Comments about ‘Abercrombie fired employee over hijab, Muslim woman wins religious battle’

Return to article »

Published: Thursday, Sept. 12 2013 4:15 p.m. MDT

Comments
  • Oldest first
  • Newest first
  • Most recommended
ultragrampa
Farmington, UT

There are many other stores to patronize than your local A&F - please shop elsewhere.

Enough is enough!
Saint George, UT

Sincere questions:

1. Why would she want to work in a place that sold clothing 180 degrees from what she wears?

2. Why did the company hire her knowing that she wore a hijab and it was not in conformance with their "look good policy?"

3. Did she just get hired to "bait" the company into this kind of situation?

Hey Baby
Franklin, IN

Enough is Enough is right!

If I'm a vegetarian, I should avoid waiting tables at Ruth Chris steak house!

Customer: how is the ribeye?
Waiter: I've never eaten here...I don't agree with the slaughter of defenseless cattle"...

Awkward!!!

Senseless...

JBQ
Saint Louis, MO

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has an agenda. They do not work to enforce the law equally. I filed a complaint in regard to a summer job at a university. The commission for the city ruled in my favor because the university would not give any information. The regional authority for the employment commission refused to back their decision and then legally stated that the decision would not hold up in court. The university had decided to hire minorities. Obviously, this is something that should have been judged by the facts. Abercrombie & Fitch also have certain rights. This is a private company which has the right to hire and fire. The question is whether the woman interviewed in her Muslim garb or misled the company during the interview process. I am betting that was the case.

The Rock
Federal Way, WA

I would not shop at A&F simply because their clothing is way out of line with my personal standard of morality and many of their corporate policies are the polar opposite of what I believe.

Nevertheless, I do have a question. According to Sharia Law it is forbidden for an Islamic person to be in subjection to a non-Islamic person. It is illegal for them to be under a non-Islamic government or have a non-Islamic employer. Based on this how is she not violating her religion simply by working there?

Chris B
Salt Lake City, UT

I have no problem with a company having a certain look they want to present.

Eliyahu
Pleasant Grove, UT

She works in the stockroom, out of the sight of the general public. What difference does it make what she wears?

A&F isn't a place I would encourage anyone to work, but with unemployment still up, the alternatives for many people would be limited to being hungry and homeless or getting public assistance. Not everyone has skills and education that enable them to choose where they will work.

@ The Rock: The issue isn't what you or I think that a Muslim should believe, or what the average Muslim believes about Sharia law. The real question is what she believes and how the employer accommodates that belief. And, more importantly, if they can fire her for dressing in accordance with her beliefs, they can fire you or me if they don't like our expression of our religious beliefs, whether it be my wearing a yarmulke or you wearing a cross on a necklace.

Morgan Duel
Taylorsville, UT

I wonder when Sharia Law will become the law of the land and tear down the Constitution that is helping it to grow?

Bob A. Bohey
Marlborough, MA

@Morgan Duel: Not so fast. This is a huge victory for religious freedom right? There is a segment of the population in this country that claims religious freedoms in America are under attack. Granted they are manly self described so called Christians and make up a majority of self defined religious people but they still should be overcome with joy on this ruling, right? Now if they ever find themselves in the minority and Sharia law starts to look like it may become a reality here they may be singing a different tune, right?

Moabmom
Moab, UT

I'm not so sure that this is a 'victory' for religious freedom. It's just one more example of government flexing its muscles under the guise of 'diversity in the workplace' against private business and trying to gain more control over private business by telling them who they can hire or who they can serve. Remember the bakery owners who didn't want to make a cake for GBLT couples? Same story, different scenario. Both had religious freedoms vs diversity and so called discrimination at the center of the complaint. Religious freedom didn't win, but "big brother" did.

l.cee
Ridgefield, WA

Deseret News mentions Muslims in any article and sure enough, bashing begins. What if the girl had really been an orthodox Jewish man wearing a yarmulke on his head? Would you see comments bashing halakhah (Jewish law)?

