Kerry-Santorum co-sponser the Workplace Religion Freedom Act---WTF???

[Gloria]

http://www.washblade.com/2005/3-25/news/national/aclu.cfm

ACLU says Dems too eager on religious bill
Civil rights groups say measure would harm gay workers

By EARTHA MELZER
Friday, March 25, 2005

U.S. senators Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) and John Kerry (D-Mass.) have introduced a bill that would amend the Civil Rights Act of 1964 to require employers to do more to accommodate religious employees.

Kerry and other supporters — including gay-friendly U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton (D-N.Y.), a possible Democratic presidential candidate in 2008 — have characterized the Workplace Religion Freedom Act as a bill that would protect people from being penalized for taking time off to observe religious holidays or from being discriminated against for wearing turbans, headscarves or other religiously required clothing.

Christopher Labonte, legislative director at the Human Rights Campaign, said many religious groups support the bill, including organizations such as the Religious Action Center and the Anti-Defamation League, which have been longtime allies on gay and lesbian rights issues.

Labonte said that though the bill was apparently created with good intentions, the way it is written could cause harm to gay people.

HRC outlined its objections about WRFA in a letter March 15 to members of Congress:

MORE

[coloradodem2005]

1. Has Hell frozen over?

Never thought Kerry and Santorum would work together on anything.

[JI7]

12. he has worked with Jesse Helms also

[Pepperbelly]

2. A mixed bag but I suspect that ...

most of those objections could be addressed in the committee and amendment process. It could be a poison pill from BOTH parties who may try to blame the other side for it not passing. IOW, it could well be sound and fury signifying precisely nothig.

[Itsthetruth]

No Need To Speculate: It's A Reactionary Bill

No need to speculate. This also appears in the article:

HRC outlined its objections about WRFA in a letter March 15 to members of Congress:

“The concern here is that employers would have serious difficulty resolving instances where an employee posts a sign reading ‘God hates fags’ in his office or cubicle; where workers proselytize on the ‘sins of the homosexual lifestyle’ over lunch and on breaks; where a social worker proffers a religious objection to being the case manager or counselor for a youth who is gay or transgender; or where a truck driver on 24-hour driving shift who gives a religious reason for refusing to drive with a co-driver who is gay, lesbian, bisexual or transgender.”

“Kerry has made promises that he would try to fix the bill, but his office has been adamantly unwilling to make changes,” said Christopher Anders, legislative counsel for the ACLU Washington office.

Anders, at the ACLU, said several groups, including the National Women’s Law Council, the National Council of Jewish Women and Planned Parenthood, have held meetings with the Democratic co-sponsors “to try and show them that there are ways to fix the bill without harming access to civil rights or health care.”

“They could have added language so WRFA could not be used to override state or federal civil rights laws or company non-discrimination policies or block access to health care,” he added. “This has not been done.”

[Pepperbelly]

16. I read the entire article ...

very carefully and read that paragraph but also read many other things that are not bad things at all ...

I still maintain my original position.

[blm]

25. I'm with you. There are alot of Muslims forced to work during their prayer

times at sunset with the threat of being fired. Recently a small group walked off the job in protest.

The American work schedule already operates pretty much on Christian holiday timetable, so I would think Kerry is involved in this bill to protect the minority religions where needed.

Somebody has to.

Thankfully, Kerry has studied the religions of almost every region in the world, so it makes perfect sense that he would step up to the plate on this bill.

[Ken Burch]

3. Kerry probably thinks this will help him crack the Red States.

Well, maybe they can amend it to take the antigay aspects out.

[KittyWampus]

7. Helping Muslims Not Be Discriminated Against Would Assist Kerry

in RED states?

Want to flesh that thought out a bit there?

[Ken Burch]

69. Not so much the Muslim thing, obviously, but backing a bill

co sponsored by a "Religious Right" heavy hitter like Santorum that was about protecting(and possibly privileging)public religiousity.

And actually, so long as they can clear up the anti-gay aspect, it wouldn't be a bad bill.

I wasn't trashing Kerry here, just speculating as to motive.

[blm]

79. Then you would have to factor in his many years studying world religions

into your speculation of his motives.

Too few lawmakers in this country have bothered to study the world's religions and their impact on their cultures and governments. Kerry did for over a decade and I am glad he's stepping up to influence this bill.

[Ken Burch]

80. Ok, but I'd be a little less suspicious if he weren't refusing to meet

with gay and lesbian groups on this.

In that sense, it seems like he's "doing a Sistah Souljah."

