By Catherine J. Frompovich
Finally someone has stepped up to the plate and hit a homerun regarding constitutional rights and the current vaccine police state we live in. But, the most interesting aspect about all this is: Who is the actor hitting the homerun? It’s none other than the federal government’s Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, the EEOC. Wow!
What’s the basis for the legal action in federal court in Erie, Pennsylvania? Alleged discrimination of religious rights for the firing of six hospital employees who refused flu vaccine shots!
Ironically, the suit was filed against Saint Vincent Hospital founded by the Sisters of Saint Joseph of Northwestern Pennsylvania who, in my humble opinion, should have known better than discharge their employees. (Source)
Not knowing all the facts in each respective employee’s case, I’d venture to say that the hospital also could be charged with violation of the American with Disabilities Act Amendments Act, depending upon which of the “prongs” in that act was/were involved and can apply. If there were added health issues involved, such as allergies to vaccine toxins that also can impact religious rights violations or being a cancer survivor, or another “prong(s)” per the ADAAA, then the feds have an even more ‘potent’ case against the employer, I believe.
I would encourage all employees being mandated to take flu vaccines against their rights to Informed Consent and depriving them of their philosophical or religious exemptions to take note of this court case and bring it to the attention of your legal team and your employer too.
Below is important information regarding the ADAAA’s “prongs,” which are the defining criteria in employment discrimination and, which I contend, also can be applied to other healthcare/damaging situations since there’s definitive differentiation established in federal law that now can—and should—be applied to persons who suffer with Multiple Chemical Sensitivity (MCS) and/or, especially, Electromagnetic Hypersensitivity (EHS) from exposure to Wi-Fi at work or school, both of which have been defined by the World Health Organization as “valid” health issues.
Section 1630.2(J) Substantially Limits
“Indeed, Congress anticipated that the first and second prongs of the definition of disability would “be used only by people who are affirmatively seeking reasonable accommodations * * * ”and that “[a]ny individual who has been discriminated against because of an impairment—short of being granted a reasonable accommodation * * *—should be bringing a claim under the third prong of the definition which will require no showing with regard to the severity of his or her impairment.” 
Here is the article about the law suit and the six employees who refused the flu vaccine that caused the feds to sue the employer alleging discrimination of religious rights regarding forced vaccinations.