Society & Culture0 min ago
If A Christian Couple Can Be Fined For Refusing To Sell Something They Believe Is Against Their Religion Then Why No Action Against This Person?
435 Answers
OK, so IMHO religion is the root of most evil but lets forget that bit because what I am trying to understand is why there seems to be one rule for one and another for a certain other religion we all have to bend ovcer backwards to accommodate?
http://
http://
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
fiction-factory , //it's [diversity] here to stay as many employers see the many benefits//
What are the ‘many’ benefits – and what is the benefit of employing someone who won’t do the job? It’s hardly surprising that some employers are reluctant to employ Muslims but are happy to employ other people who are ‘foreign’ or ‘brown’. No one should be inconvenienced by someone else’s beliefs – including other members of staff.
What are the ‘many’ benefits – and what is the benefit of employing someone who won’t do the job? It’s hardly surprising that some employers are reluctant to employ Muslims but are happy to employ other people who are ‘foreign’ or ‘brown’. No one should be inconvenienced by someone else’s beliefs – including other members of staff.
It wasn't a case of her not wanting to do her job. She had been employed in the full knowledge that she did not wish to handle alcohol and had been located in a position where this was unlikely. Tesco are the ones at fault for having a ridiculously all encompassing HR policy and for not making 100% sure they could accommodate her request.
Togo - ////The issue here is that Tesco knew the situation, wanted to employ the girl, were happy to accommodate her//
Ahh but would they be "happy" to employ a baker who was liable to object to a "celebrate same sex marriage" cake if his Christian beliefs were to be compromised? Would they accommodate him or her. We know the answer do we not. //
You appear keen to flog this particular dead horse, so I am happy once again to point out the reasons why it is not a comparable situation.
In the case of the bakers - they own their business, and they willingly broke discrimination law, and were successfully prosecuted for it.
In the case of wine-gate, an employee opted not to serve a customer, but the customer was served by the store, no law was broken.
Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.
Ahh but would they be "happy" to employ a baker who was liable to object to a "celebrate same sex marriage" cake if his Christian beliefs were to be compromised? Would they accommodate him or her. We know the answer do we not. //
You appear keen to flog this particular dead horse, so I am happy once again to point out the reasons why it is not a comparable situation.
In the case of the bakers - they own their business, and they willingly broke discrimination law, and were successfully prosecuted for it.
In the case of wine-gate, an employee opted not to serve a customer, but the customer was served by the store, no law was broken.
Hopefully that clears up any misunderstanding.
No misunderstanding at all. What we once again see is a Muslim expecting "special" consideration in an environment that is not natural for their culture. Perhaps she was expecting her peer group to punish her in some way if she did not comply with the more anti social edicts of the group. You know like the young lady recently beheaded for going out without her husband.
Togo - //No misunderstanding at all. What we once again see is a Muslim expecting "special" consideration in an environment that is not natural for their culture. Perhaps she was expecting her peer group to punish her in some way if she did not comply with the more anti social edicts of the group. You know like the young lady recently beheaded for going out without her husband. //
We are not party to the discussions that will have taken place before this lady was employed - but it is clear that a concession was agreed, be it offered or requested.
If an employer agrees to a concession, then the responsibility to ensure that the concession is implemented lies with the employer, who on this occasion, failed in that responsibility.
We are not party to the discussions that will have taken place before this lady was employed - but it is clear that a concession was agreed, be it offered or requested.
If an employer agrees to a concession, then the responsibility to ensure that the concession is implemented lies with the employer, who on this occasion, failed in that responsibility.
Islay - that is obviously the appropriate outcome.
It's clear that some uppity foreigner has got ideas above her station, and is part of the Islamisation plot to take over the world, so of course, she should be fired forthwith.
Any chance of tarring and feathering her on her last day, just to discourage the rest of them from trying it on like this?
It's clear that some uppity foreigner has got ideas above her station, and is part of the Islamisation plot to take over the world, so of course, she should be fired forthwith.
Any chance of tarring and feathering her on her last day, just to discourage the rest of them from trying it on like this?
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.