Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols

Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

vincentML -> Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 4:15:32 PM)
Good News for all God's chillun!' The EU High Court has approved allowing employers to ban staff from wearing headscarves and other religious symbols in the work place. That is good news, right? I'm confused. In the United States employers with more than fifteen employees are prohibited from banning religious symbols if they do not cause disruption. If you are Christian you can wear your cross in the workplace no matter that it conflicts with your boss's wish to maintain an image of neutrality, and he/she can't hide you away in the stock room all by yourself, courtesy of the Civil Rights Act. Well, that's Good News too, ain't it? I would think. Freedom of religion, freedom of expression. Yeah, mon! So, in America, if you run a bakery with say twenty employees and you are a Christian who refuses to bake a cake for a gay couple, you cannot prevent the delivery boy from wearing his yarmulke. Oy, veh!!! Which is more important? Allowing the boss to run his business as he damn well wants to or defending your freedom of symbolic speech? Are you a headscarves-gotta-go person or a keep-your-hands-off-my-cross dude or dudette?

blnymph -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 5:46:25 PM)
The ban is restricted to those employees with customer or other outside contact as a representative of the company. Basically it is a demand of ideological neutrality for public representatves if the employer requests it before hiring. Btw it includes not only religious but also political symbols. So in your bakery example (within the EU) the boss could demand no ideological symbols on sales persons but this does not apply to someone working in the bakery itself or the office.

vincentML -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 6:51:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: blnymph The ban is restricted to those employees with customer or other outside contact as a representative of the company. Basically it is a demand of ideological neutrality for public representatves if the employer requests it before hiring. Btw it includes not only religious but also political symbols. So in your bakery example (within the EU) the boss could demand no ideological symbols on sales persons but this does not apply to someone working in the bakery itself or the office. Thank you for the input. However, the way I read the EEOC [U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission] which I linked above, the EU decision is not the case here. So, my question directed at my country's citizens: which do they wish takes precedence: the company's control of its own image, or the employees' civil rights? Maybe I have it wrong.

Termyn8or -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 7:37:18 PM)
I think the employer has the right to require damn near anything. Shit like this is why nobody wants to start a company here. They can have a dress code, and actually require the wearing of a uniform. Fast food joints do. Higher end eateries might require waiters to wear a suit and tie. And there is always the option of firing. Most states are "at will" which means they can fire you because of your eye color if they choose. When you are at work you are selling yourself. I think it is a good idea to respect the buyer's wishes, don't you ? T^T

jlf1961 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 8:00:32 PM)
According to the Trump camp reading of the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof as long that is a christian based religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

tamaka -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 8:06:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 According to the Trump camp reading of the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof as long that is a christian based religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Yes because Trump is such a devoted Christian.... rolls eyes at you

Nnanji -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 8:14:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 According to the Trump camp reading of the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof as long that is a christian based religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Do you have a source for that?

jlf1961 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 9:26:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 According to the Trump camp reading of the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof as long that is a christian based religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Do you have a source for that? Read any post by boscox or bounty44 where religion is concerned.

Nnanji -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 9:48:10 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: Nnanji quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 According to the Trump camp reading of the first amendment: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof as long that is a christian based religion; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. Do you have a source for that? Read any post by boscox or bounty44 where religion is concerned. You've had some reasonable posts on here that stemmed from historical knowledge. Those I respect. This, I don't respect.

Edwird -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:04:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: vincentML So, my question directed at my country's citizens: which do they wish takes precedence: the company's control of its own image, or the employees' civil rights? Maybe I have it wrong. Is ostentatious display of one's religion in every situation a 'civil right'? I'm not a federal court judge, so my estimation one way or the other wouldn't matter in any case. As to the First Amendment's reference to "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof"; does that mean such 'exercise' is to be allowed at all times, in all places, in any circumstance? I think the intention was that one should be allowed to attend whatever service they chose at whichever Christian church, but easily applied also as to services held at whichever Temple or Mosque or Synagogue, etc. It's a bit of a stretch for me to think that they intended that you be able to bring your church into the workplace.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:25:48 PM)
I dunno Edwird..................didn't businesses used to have compulsory morning prayers for all staff way back in the 19th and early 20th century in the U.S.? I know they did in a lot of western countries and you were expected to be there or have a damn good excuse. Surely that would then be the employers bringing their religion/church into the workplace ?

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:31:57 PM)
sorry about that typo but I have an infected hand which allows the fingers on the right hand to wander around they keyboard as they fancy. It's annoying but can be fun at times. I have a permanent rigid digit. Good job I'm not a cold dwarf or I would be a frigid midget with a..................well, you get the idea

