.

It is the purpose of this part to provide effective remedies that will eliminate these discriminatory practices.  This part shall be deemed an exercise of the police power of the state for the protection of the welfare, health, and peace of the people of this state.

Section 12921. It is hereby declared as the public policy of this state that it is necessary to protect and safeguard the right and opportunity of all persons to seek, obtain, and hold employment without discrimination or abridgment on account of race, religious creed, color, national origin, ancestry, physical disability, mental disability, medical condition, genetic information, marital status, sex, gender, gender identity, gender expression, age, sexual orientation, or military and veteran status.



We have reviewed employer provided forms that are intentionally designed to thwart the Title VII request they are claiming to facilitate, setting the applicant up for a denial.  Employers are asking personal questions about where you attend church, where you go after church, how long you’ve held your religious beliefs, whether you’ve ever been vaccinated before, and many other questions prohibited by federal law as a condition to SUBMIT your Title VII request. 

You should only use the employer provided form to identify yourself and the fact that you are submitting a Title VII religious accommodation request pertaining to the COVID-19 vaccine mandate.  You may write “See Attached” in the rest of the fields of the employer provided form and then attach it to the Title VII Religious Accommodation form you obtain here.  That is sufficient to satisfy your Title VII request under federal law whether your employer agrees or not.  

However, your employer may ask you certain questions AFTER submission of your Title VII request, but only if they have an objective reason to question the sincerity of your belief (i.e., your  advocating abortion or presenting yourself in a contradictory way to your sincerely held beliefs on social media or elsewhere).  However, they must otherwise presume your request is sincere and based on your religious beliefs and cannot require you to do anything more to  SUBMIT  your request.

Even after submitting your request, the line of questioning from the employer is limited.  Your employer cannot ask for a letter from your pastor or priest, whether you attend church or where you attend,  or who your religious leader is.   It is sufficient to state your religion as “Christian” or “Judaism” or any other religion that applies. 



It seems to be routine for employers to insist on an in-person meeting with the employee after the request has been submitted.  If the employer’s required form was predatory (a “fishing expedition” intended to gather information to thwart the Title VII request), it is safe to presume the purpose of the meeting is the same.   An in-person interview is not part of the process under a Title VII claim nor is it necessary. 

You should politely decline an employer’s request for an in-person meeting  and instead reply in writing as follows:


Thank you for the invitation to meet in person regarding my Title VII request.  I am eager to cooperate by answering all your questions in writing but I am not interested in a deposition style meeting in person.  This is not part of the Title VII process outlined under federal law nor is it required.

A Title VII request for accommodation requires the employer to presume the sincerity and religious origin of the request unless the employer is aware of objective facts that suggest otherwise. Then and only then, may the employer ask probative questions about the Title VII request.

My  lengthy Title VII request outlines in great detail the sincerity and religious origin of my beliefs, far in excess of what is required under federal law.   I also provided the applicable case law and the official EEOC statement pertaining to covid-19 vaccine mandates in the workplace.  I also used the employer mandated Title VII request form which asked a series of unlawful questions that appeared to be a fishing expedition to gather information intended to thwart my request rather than facilitate it.  

If you have objective facts that justify further inquiry about the sincerity or religious origin of my beliefs please share them in writing so I may provide you with a written response.  

Please understand that I will not waive or compromise my rights under the United States Constitution as codified under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  The fundamental rights and procedures for a Title VII request are affirmed and enforced by the EEOC and federal courts when an employer fails to follow procedure and/or wrongfully denies a Title VII claim.  Please follow federal law and procedure for my Title VII request.

 I look forward to receiving an approval of my Title VII request by way of providing reasonable accommodation as required by law.   I am also eager to cooperate by answering any additional questions you may have by way of a written response, so long as those questions are lawful and justified, as required under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.

Thank you.




The fillable Title VII Religious Accommodation Request form below is free of charge.  However, this Title VII request is based on a Judeo/Christian religious perspective and scriptures.  The religious origin of the sincerely held belief must be tailored to fit your religious beliefs if they differ.  This Title VII request is very thorough as it provides more than what is required by law, focusing mostly on the sanctity of life doctrine and prohibition against murder under the Sixth Commandment.  There are several additional compelling religious reasons for  objecting to covid-19 vaccinations which are not included in this form due to length but should be included as the religious objections are not limited to the aborted fetal cell line by any means.  And, employers may try to invalidate your sincerity if you take any other medications that rely upon aborted fetal cell lines, which are many.  Covid vaccines inject a synthetic copy of an aborted fetal cell which for most is an abomination because it attempts to replicate what God has created (the human cell).   


Your belief must be sincere and religious in origin under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.  

This Title VII request form is based on Judeo/Christian religious beliefs which may differ from other religions and religious objections.

It does not matter how new your belief is (that was one of the unlawful questions discovered in an employer’s Title VII template).

It does not matter whether you  have vaccinated in the past if you were not aware that such vaccines utilized aborted fetal cell lines or other religious objections at the time you received the vaccine.  You may have decided afterward that it was wrong and unethical to capitalize on aborted baby parts, no matter how new the decision or tenuous the connection may be to the vaccine. 

If you have not lived out your sincerely held religious beliefs with perfection this does not disqualify you from raising a Title VII accommodation request.  Nobody lives out their beliefs with perfection, nor can your sincerely held beliefs be invalidated for failure to live them out with perfection.  Your HR Director will need to be informed of case law ruling the same if they try to raise this objection to your request.

The template is free!  You may submit this on your own by simply filling in the fields to identify yourself, your employer, and provide a signature.  That’s it!  

Obtain proof your request has been received by documenting the person who received it and the day and time received, particularly if there is a deadline.  

If you missed the deadline do not presume you’ve forfeited your rights under federal law.  Many employers are changing their deadlines with little or inadequate notice.

If you’ve been vaccinated before with traditional vaccinations, this does not mean you’re religious objection is not sincere or valid.  Many people were not aware an aborted fetal cell line had been used to develop, test, or manufacture the vaccine at the time they received it.  Some may have been aware but have since changed their religious point of view since then. 



If you would prefer to have a law firm representing you in your Title VII request, it is available for an affordable, flat fee.  Please contact: info@avoidthevax.com for further information.