Sharia law will NOT become the law of our land. It would take Congress (with states ratifying the change) for our law to change to anything resembling Sharia law. Our congress cannot even do much more than name post offices these days.

Bruce A. Frank
San Jose, CA

In a day and age where people are being forbidden to wear Crosses while waiting on customers, how in the world does a court rule this way??? Could it be a bias rearing its ugly head in our justice system? Noooo, I am sure our DOJ Attorney General Eric Holder would not allow such favoritism! Right?

It is very difficult to believe that the people whom our President said,"I will stand with them" are not getting treatment outside the recent interpretation of our laws. Particularly in this current "official" stance that we have freedom FROM religion rather than freedom OF religion.

She has the right to dress as her religion dictates, but her motives SHOULD have been STRONGLY questioned by the judge. I have to agree that this looks like a "put up" job. I certainly wouldn't seek a job from a company whose product, I am supposed to sell, was an insult to my religious tenants!

Moabmom
Moab, UT

1.cee said "Sharia law will NOT become the law of our land. It would take Congress (with states ratifying the change) for our law to change to anything resembling Sharia law."... I guess 1.cee missed the pro "Sharia" rulings by liberal judges over the past years. Oklahoma, Aug 2013, Pennsylvania Feb 2012, Minnesota June 2012, Florida March 2011, New Jersey Aug 2010 just to name a few. Sharia IS creeping in under 'precedent' law. According to the DN article Aug 28, 2013, North Carolina became the 7th state to pass an outright ban on Sharia law. 7 states out of 50 is NOT a very good track record when it comes to protecting the Constitution as the law of the land.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@The Rock
"According to Sharia Law it is forbidden for an Islamic person to be in subjection to a non-Islamic person. It is illegal for them to be under a non-Islamic government or have a non-Islamic employer. Based on this how is she not violating her religion simply by working there?"

Consider Islam like Christianity in that there are many different subcategories (denominations). Not all Muslims follow some sort of Sharia law or think they need to follow it and what even constitutes Sharia law varies from person to person,mosque to mosque, and nation to nation.

atl134
Salt Lake City, UT

@Moabmom
"7 states out of 50 is NOT a very good track record when it comes to protecting the Constitution as the law of the land."

When the Constitution expressly forbids anything remotely resembling sharia law in the first amendment, it's really irrelevant what states do or don't do.

Gracie
Boise, ID

@1.cee: "Sharia law will NOT become the law of our land. It would take Congress (with states ratifying the change) for our law to change to anything resembling Sharia law."
Nations rise and fall through wars when the inside agitators can't get their way in any other fashion. Don't be so sure it can't happen here.

@atl134: "When the Constitution expressly forbids anything remotely resembling sharia law in the first amendment, it's really irrelevant what states do or don't do."
We live in a strange world now, including our country. In powerful circles applying legal reasoning in questions to Congress over what they're doing to the Constitution is considered "not serious." Without diligence to reenthrown it as the law of the land, we'll be fully transformed even as we write that it can't be done.

Astatine
Randallstown, MD

You know... it's funny.

I mean, Arab Christians wear headscarves too. I always assumed it was a cultural thing. In our CHURCH, it is a tenet that if a woman is to sing in the choir, they must be wearing something to cover their head. Even the Apostle Paul was like "Women should cover their head because it wouldn't be a good thing if they 'distracted' the men".

Oh wait. It IS cultural.

But, fine, let's assume it IS stated in the Quran to wear something like that (because it DOES mention not being provocative with your clothing). Fine.

Why are you working in a shop that takes that tenet and beats it over the head to die 25,000,000,000 times? It's like a pastor selling drinks at a strip club and then complaining that he got fired because he was trying to evangelize to his customers and cover up the strippers-- you have no right to talk about religious expression when you willingly work in a place that violates or provides a gateway to violate tenets on which you base your decisions.

to comment

DeseretNews.com encourages a civil dialogue among its readers. We welcome your thoughtful comments.
About comments