Muslim worker demands to wear head scarf with costume

[Obama 2012 1,714]

How are others being imposed upon Paul? Just curious. Imposition would be what? Being forced to see other people wearing headscarves? Oh the horror and injustice...

Same argument is used against homosexual marriage rights. You'd almost think that us heterosexuals would be imposed to watch gays doing it or something.

Again... she agreed to work under those conditions... her focus should be elsewhere, even though as sandinista! points out... there's already some precedent covering religious protections under the constitution. Maybe some people don't like that on grounds that it makes them very uncomfortable to see different people wearing different things.

There's no 'religious protections' IN the work place and that's where many are mistaken, even a ruling judge in such a case.

The constitution allows you to practice your religion freely and pursue happiness, but it does not allow you to force another individual or group of individuals to adhere to your religious demands.

See this is the same argument I give the anti-smoking crowd. You have every right to open your own business, practice your own way, and do things the way you want to do. You have no right though to force everyone else to do things your way. Getting a judicial ruling to impose your view is nothing short of Fascism.

What a company CANNOT do, is they cannot refuse to hire, fire, etc. a person because of their religious beliefs overall, but they can keep them from practicing their religious beliefs on company time. If a company has a dress code, a costume, whatever, and that costume does not come require a headscarf, then the company can either allow or disallow it to be used. -- Now a company cannot "allow" then all of a sudden "disallow" it, but if it's been the case from day one to not allow it, then the rules are the rules.

[sandinista! 1,816]

Once again, why should I or anyone be forced to bend over backwards to cater for strict others unique nuances?

in this particular instance, it's part of being an american. other people have rights, whether you like them or not. if you don't like this aspect of the us, then go about the proper channels to change it. instead of banging on and on in an internet forum.

There's no 'religious protections' IN the work place and that's where many are mistaken, even a ruling judge in such a case.

The constitution allows you to practice your religion freely and pursue happiness, but it does not allow you to force another individual or group of individuals to adhere to your religious demands.

See this is the same argument I give the anti-smoking crowd. You have every right to open your own business, practice your own way, and do things the way you want to do. You have no right though to force everyone else to do things your way. Getting a judicial ruling to impose your view is nothing short of Fascism.

What a company CANNOT do, is they cannot refuse to hire, fire, etc. a person because of their religious beliefs overall, but they can keep them from practicing their religious beliefs on company time. If a company has a dress code, a costume, whatever, and that costume does not come require a headscarf, then the company can either allow or disallow it to be used. -- Now a company cannot "allow" then all of a sudden "disallow" it, but if it's been the case from day one to not allow it, then the rules are the rules.

really? then why did a muslim woman win her case against alamo rent a car when they wouldnt let her wear a headscarf while waiting on customers? why do muslim men in newark's police dept have the right to wear beards for religious reasons even though it goes against their dress code? what are your qualifications vs. those of the ruling judges there?

Edited August 20, 2010 by sandinista!

[Obama 2012 1,714]

in this particular instance, it's part of being an american. other people have rights, whether you like them or not. if you don't like this aspect of the us, then go about the proper channels to change it. instead of banging on and on in an internet forum.

You have PRIVATE rights, You have PUBLIC rights, but you do NOT have the right to impose yourself on others private property, their time, their company, etc. Your rights end, where everyone else has theirs begin.

[HAL 9000 96]

That's why you get laughed at for distancing the workplace from the rest of American society and assuming an omnipotent role of purveyor of Constitutionality around these here parts.

Nevertheless notice my agreement with you. She signed on to Disney, and she recently decided that maybe its time the corporate culture reflected a more open-minded society, although there is no strict illegality in prohibiting things once they have been agreed to amongst interested parties. Her venue for attempting to bring about change from within is perhaps a bit ill-conceived.

Another thing Disney employees are prohibited from doing is pointing at something with one finger. They must use two.