[Sanity Claws]

4. I don't think deserves a WTF

This would protect religious minorities, like Wiccans and Muslims, in terms of scheduling or other things. You'd be surprised at what they encounter in the workplace. Perhaps the bill needs to be shored up against misuse but the bill is not the result of some RW conspiracy.

[FreedomAngel82]

6. I do see that point

I'm sure in this country it's especially hard on muslims and wiccans right now. It's not fair that Christians get off for their holiday's but nobody else does.

[Gloria]

21. For me, it's the Kerry-Santorum linkup, with Hillary not far behind

that evoked the initial "WTF"

[JI7]

22. why would that evoke a WTF ?

he has worked with Jesse Helms before also.

[blm]

29. Not odd to me. Kerry has studied every religion of every region for years

to better understand their influence on their cultures and governments.

Wouldn't you WANT somebody with that background to step up to the plate to influence a bill like that for the minority religions?

[tjdee]

5. So very much WTFing comes to mind....three or four at least!

What about health insurance, jerks!

[KittyWampus]

9. Seems I Recall Kerry Had A Decent Start On Health Care Reform

while running.

And I'm sure Congressional Dems would LOVE To address Health Care.

Oh, Wait, the Dems aren't in control, are they?

And it's not like Congresscritters can't work on more than one item at a time.

[Itsthetruth]

10. Christians Are Persecuted In America

Can't do the health coverage thing. That costs money! We have a real lack of religious freedom in America. Christians are being persecuted and we must stop that. Do you believe that?

Now this bill ought to capture a few right-wing votes.

[JI7]

13. people who wear turbans are Christians ?

[LittleClarkie]

32. I know a few gay men who wear turbans

but I don't know if it's part of their religion.

[JI7]

33. there are Sikhs who are gay

so yes, it's possible.

[QC]

35. Gloria Swanson impersonators? n/t

[LittleClarkie]

36. I'm ready for my closeup, Mr. DeMille

Church of the Terminally Faaabulous

[LittleClarkie]

24. What about health care?

He has that bill in the works as well. Should he only do one at a time?

[tjdee]

68. Until it's done, yes, he should.

I'm so sick of this "Let's rush a bill through for Terri Schiavo" Congress, and the fact that Kerry thinks it's a dandy idea to pair up with that liberal (sic) stalwart Santorum to sponsor this sort of bill, at this time, does indeed warrant a WTF. My irritation at this news is more a general one, though. Not targeted at Kerry so much.

All the work and expense done to trot out a "we love you even if you wear a turban" grandstanding POS bill like this is ridiculous. Of course I am for religious freedom in the workplace, DUH, but at this time I am not convinced it is as pressing to the Congress as any number of other issues.

This could be because I am not Sikh/Wiccan/etc.

[mattclearing]

8. Hmmm...Not sure how to feel about that.

It's not clear to me how the bill harms gays, other than to create a conflict between religious rights and gay rights.

The rush to embrace "values," whatever that means, continues the time-honored tradition of pandering to whatever bullshit the media and Republicans say about us.

Nice one there, Kerry.

Incidentally, what does the bill mean for Rastafarians and drug-testing?

:D

Edit to note: I wish Kerry pandered to the good people on DU as much as he panders to media whores' and the Republicans' image of him.

[politicasista]

17. Stop hating on Kerry

and get over the primaries!

[mattclearing]

41. It's not hating.

I like Kerry.

But let's face it...he needs a little more Dean and a little less Clinton.

[politicasista]

51. It's all good

couldn't go back and edit.

[Mass]

18. Helping minority religion is pandering

All non christian religions support this bill. This would allow them to celebrate their religious holidays without risking being fired.

The only thing I hope is that the necessary modifications will be made to avoid gay bashing and other things (such as women's discrimination).

[mattclearing]

42. I can agree with that.

I question Kerry being the co-sponsor because there is a conventional wisdom that says he lost because of "values."

I know it's crap.

You know it's crap.

But would he be the person with his name on the bill if he knew the "values" thing was crap?

That's my problem with it in a nutshell.

[Freddie Stubbs]

89. He sponsored the same bill in the last Congress

So this isn't evidence that he has changed his positions yet because of last year's loss.

[LittleClarkie]

26. I didn't know the Muslim vote was so critical that it needed pandering to

It seems like a decent bill that could use some work. What's wrong with protecting everyone, including Hindis, Muslims, Wiccans, as well as Christians.

They may need a "no-hate speech" amendment added, I will admit. But whoever said that "hating fags" was critical to Christianity. On the contrary, I don't think Jesus would approve of hate.

[mattclearing]

43. Just to make sure...

I don't mind the bill. I approve of anything that allows people to practice their faith in the way intended.

