[darrellmaurina]

445 posted on 9/3/2015, 1:59:21 PM by Yaelle: “Imagine a hospital worker who is Jehovas Witness (doesn’t believe in transfusions?) who gets transferred to a transfusion dept. They would have to beg for a transfer, or quit. If as a Jew I were told I’d have to work on Saturday, I’d have to go against my religion or quit. You can be asked anything legal by your boss, and you need to perform it. Period. You can always quit. This was a stupid performance.”

Actually, Yaelle, that is **NOT** the law. The Religious Freedom Restoration Act, which codifies much older principles and precedents, was put into place precisely to protect religious minorities such as those of your Jewish faith from being abused by employers.

As with most laws, the devil is in the details. To make a very long and complicated issue short, if you claim a sincerely held religious belief prevents you from doing something your employer wants, the courts do not have the right to inquire into whether your beliefs are right or wrong. All they can do is determine whether your beliefs are sincerely held.

Once that has been determined, your employer **MUST** show a good-faith effort to accommodate your sincerely held religious beliefs. Often (actually nearly all the time) that's possible. An Orthodox Jew or Seventh Day Adventist can and should be allowed to work on Sundays rather than Saturdays. If the employee must get home before sundown on Friday to observe the Sabbath, that employee can be allowed to come in early on Friday morning.

Those are common-sense accommodations. Most of the time they work. Exceptions exist, but the burden of proof is on the employer to prove that an accommodation cannot be offered once employees have proved the sincerity of their religious belief.

Conservative Christians, now that it's clear we are in the minority (at least on the national level) are going to have to become much more aware of our rights under the law. Minority religions have asked for and received accommodations for a very long time. Those accommodations don't have a “don't apply” clause for people who wear crosses.

[little jeremiah]

Thank you for pinging me. I’ve not been on FR much for a while but I may be coming back. :-)

Your arguments are sound. All arguments on the other side are based on the foundation that two people of the same sex have a right to get married and that not only is that now “legal”, it’s also morally correct.

That foundation is wrong and sooner or later, the entire house of cards called the homosexual agenda will fall.