Religion only serves to fragment our society, and it is insidiously
opportunistic in situations such as a tight eployment market. It has no business
imposing itself over individual rights and freedoms.
Dear Hutterite, so religion "fragment(s) our society" but those opposing
a person of faith's efforts to maintain modesty and propriety in their
establishments do not? The sign "no shoes, no shirts, no service" has
been a long standing sign in many establishments and I see no additional
infringement on anyone's liberties by the additions of this business owner
on the East Coast. Many of our sensibilities are constantly assaulted by the
attire of males who choose to model for us their undergarments half way down
their back side or females who leave little or nothing to our imaginations in
terms of modesty front. So often we speak only in terms of the rights of those
so called abused or imposed upon by any required behavior or dress and never the
rights of those who are assaulted by these "liberated" souls. As far a
religious school not being able to have its own standards of adherence for
it's teachers, this is almost laughable since so many institutions of
"higher learner" have their own litmus test, a political one, sometimes
imposed ever so subtly, but imposed none the less.
Wow, Hutterite, how socialistic of you! So someone else's property is
yours to use as YOU see fit?Ever hear of private residential
property? That you don't have a right to trespass on someone else's
property unless invited? And if you do, you have to abide by THEIR rules since
you are on their property? Because someone has business property doesn't
mean that they no longer have rights over THEIR property which THEY PURCHASED
and manage.If people don't like the rules of entrance inside of
some business, they don't need to frequent it any more. Vote with your
feet!But, oh, that's right, this is socialist Amerika where
everyone is free to tell everyone else what they can and can't do regarding
what is good/best for "the whole" since no one really has much of any
rights since the government is the one to grant them what they can and cannot do
with their own property.Freedom - what an interesting concept which
most people today have a hard time grasping.
The only reason Catholics have schools is to indoctrinate Catholic youth and to
keep them from being indoctrinated in the 'ways of the world'. If
they hire a person to teach, it seems right and reasonable that they can
determine what is and what isn't taught.What would not be
reasonable or right is if the Catholic church could restrict a person from using
birth control as a condition of employment.Such a personal choice is
none of any employers business.
In Israel Orthodex Jews not only have dress codes for businesses they own but
also for neighborhoods they live in. I read an article where women dressed in
modern fashion are harassed if they walk into Orthodox neighborhoods. Cheese
burgers are also apparently against the Jewish Orthodox faith. Orthodox Jews in
Israel tried to get McDonald's to stop serving cheese burgers. It
wasn't enough to abide by this rule themself, they tried to impose this on
everyone else. Other Jews of course resisted this, saying to the Orthodox Jews
.. 'We don't tell you what to eat and what not to eat, you don't
tell us either'.Whenever Religion has unique restrictions,
there is a tendency to want to impose those restrictions on everyone else.
Religions themselves need to be aware of this tendency and then refrain from
doing this. The rest of society needs to stand up for their rights and not allow
this to happen.
The Diocese wants employees to sign an addendum saying they will follow Catholic
teachings, but the addendum itself violates Catholic teachings....Interesting conundrum....
As a gay male, I've had lots of experiences of religions trying to impose
their beliefs on me--not just within their own domains (no problem, since I have
no interest in being in their domains), but in the wider society, of which
I'm a citizen.Thank God, they're not winning in the wider
society.Having said that, I would defend to the death these
religions' rights to set the rules for their own domains. Teachers in
private schools *should* fit the criteria of what those schools seek to
teach.Customers in orthodox businesses *should* be respectful of the
beliefs of the proprietors.Their freedom to do that is inextricably
linked to my freedom to have equal rights--including gay marriage--in our
democratic society. For me to try to impose my beliefs on them threatens my own
freedom.As for the marriage issue, they don't own
"marriage," no matter how much they claim to. So I'm not imposing
my beliefs on them by being allowed to marry. However, I *would* be doing so if
I demanded that they perform my marriage.
No ones rights are being violated as long as people are free to work/shop
elsewhere. "Freedom for all" does not mean "freedom to do whatever
you want wherever you want".