SCOTUS Stupidity

[struth]

If you're doing to do that thing where you pretend that laws aren't force, I don't see much point in discussing it.

Not all of them. For example. My religion is snow skiing. For me it's the ultimate spiritual activity and gives my life meaning. But I'm willing to bet that doesn't require my employer to give me time off for powder days. That might seem specious, but it's not. It's a valid point. The government would reject my religion.

And you're going to say, for "reasons", that my faith is not really a religion. Which is my point. These laws put government in a position where they must decide whether a given belief system is a "religion" or not.

See above. Why should people who follow state-approved religions get "rights" the rest of us don't have?

Which has exactly nothing to do with employment.

1) my issue is with your comment “serve” nobody is requiring the employer to serve the employee
2/3) yes the first amendment. does require the courts to do that…there is a test and jurispurdence on the issue

you have the same rights

4) haha of course it does! the civil rights acts applies to employers and employees

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I remember similar stories in the past; not about Christians, but of Muslims.

Jury Awards $240,000 to Muslim Truck Drivers In EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit

A federal jury in Peoria, Ill., has awarded $240,000 to two Somalian-American Muslims who were fired from their jobs as truck drivers at Star Transport, an over-the-road trucking company, when they refused to transport alcohol because it violated their religious beliefs, according to the U.S...

www.eeoc.gov

JBS Settles Muslim Discrimination Lawsuit for $5.5 Million

The second-largest producer of beef, pork and chicken in the US was accused of discriminating against Muslim employees at a meat processing plant in northern Colorado

www.voanews.com

Muslim woman sues Walmart for religious discrimination after being fired from Knoxville store

In the lawsuit filed Wednesday, attorneys for Fadumo Sardeye accuse her managers and coworkers of harassing her for the religious accommodations she requested.

www.tennessean.com

Muslim Can't Be Punished for Refusal to Handle Pork | Prison Legal News

www.prisonlegalnews.org

Muslim woman sues Portland employer, alleges religious discrimination

Leyla Hashi worked at the Portland Aaron's store, where she says her employer made fun of her hijab, made her serve coffee to other staffers and fired her after she celebrated Eid.

www.pressherald.com

 

[dblack]

yes trumpeters are all in on civil rights

which are the opposite of civil liberties. Republicans used to at least pretend to understand that.

 

[dblack]

Jury Awards $240,000 to Muslim Truck Drivers In EEOC Religious Discrimination Suit

A federal jury in Peoria, Ill., has awarded $240,000 to two Somalian-American Muslims who were fired from their jobs as truck drivers at Star Transport, an over-the-road trucking company, when they refused to transport alcohol because it violated their religious beliefs, according to the U.S...

www.eeoc.gov

JBS Settles Muslim Discrimination Lawsuit for $5.5 Million

The second-largest producer of beef, pork and chicken in the US was accused of discriminating against Muslim employees at a meat processing plant in northern Colorado

www.voanews.com

Muslim woman sues Walmart for religious discrimination after being fired from Knoxville store

In the lawsuit filed Wednesday, attorneys for Fadumo Sardeye accuse her managers and coworkers of harassing her for the religious accommodations she requested.

www.tennessean.com

Muslim Can't Be Punished for Refusal to Handle Pork | Prison Legal News

www.prisonlegalnews.org

Muslim woman sues Portland employer, alleges religious discrimination

Leyla Hashi worked at the Portland Aaron's store, where she says her employer made fun of her hijab, made her serve coffee to other staffers and fired her after she celebrated Eid.

www.pressherald.com

Yep. Stupidity is an equal opportunity endeavor.

 

[Harpy Eagle]

hahah letting someone go to church isn’t a religious accommodation? haha

It is if they are going to church during their assigned working hours.

what does a bartender serving booze have to do with it? if the bartender wants time off to go to church sunday morning, the bar should accommodate, a couple hours on sunday morning shouldn’t be unreasonlencost on the bar

This is about more than going to church, it is about any expression of religion.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

what does a bartender serving booze have to do with it? if the bartender wants time off to go to church sunday morning, the bar should accommodate, a couple hours on sunday morning shouldn’t be unreasonlencost on the bar

It has absolutely nothing to do with it. He's attempting to compare a person who decided to make a living serving drinks and then refused to sell them, to somebody that took a job that never required him to work on Sunday's and then claim religious discrimination when they decided to take an Amazon account and force their employees to work on Sunday's.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wrong. Mine does. Why don't I get the same rights as Christians?

Then show me what this religion is and it's legacy of having people go skying.

 

[dblack]

Then show me what this religion is and it's legacy of having people go skying.

It's spelled "skiing". But there is no legacy. It's my religion. I made it up. Will my religion be recognized by the state?

If not, what are the requirements for my religion to get government approval?

