Religious exceptions on the job

It seems to me that if you are going to allow religious liberty and conscious for one of the above then you should allow it for all.

I was surprised to see such variations, but maybe that is because people did not know they could have multiple votes.

 

I used to work in a supermarket and while some issues of conscience can seem unreasonable, most places of work can find ways to accommodate individuals.

This poll seems to show people's beliefs about religious liberty are bound up in their particular religion.

 

While I agree with some of them in general if you can't fulfill the requirements of a job you should find another job. Many employers are understanding and are willing to work with an employee who has an issue if that employee is a good employee. When I was in high school and college I worked for a video store chain that, in some of their stores, rented pervert movies. I politely requested not to work at those stores and, for the most part, my request was honored. On the rare occasion when I did have to work at a store that rented pervert flicks another clerk would check out and return those movies. I never had one minutes worth of problems with my managers or the company. Why? I did my job well and therefore they were happy to work with me on these type things. Interestingly enough I worked for this same company from when I was in the 10th grade until after I graduated from college (what, some 8 yrs). When I first started college I quit so I could focus on school. After three months the district manager, without my asking, called me at my house and asked if I wanted my job back. Point? If you do your job, and are polite, most companies will work with you. Sometimes I wonder if some of these people who are having these problems are either (a) not doing their jobs or (b) hard to get along with on the job because they are always looking to be offended.

 

Would you disagree with any of the above?

 

While I don't agree with the need for certain of these listed exemptions, because they arenot supported by my beliefs. I do agree that in a country that guarantees religious freedom no one should be forced to betray their beliefs.

If your religious beliefs put an undo burden upon the employer then you should not be working there. Just as an employer is required by federal law to make a reasonable accommodation for someone with a disability they should make a reasonable accommodation for religious reasons.

Bill

 

I think there is a big difference between a grocery store clerk and an OB/GYN.

Typically, one is employed by a large company and the other is self-employed, or part of a cooperative firm.

If I own a grocery store, I would expect that my workers fulfill all of the requirements of that job. If a muslim owns the store, I would expect that they not handle pork, or even sell it for that matter, if it is against their religious beliefs.

If an OB/GYN is employed by a company (I would think that very rare), then they should be expected to perform all services offered by that company. If they work as an independent entity, or in a cooperative firm with other OB/GYNs, then they have the freedom to decide what services they will or will not offer to patients, and what they will or will not perform.

If a cab driver is independent, he can pick up whomever he wants. Whether he wants to pick up only muslim passengers, or only blacks, or only whites, in that regard he is free to make or not make money the way he wants.

If a company I work for makes an undue burden on me in my work, I am free to quit and find a company that will not. There are plenty good companies out there that haven't moved to Dubai or India yet.

 

If only a part of my job requires me to do something against my conscious then I believe the employer can do something to allow the employee some personal liberty.

If large parts of the job conflict with my beliefs then I need another job.

The supermarket example is one I am very familier with. The majority of those stores can give you a job within the store that would suit almost anyone.

I believe doctors have the same liberty. To define their entire job by one aspect is to put down unneccessary restraints.

 

Of course. I am also familiar with this, having worked in one for a time.

My problem is, if you apply at the store to be a cashier, you are obviously going to get all sorts of things across your register. How often is the store to expect you will step aside when something "against your religion" comes down your conveyor belt?

If the muslim girl in question, from the other thread, didn't want to handle pork, then she should not have applied for the job of cashier working a register. She could have applied for another position, but she chose not to and she is now inconveniencing others.

I worked stocking paper goods and chemicals. I don't think there's a prohibition to Muslims about touching toilet paper or lysol. She could do that.

 

Well, if that's a law applied to independent drivers, it's a stupid one.

Of course, how in the world would they prosecute you for disobeying it? Do you have to meet a quota of so many muslims, so many women, so many Indians, etc every week?

No wonder people hate our government so much. It's full of morons who create ridiculous laws like this.:BangHead:

 

I couldn't vote for any of them, as none of them were in their own private business. The closest one I could come to was the OB/BYN, as some of them have their own practice, but some don't.
You know the job needed to be done for your employment. If you apply for a job knowing there could be things that go against your covictions, and you still take employment, you really have no right to refuse to do anything the employer requests, as you have agreed to their terms and conditions of employment.
Now, if you get these convictions after you are hired, you can either refuse to follow your employer's guidelines and get terminated, or you can quit. There is always a way out.

 

I think you misunderstood what I was getting at.

If the grocery clerk owns the store, then they shouldn't have to sell or touch anything they don't want. If they do not own the store and they took the job knowing that the store sells pork, and that part of their job duties included touching the items to scan them, then they knowingly put themselves in that situation. They can not complain. They should have either applied for a different position within the company or they should find another job. The difference there is in who is making the rules, the employee or the business owner.

The same goes with the OB/GYN. If the Dr. is self-employed, they are able to say what services they will offer their patients. Now, if that OB/GYN goes to work for an abortion clinic, knowing full well what services they provide, they should not complain if asked to perform an abortion. They should find another job.

If I make the rules as the boss, then I get to decide what I and my employees will or will not do. If I, as an employee, do not like the rules my boss sets forth, then I should find another job.

This seems very simple to me.

 

I believe for most Christians it is a matter of choosing the right thing in any given situation (not situational ethics I hasten to add).

Even in the Old Testament they were told to not work on the Sabbath but if their neighbours ox fell in the ditch then you were permitted to lend a hand.

Now, for Muslims it may be different. Not too long ago in Saudi Arabia, I think it was there, a girls school caught on fire. The firemen deliberately through girls back into the building and locked them in to die because they did not have on the right clothing to be in public!

But that is not the situation under discussion.

Is it permissable for a Christian to wear a cross or religious symbols? Should a Christian have to serve alcohol in a place of work if it is against their principles?

We are not talking life and death put-me-on-the-stake doctrine, it is about preference in normal day-to-day situations.

 

I agree with the cab analogy.

If the Doc is in the middle of surgery when the sun goes down, well maybe he shouldn't have started the surgery in the first place. I liken that to a cab driver who picks up the blind man and dog, drives two blocks, and in the middle of the worst neighborhood has a guilt trip and orders the guy out.

I just don't like the idea of the government telling people, in their own private business, who they can or can not serve, for whatever reason.

 

In a country that provides religious freedoms, these issues should be applied fairly to all, regardless of their religious preferences. The numbers in this vote appears to me that Christians have tended to vote favorably toward "Christian" issues, while not so favorably to Jews, Muslims and sabbatarians. Of course, since I don't know who voted or how, that could be a misperception.

I can't see the individual questions now while in this text box, but I voted favorably to all of them except two (and the very last one). But I do keep in mind that this must be reasonable for the employer. In most companies with several employees, employers are able to reasonably accomodate the employees.

The two I didn't check were about the sports players and teachers. Although I think athletes should be treated fairly too, I was thinking of a football player who didn't believe in working (playing) on Sunday. Now that would be a problem, since almost all the games are played on Sunday. Looks like he just needs to get another job! With different sports that have many more games and on lots of different days, the accomodation might not be a real problem. Now to the school teacher teaching evolution: I didn't check that one, and it may be a matter of perception. It is my understanding that a science teacher would not have to be teaching it as a fact, but as a theory that is held by some/many about how the world began. But if teachers are required to teach it as a fact, then that would have changed how I would have voted.