Should a religious employer be exempt from anti-discrimination laws?

Yeah, we could even put signs out saying

'Vacancies'

Underneath, we could have no queers, no Jews, no black, no hispanics.

Wonder why no one has thought of that before.

 

Does it trump any other law? Was 9/11 not actually a crime because it was carried out on religious grounds?

 

Sometimes we forget those less fortunate who suffer from disabilities like liberalism. But, don't worry, there is a cure.

 

Actually, we all do discriminate. I'm put off by someone who shows up for a job interview wearing shorts, a tank top, and rubber sandals. I'm sure he might be one of the best and the brightest but I still don't feel good about it. The same for me is a guy who shows up dressed well but with a huge--say 2" long--cross hanging around his neck. When I was in the service I was digging one day. Digging did not require a lot of thought and my mind wandered. I realized every single person on a shovel had a southern accent. The sergeant in charge of the detail had a southern accent. I guess I could have whined but I simply got rid of my accent.

I do try to recognize my prejudices and compensate but I doubt if I'm always successful. When I was working, I liked having people working with me who disagreed with me so they could help correct my errors.

 

If a Muslim owns a business and wishes to only hire other Muslims then that is his right to do so as he is the rightful owner of the business. That is his property. Without him their would be no job, period. Nobody has a right to be employed by this Muslim business owner. What would give someone else a right to a specific job from a private citizen?

 

I think businesses should hire who they wish.....but they aren't given that freedom. For instance there are certain things you can't ask an employee during the interview process because it is considered discrimination and a company is liable to be sued. A lengthy conversation fueled by seemingly harmless questions helps get some of this information out without the interviewer directly asking.

Marital status, children, religion...come to mind. You can't ask if someone is a united states citizen even.

I remember a job where the employer often didn't hire several prospective employees--due to the prospective employees offering information that the employer wouldn't have been able to directly ask. One was authorized to work and legal...but not a citizen. My employer felt like that person wouldn't end up long-term. Another interviewee had two small children and was single. The owner saw all sorts of sick days coming in with that one.

He was just looking for the best fit in the particular job he offered but he wasn't free to find that fit outright.

 

No exceptions for religious employees at all.

Anti-discrimination laws, if they exist, must apply for religions, too. Otherwise equality before the law is violated.

 

It isn't right, but I would prefer someone not get hired, rather than have them fired after they have gotten the job.

 

Correct.

So, in short, we need anti discrimation laws to prevent it.

Luckily, we do.

 

You should be able to hire and fire anybody for any reason or no reason. The government should not discriminate, however anybody else should be allowed to.

If the employer/company is discriminating people will hear about it, ultimately harming their public image and their profits. If they do it enough people will boycott them and they will lose more and more money.

 

No. A person's religious beliefs shouldn't be a part of the workplace...

 

Sometimes it is. A Christian Supply store would want Christians as they have a better understanding for the customer's needs. I knew a strongly religious small business owner who felt more comfortable hiring fundamental Christians---because it helped her feel more comfortable entrusting her store to someone who shared her beliefs. Hiring is tough and a risk. For the small business---all things are considered---even if it can't legally be asked.

 

a motorcycle shop would want to hire motorcyclists.

 

Should we?

Well, thankfully you are not in a position to enforce such backward things.

Another way of putting what you wrote is to declare 'We should be able to exploit anyone we can, without being accountable'.

 

Personally, when I go to Benihana's I want an Asian person cooking my food, not a Mexican or a Pole. When I go to my local Thai restaurant I like the fact that the people working there are Thai. I guess that makes me a backward person...

 

Um, so let's encourage discrimination based on the fact you like your food cooked by an 'Asian person'.

Cerebral.

Like it.

 

We;ll he has a point.......If you go to an asian restarant, you usually want to see an asian person......Just like if you go to KFC, you want to see a black person (That was a joke)

 

The point being that business owners should be the ones deciding how THEIR business is run.

Excuse the hell out of me for preferring a French staff at a French restaurant....

 

No..................

 

The only point(sic) that he has, is to trivialise the very serious matter of discrimination.

Who cares if he wants to see an Indian chef making his chicken Bhuna, who on earth is saying that he is being denied that, since it seems to be of key ethical importance to him?

That's right - no one, so it is a non point and a triviality.

Wouldn't you agree?

Jack

 

The only point you have is to trivialize the very important matter of property ownership.

 

Business are not above the law of the land.

A business is free to trade if it operates lawfully.

A business that does not operate lawfully and pay due respect to the laws of the land is not just able to do as they please, and nor should they be able to.

Unless you want to go all the way, and just legalise all business that gangsters engage in, in the interests of enterprise and free choice.

How about that?

 

I don't believe we were speaking about that, nor that it is the subject of the thread.

 

Tsk, tsk. I didn't expect the "It's the law so it must be right, buddy, so get over it" argument so early.

 

Then you obviously haven't given the subject very much thought.