If we are going to let there be a religious exemption from the requirements of a position, then we need to start letting employers ask if you are of a certain religion and potentially not hire you based upon your religious beliefs. In the case of hauling alcohol, if it is a known thing that muslims will not transport alcohol and the job requires the transport of alcohol then the employer is not being discriminatory in not hiring muslims. He is merely hiring people who are willing to do the job he has. If i was a pharmacy owner I should be able to ask the people who would be performing as a pharmacy tech if they are christian because christians on a whole have an aversion to selling certain medications. Perhaps it should be explained to the potential newhire that there is a requirement to deal with certain things their religion may be opposed to and to let them know that their inability to do such a thing would cause their termination, and that you just want to avoid that black mark on their record by informing them of that responsibility and ending the hiring process with them if they object. Enough of this subterfuge where a person gets a job under the false pretense that they have no objections to the job duties and then forces an employer to have to hire someone else or shift those responsibilities onto other workers. Since the religious cannot be personally responsible and honest in seeking jobs that do not violate their faith, then employers need to protect themselves from deliberately deceptive employees and keep the door open for booting their ass for not being forthcoming in telling the employer about any restrictions their personal beliefs might impose on them. You picked the religion and you have to live with the sacrifices you chose to live by. It is not your employer's job to make the job conform to you. The employer has a specific need, and if you cannot perform that need then you should not be doing that job. If the job required you to masturbate male semen into a cup it is not sexism to only hire men for that position. It is not transphobia to deny a trans male that position. It would be discrimination to not hire a gay guy with functioning gonads because he used pictures of men to cum. I have to add that it would also not be discrimination to refuse to hire a trans woman who might presently have functioning male organs because she is on the track through medication and surgery to eventually not be able to perform the physical requirements of the job.
Oh, I'm sure it's another opportunity to jerk off on Muslim bashing, but in this case it doesn't negate the issue that one should seek employment elsewhere if one can't compromise their religious beliefs to do the job they were hired for.
Plus, it's not exactly Muslims in general. In the UK, jump into a taxi and it's a Muslim Asian driving. Local shop? The ones with all those cigarettes and booze? Yeah, usually a Muslim. I don't see any refusals to take people to/from drinking establishments, or the two biggest vices getting flung out and not sold.
Did you notice how I said the Christian lady was wrong too. You are the one trying to turn this into a sectarian religious thing while I am being equal opportunity trying to hold everyone to the same standard. The position is pretty clear: Do the job or find a new job but no special carve outs for religion.
I said you were right plenty of times. That your bias plays a part doesn't make you less right on this.
You picking a Muslim story for one? Don't worry, Rick and Diacanu have gotten the same shit for their foaming at the mouth over Christianity.
You are really stretching there. I chose this topic mainly because of the recent stupidity about supposed religious rights including the right to not do your job but still get paid.
http://wric.com/ap/kentucky-clerk-kim-davis-loses-latest-gay-marriage-appeal/ Thankfully she is losing but the clerk in Kentucky is still filing appeals and still trying to not do her job while still getting paid for it.