 

[struth]

It is if they are going to church during their assigned working hours.



This is about more than going to church, it is about any expression of religion.

and it’s not unreadable to assign that time to someone else. the law requires reasonable accomadations

people are allowed to freely express their faith

 

[struth]

which are the opposite of civil liberties. Republicans used to at least pretend to understand that.

haha yet you are the one saying people should be fired for wanting to go to church! hahah

the problem is demafasict have. no idea what civil liberties are

 

[dblack]

haha yet you are the one saying people should be fired for wanting to go to church! hahah

I'm not saying that. I'm saying the government should have no say in the matter.

the problem is demafasict have. no idea what civil liberties are

Do you? Do you know the difference between civil liberties and civil rights? HINT: they're opposites.

 

[struth]

I'm not saying that. I'm saying the government should have no say in the matter.

Do you? Do you know the difference between civil liberties and civil rights? HINT: they're opposites.

of course they should. The 1sr amendment says the Govt can’t interfere with the free exercise of religion…the USPS is the govt!!!

they aren’t opposites…but the free exercise of religion is a civil liberty…it’s in the bill of rights

 

[dblack]

of course they should. The 1sr amendment says the Govt can’t interfere with the free exercise of religion…the USPS is the govt!!!

The law in question doesn't take that into account. It applies to all employers. Are you saying it should only apply to government. I can agree with that, but again, that's not what the Court is considering.

they aren’t opposites…but the free exercise of religion is a civil liberty…it’s in the bill of right

They are opposites. Civil liberties are freedoms that are protected from government interference. Civil rights are claims on service from others that demand government interference.

Freedom of religion, as described in the First Amendment, is a civil liberty. "Congress shall pass no law ..." It makes no demands on the behavior of private citizens or businesses. It merely prohibits government from regulating religion.

 

[struth]

The law in question doesn't take that into account. It applies to all employers. Are you saying it should only apply to government. I can agree with that, but again, that's not what the Court is considering.


They are opposites. Civil liberties are freedoms that are protected from government interference. Civil rights are claims on service from others that demand government interference.

Freedom of religion, as described in the First Amendment, is a civil liberty. "Congress shall pass no law ..." It makes no demands on the behavior of private citizens or businesses. It merely prohibits government from regulating religion.

yes the civil rights act applies to all employers…there is a constitutional agreement as it relates to the USPS…in additional there is a federal law as well

what you describe isn’t opposite civil rights aren’t listed in the bill of rights, but are still legal protections…such as the right to vote. You can get interventions ehen either are violated

the USPS is the Govt. not a private business

the ability to practice ones faith and not be discrimated against is a civil right. businesses don’t not have the right to discrimate based on someone’s faith, race or national origin

i get you want to take us back to the jim crow days where they could but that’s dangerous

 

[Harpy Eagle]

and it’s not unreadable to assign that time to someone else. the law requires reasonable accomadations

It is not reasonable to make someone else work extra to give an accommodation to someone else

people are allowed to freely express their faith

Yes they are, but they are not guaranteed a specific job.

 

[struth]

It is not reasonable to make someone else work extra to give an accommodation to someone else



Yes they are, but they are not guaranteed a specific job.

1) that’s on the employer. Who says anyone has to work “extra?”
2) when the person took the job for years it was perfectly fine. The employer changed the conditions after he had already been employed there for years

 

[Harpy Eagle]

1) that’s on the employer. Who says anyone has to work “extra?”
2) when the person took the job for years it was perfectly fine. The employer changed the conditions after he had already been employed there for years

1. nope

2. That happens all the time in the real world. If you had ever had a job you would know this

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

It is not reasonable to make someone else work extra to give an accommodation to someone else

That's what happens when people go on short term disability, become ill or take vacation. Other workers have to cover for them. This guy was not trying to skate out of work. He was willing to put in those hours just on another day.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I'm not saying that. I'm saying the government should have no say in the matter.

Why not? Government has a say in the lowest wage an employer can pay. Government mandates time and a half pay over 40 hours. Some states require employers to provide ample time for their employees to vote on election day. Government has pages and pages of safety regulations all employers must follow. But government should have no say on whether or not an employer must allow an employee to attend church services?

 

[dblack]

I get you want to take us back to the jim crow days where they could but that’s dangerous

Heh, no. I'm trying to get government out of the identity politics game. You're apparently a fan.

Why not?

Because that's too much power for government.

Government has a say in the lowest wage an employer can pay.

This is wrong as well.

Government mandates time and a half pay over 40 hours.

So is this.

Some states require employers to provide ample time for their employees to vote on election day.

Ditto

Government has pages and pages of safety regulations all employers must follow.

And again.

But government should have no say on whether or not an employer must allow an employee to attend church services?

Nope. It's none of their business.