[sandinista! 1,816]

You have PRIVATE rights, You have PUBLIC rights, but you do NOT have the right to impose yourself on others private property, their time, their company, etc. Your rights end, where everyone else has theirs begin.

except it doesn't work that way, except in yours, and other bigots' heads. the right to have your religious beliefs reasonably accommodated to trump a private business' rights to deny someone's religious headscarf because of their constructed dress code.

[Obama 2012 1,714]

really? then why did a muslim woman win her case against alamo rent a car when they wouldnt let her wear a headscarf while waiting on customers? why do muslim men in newark's police dept have the right to wear beards for religious reasons even though it goes against their dress code? what are your qualifications vs. those of the ruling judges there?

I'm not a fascist. It's really that simple.

I live my life. Keep to myself. Go about every day life. I practice I wish to practice on my time and understand on company time that it is their time, not my own. I adhere to their rules as it's my choice to work for them. I eat where I want to eat based on how a place fits my lifestyle. If it doesn't, I choose not to eat there.

People seem to forget, we all have choices. That's the beauty of a 'free country' where you have the freedom to design your own lifestyle pretty much and have those who agree be a part of it. See: China Town as a prime example of this.

[sandinista! 1,816]

That's why you get laughed at for distancing the workplace from the rest of American society and assuming an omnipotent role of purveyor of Constitutionality around these here parts.

Nevertheless notice my agreement with you. She signed on to Disney, and she recently decided that maybe its time the corporate culture reflected a more open-minded society, although there is no strict illegality in prohibiting things once they have been agreed to amongst interested parties. Her venue for attempting to bring about change from within is perhaps a bit ill-conceived.

Another thing Disney employees are prohibited from doing is pointing at something with one finger. They must use two.

maybe. but i can speak from experience that it's not uncommon for girls who don't otherwise wear scarves to wear them during ramadan. i'm friendly with a somali girl who works at the grocery store i always go to, and she never covers her head, but yesterday was wearing a scarf. why? because it's ramadan. and her employer has zero problem with it, because they don't cater to bigots.

[Heracles 417]

in this particular instance, it's part of being an american. other people have rights, whether you like them or not. if you don't like this aspect of the us, then go about the proper channels to change it. instead of banging on and on in an internet forum.

Forcing your beliefs onto others is a piss-poor example of rights or freedom. If I want to open up a Buddhist company and ask that everyone dress accordingly, I have that right. No one should then be able to come and demand I change my dress code to suit their personal beliefs.

Picture the scenario where someone applies for a job at a venue which is Muslim in nature. After a while working there, she suddenly dresses all slutty and inappropriately. Should she be able to sue when fired? Of course not, particularly if what is expected dress wise is made clear to her from the beginning.

[Peikko 1,575]

Private companies do not have the right to make up any rules they fancy and make their workers adhere to them - the rules have to comply with federal/state laws or they are nul and void no matter what papers are signed, willingly or not. An employee can not be bound by a void contract. I am not a constitutional scholar, but my bet is that religious practice that is not harmful or dangerous to others not sharing that belief must be respected, regardless of any specific rules that the company may put in place that appear to deny that right unless the religious practice prevents the employee from carrying out their due tasks as an employee, or renders carrying out that task dangerous. Wearing a headscarf is merely incongruous to the costume at Disney, that is not a good enough reason to deny the wearer their religious practice - at least that is my opinion.

[HAL 9000 96]

maybe. but i can speak from experience that it's not uncommon for girls who don't otherwise wear scarves to wear them during ramadan. i'm friendly with a somali girl who works at the grocery store i always go to, and she never covers her head, but yesterday was wearing a scarf. why? because it's ramadan. and her employer has zero problem with it, because they don't cater to bigots.

Disney supposedly has its public image thing... but lets be serious now... religion is not something that influences the public image, and if anything- having employees at one of Florida's largest tourist destinations show off their commonalities with many foreign AND domestic visitors, that spend LOTS of money there, is a positive idea. Time for Disney to get with the times and not have robot employees.

How that ties in to catering to bigots is perhaps a bit steep, although quite real. Plenty of times at those parks I have seen very displeasurable faces by angry people at 'differents' enjoying the same facilities they use.

