Skip to main content

Holding all "religious freedom" cases to the same standard

Much talk has been made of Kentucky county clerk Kim Davis for refusing to issue marriage licenses to same-sex couples due to her religious beliefs, even though same-sex marriage is now legal nationwide. She was then found in contempt of court and temporarily jailed before being released earlier today. Well, another such story regarding religious freedom at the workplace was reported recently, as ExpressJet flight attendant Charee Stanley was suspended by the airline for refusing to serve alcohol on flights due to her Islamic faith. She's been placed on unpaid leave and it's uncertain at this time if she'll ever work for the company again. She's since filed a discrimination complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

After reading the entire article, Charee Stanley's case is quite similar to Kim Clark's, but not identical. Ms. Stanley's been an employee of ExpressJet for approximately three years. Two years ago, she converted to Islam and asked her supervisor if it'd be alright for the other on-duty flight attendants to serve all the alcohol due to alcohol conflicting with her religious beliefs. Apparently this request was granted and the arrangement worked fairly well for a while, until a flight attendant filed a complaint against Ms. Stanley for not fulfilling her duties as a flight attendant, also making mention of her headdress and a book she possessed with "foreign writings."

My feelings in this case are more mixed than the one involving Kim Davis, largely due to the fact the company agreed to work with Charee Stanley on the matter, did so for quite a while, and the complaint filed against her came across as a bit discriminatory toward Muslims (complaining about her headdress and owning a book with "foreign writings"? Really?). When it all comes down to it, though, like Kim Davis or anyone else, if Charee Stanley's religious beliefs interfere with her doing her job, she should probably be working someplace else. As Kim Davis is permitted to be a believer in Christianity, Charee Stanley is allowed to possess strong faith in Islam. However, religious freedom, like other types of freedom, are condensed at the workplace, and while Ms. Davis and Ms. Stanley can believe whatever they so choose while at work, they can't allow what they believe to prevent them from fully doing their jobs.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/05/travel/muslim-flight-attendant-feat/

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Boycotting jukeboxes because of TouchTunes

I love music and enjoy hitting the bar(s) over the weekend, so naturally, when the mood strikes me, I've never been coy about playing some songs on the jukebox. This past Thursday, a friend of mine turned 50, so several friends of her's, including myself, all met up to celebrate the occasion. At around 9:30, a friend of mine and I both chipped in $5 to play some songs on the jukebox. Four hours and 231 skips later, we gave up on hearing the songs we had selected, and went home knowing we had just wasted $5. This wasn't the first time such a thing had happened to me (and many others), and due to that, I'll be boycotting jukeboxes. Why? The scam known as TouchTunes. You see, here's how the plot typically breaks down. A person (or group of people) downloads the TouchTunes app on his/her phone, consumes one too many adult beverages, and due to this, has less care for spending extra money to hear the songs of their choosing right NOW. That's the thing with TouchTun

The difference between "looking" and "checking out"

I may be way off with these numbers, but it's my approximation that at least 75% of individuals whom are involved in a serious relationship feel it's perfectly acceptable to "check out" members of the opposite sex they're not involved with. Meanwhile, approximately 25% either don't feel this is acceptable or aren't sure about the matter. I hadn't thought about this matter for a while, but since I've been dating a woman for about 8 months, the topic has been pondered about some. When reading or hearing others discuss this very issue, I often times hear comments similar to the following: "It's human nature to look." "There's nothing wrong with checking others out. I'm sure he/she does it too!" "It's fine to do it. Just don't tell your boyfriend/girlfriend about it or do it in front of them!" "It's natural to find people attractive." When observing the array of comments, I i

The verdict is in. To no one's surprise, Jonathan Hoenig has been found guilty of being an idiot.

Just recently, when discussing the Michael Brown shooting and whether or not race had anything to do with it, Fox News contributor Jonathan Hoenig said, "You know who talks about race? Racists." One moment while I provide Mr. Hoenig with the well deserved slow-clap. :: slow-claps for two seconds :: So, that was quite the line by Mr. Hoenig, wasn't it? "You know who talks about race? Racists." Well, wasn't he just talking about race? So, by his own words, I guess that makes him a racist. Also, if he wants to be consistent, does this mean that people whom talk about gender are sexists and people whom talk about sexual orientation are homophobes? With that line of thinking, Hoenig would engage in the following back-and-forths: Hoenig: "So, who are you voting for?" A woman: "The Democratic candidate, because he's been adamant about his support for equal rights for women." Hoenig: "You sexist feminist nazi!"