Termyn8or -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:38:52 PM)
FR This can get into all kinds of twists here. Work is a public place. Now, should they be able to put up an IS flag in front of a synagogue ? Should they be able to put up the star of David in front of a mosque ? If you work in certain jobs like when my sister was a cashier a long time ago, they required that their purse be clear plastic. Other things include cut that hair, no beards or facial hair things like that. If you don't want that, don't take the job. The hijab (sp) is especially troubling because then you can't even be identified. I came up with a solution for that but nobody wants to hear it. The thumbprint. What if a Muslim Woman wants to buy some wine - for cooking of course because they do not drink ? Or how about a gun ? How can they ID her ? The thumbprint. However, the devices needed are not in place in most of the US. But really putting a thumbprint on an ID is no big deal, however then they need a scanner to read it and compare it. Also, there have been errors in fingerprint matching but I am sure the technology can be developed. Anyway, as much as I have messed with employers in the past, and I mean bad that would get most people fired, I have to side with the employers (and cake bakers) on this one. You have the right to say no. When you lose the right to say no you are a slave. Paying you makes no difference because slaves were paid, in a way. Housing, food and medical, whatever else they needed, massa provided. Even the wood for their stove. We are serfs, which are actually worse off than slaves. The difference is choice. You can walk out that door. And that should not mean that you can start a multimillion dollar lawsuit over a dispute with company policy. If it does, we are more screwed than ever. Follow that path and the light from screwed will take 20 minutes to get to you. There is a limit. Speaking of the first amendment, I haven't heard anything about Westboro Baptist Church lately.. Did they die off or something ? Or did someone finally shoot them ? T^T

Edwird -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:46:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Dvr22999874 I dunno Edwird..................didn't businesses used to have compulsory morning prayers for all staff way back in the 19th and early 20th century in the U.S.? I know they did in a lot of western countries and you were expected to be there or have a damn good excuse. Surely that would then be the employers bringing their religion/church into the workplace ? Yes, and we also had slavery at one time and we also had compulsory military service at one time and we also had child labor at one time, just like the rest of the world, including yours, lest it escaped notice. If I'm not mistaken, I think the OP was about today's world, as would be indicated by his reference to a recent EU action and from that asking Americans what they think about that and *our own current* situation** in such matters.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/14/2017 11:51:44 PM)
My apologies but I guess that as long as citizens ( and some employees) are required to swear on the bible at certain times, even now, it's relevant. Maybe not. I dunno.

Edwird -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/15/2017 12:09:55 AM)
Well at least you're getting up do date, now. Ha. Yes, there is still a 'swearing in' of the US president with hand on bible (along with lots of 'swearing at' soon to follow, no matter which party), but in US courts there has been an alternative to the bible when the bailiff says "do you swear to tell the truth . . ." etc. for some years now. I'm sure such alternative exists even for presidential inauguration, but it would be political suicide just as getting in office for him/her to go that route. Since you have such an ardent interest in these things, I'm surprised that you've missed out on all the squabbles in the US about 'voluntary' prayer before sports games at US public schools (you do understand that in the US, public school actually means public, right?) What a mess. But we slog through it like we always do.

longwayhome -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/15/2017 12:18:42 AM)
As a UK citizen my instinct is for religious neutrality in public places. We have had enough problems with Catholic/Protestant prejudice, discrimination and violence in the relatively recent past. All it took was a crucifix instead of a cross. We all understood the significance. I'm not sure that headscarf quite cuts though as an unambiguous religious symbol. Wearing a head covering is not confined to Muslims, nor would many Muslims choose to wear one. As an example many Indians who are not Muslim wear a head scarf in public. Furthermore the exact nature of a headscarf is culturally not religiously determined. What's the difference between a hijab, niqab and burka? A while ago in the UK it was accepted by girls could wear trousers as part of a school uniform, largely in response to parents who did not want their daughters to have to show their legs in public. This started as a request from some religious groups but once it got going it quickly became non-controversial because most girls themselves preferred to wear trousers whatever their ethnic or religious background. In most place few white girls now wear skirts to school. A case has also been made for specifically not allowing people in certain jobs or situations to wear a niqab or a burka because it covers the face. Examples are public facing staff, customers on banks and people testifying in court. Not sure I really want the state or employers to do anything to control what someone wears, beyond requiring someone to wear a uniform if necessary or to project a certain level of formality if that is required. Uniforms with matching headscarves achieve that aim as far as I am concerned, with employers being able to insist that public-facing staff do not cover their face. I am however conflicted because there is also a good case for an employer insisting on political and religious neutrality in the workplace or at the very least in public facing roles. In Northern Ireland and much of Scotland there are potential issues with Christian groups before you even consider Islam. It's a classic example of competing freedoms, where no sensible argument is entirely right or wrong.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/15/2017 12:22:29 AM)
Yep !!...............public schools here are on the same lines as your public schools there, whereas when I lived in Windsor ( England) there was a public school about 3 kms away that is different to any public schools in either U.S. or Australia..................you may have heard of it ? Eton ? But don't your judges and military get sworn in on bibles or something ? I am pretty sure ours (Australian) do. All I had to do was put my name on the bottom of a contract and I am sure there was no mention of god in any way, even though it was in French. And looking back on it, I have to think that we were a pretty ungodly lot !!

Edwird -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/15/2017 12:28:22 AM)
Almost every pro sports team in the US has a prayer group and sometimes a prayer meeting before games, but that is always aside from the team as a whole. I think the public school sports teams eventually recognized the value in that approach and have taken that avenue themselves.

Dvr22999874 -> RE: Head Scarves & Other Religious Symbols (3/15/2017 12:28:35 AM)
Longwayhome..........................Britain's come a long way from banning the wearing of the tartan and the wearing of the green, hasn't it smile........................ " They're hanging men and women too for the wearing of the hijab" , just doesn't have the same heart-tugging ring to it, does it ?

Page: [1] 2 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

6.054688E-02