Maybe the imposition that is necessary is some more freaking education for bigots to get over themselves already? It is the 21st Century for crying out loud.

[Heracles 417]

maybe. but i can speak from experience that it's not uncommon for girls who don't otherwise wear scarves to wear them during ramadan. i'm friendly with a somali girl who works at the grocery store i always go to, and she never covers her head, but yesterday was wearing a scarf. why? because it's ramadan. and her employer has zero problem with it, because they don't cater to bigots.

Just in case you have not noticed or things are different in Oregon but supermarkets and car rental places are not exactly theme parks.

Perhaps I should enter a Mosque with nothing but underwear and claim discrimination when thrown out. However, I wouldn't do it for two reasons:

1. I respect their beliefs and traditions.

2. I am completely aware that my attire is not appropriate.

Evidently, you would have me sue them. Perhaps, I can even sue those places that are fenced and not too friendly to strangers too.

Edited August 20, 2010 by Heracles

[Heracles 417]

Disney supposedly has its public image thing... but lets be serious now... religion is not something that influences the public image, and if anything- having employees at one of Florida's largest tourist destinations show off their commonalities with many foreign AND domestic visitors, that spend LOTS of money there, is a positive idea. Time for Disney to get with the times and not have robot employees.

How that ties in to catering to bigots is perhaps a bit steep, although quite real. Plenty of times at those parks I have seen very displeasurable faces by angry people at 'differents' enjoying the same facilities they use.

Maybe the imposition that is necessary is some more freaking education for bigots to get over themselves already? It is the 21st Century for crying out loud.

Perhaps they should hand out guns as well, to cater for those visitors from Chicago or the mother country. To make them feel at home. Then can even stage hourly homicides.

Edited August 20, 2010 by Heracles

[sandinista! 1,816]

Disney supposedly has its public image thing... but lets be serious now... religion is not something that influences the public image, and if anything- having employees at one of Florida's largest tourist destinations show off their commonalities with many foreign AND domestic visitors, that spend LOTS of money there, is a positive idea. Time for Disney to get with the times and not have robot employees.

How that ties in to catering to bigots is perhaps a bit steep, although quite real. Plenty of times at those parks I have seen very displeasurable faces by angry people at 'differents' enjoying the same facilities they use.

Maybe the imposition that is necessary is some more freaking education for bigots to get over themselves already? It is the 21st Century for crying out loud.

right. and it's not as though she's a character actor for ariel the mermaid, and wants to cover up ariel's bikini top and fishtail with an abaya. that would constitute a hardship on disney-ariel wouldn't look like ariel. and people pay money for their kids to see ariel looking like ariel. but a restaurant hostess is a completely different story.

it's fine if you think that's a steep opinion, but i still believe that anyone that would have a problem with the girl bagging their groceries to be wearing a scarf is wrongheaded and bigoted. it's no imposition on a customer to have their groceries bagged by a girl in a plain old scarf.

[HAL 9000 96]

right. and it's not as though she's a character actor for ariel the mermaid, and wants to cover up ariel's bikini top and fishtail with an abaya. that would constitute a hardship on disney-ariel wouldn't look like ariel. and people pay money for their kids to see ariel looking like ariel. but a restaurant hostess is a completely different story.

it's fine if you think that's a steep opinion, but i still believe that anyone that would have a problem with the girl bagging their groceries to be wearing a scarf is wrongheaded and bigoted. it's no imposition on a customer to have their groceries bagged by a girl in a plain old scarf.

Exactly to that last sentence.

People that are unaffected by others' innocent actions have serious head issues.

[Captain Ewok 1,871]

Please, this I am an intellectual scientist who has nothing to add apart from witty insults is getting old. One would think a person of your intellect, would spend your valuable time focusing on your city's mother country-esque homicide rate, than than trying act like you are smarter than anyone who disagrees with your idiotic and baseless views.

Warning not just for this but to everyone to please self moderate the personal attacks. They are uncalled for. I appreciate the help as the next step will be a moderator having to step in.

Thank you .