I just question Kerry's motives because of the appearance of catering to "values voters."

[LittleClarkie]

52. Eh, I'm giving him the benefit of the doubt as far as appearances go

He hasn't been pandering so far. He's been doing quite well so far, actually. I don't think, with the votes he's cast so far, that this one bill would fool anybody anyway. Hillary, on the other hand, has definitely been pandering like a fiend. Putting a hand out to pro-lifers, going after violence in video games as if that were all we needed to worry about, talking about faith-based initiatives. I'd say she was pandering far more.

Kerry has made one comment about the big-tent and pro-life voters, and now this bill, which really does have some merit and may or may not be pleasing to Red Staters, considering it's inclusion of non-Christians. I think he can be forgiven.

[mattclearing]

78. You are right on both counts.

Kerry has been pretty normal outside of this, where Hillary's been pandering to any and everyone that will listen.

[blm]

34. Wrong. Kerry has studied world religions for many years. He should step up

and better inform this bill to protect the rights of the minority religions in this country.

Wouldn't you WANT someone who has studied the world's religions and knows the law to influence a bill like this?

Why assume something so nasty about the man, when his bio shows that he has studied in this area for so many years?

He has even studied the effects of no religion on cultures around the world and how those peoples' views influence their culture and government. I think that's a very unique perspective that doesn't get enough thoughtful consideration. Kerry bothered ....and he did it for YEARS.

The 1997 Windsurfer article on Kerry went into some descriptions of that part of his life and work.

[mattclearing]

44. Funny, I don't remember him sponsoring this bill last year.

Or the year before that. Or any of the other of several years before that.

Or in 93, when he could have gotten such a bill passed.

No, he's doing it now, six months after losing an election "because of values."

I'd like to give him the benefit of the doubt, but I think the timing is relevant.

[JI7]

45. NOT TRUE

he introducted it in 1997 or 1998. can't say exactly but around then.

[mattclearing]

46. Damn. My bad.

A link would be nice, but I'll take your word for it.

Sorry JK. We cool.

[politicasista]

50. It's okay tasteblind

I have been in an up and down mode since the election. My bad.:hi:

[LittleClarkie]

53. Haven't we all!

And that's putting it mildly.

[JI7]

54. LINK

he cosponsered it with then senator Dan Coates of Indiana at that time. the congressional sites are confusing but this link gives the number and date of the bill so if you want to look it up at the offical congressional sites you can.

"1998-JAN: The WRFA was introduced in the House as H.R. 2948 by William Goodling. It was introduced in the Senate as S. 1124 by John Kerry (D-MA) and Dan Coats (R-IN)"



http://www.religioustolerance.org/wrfa.htm

[blm]

55. Actually, it's the media. They portray him exactly the way he ISN'T and so

many people are surprised what they learn about the reality of the man. On so many levels.

The 1997 Windsurfer article is a great sample of the man's spiritual searches to find multi-leveled answers to global relationships in the world.


This post was supposed to be a reply to tasteblind. Sorry J17.

[LittleClarkie]

67. Ah so, bipartisan even then

with this bill. Another time, another Republican.

Not everyone here agrees with bipartisanship, but I do think that Kerry sincerely tries to be a uniter when he can. He has been known to work with Republicans on something he believes in, like Helms and the Iran/Contra affair, or voting for the deficit reduction bills of both Democrats and Republicans.

I like to say I don't care where a good idea comes from. I don't like kneejerk, "it's a Republican bill so we have to reject it" reactions, nor do I like "it's a Democrat bill so we have to reject it" reactions. Rather like the Alaskan Senator I heard of who voted against Clinton judicial appointees merely because they were Clinton appointees. Asshattery on both sides can be quite annoying.

[Freddie Stubbs]

81. Actually, he did cosponsor Santorum's bill in the last Congress

http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/D?d108:1:./temp/~bd3cW4:@@@P|/bss/d108query.html|

[LittleClarkie]

11. So what's wrong with that

Read it. I love the part about protecting folks wearing turbans and headscarves and other clothing.

Not necessarily Red State bait. At the least, I agree with Labonte that the bill seems to have been created with good intent. Might need a bit of a tinker, though.

[napi21]

14. Well, I'm torn on this one. I understand religious freedom and all,

but I've experienced it going too far already!

South Carolina: People were hired to do a job in mfg. that required them to climb steps up to the top of a vat. After they were hired, they said they couldn't do that because they weren't permitted to wear slacks (trousers, pants) and with skirts, the guys would look up their skirts. The Co. said OK.

TX: The company ran a 24/7 work week. After people were hired, they said they weren't permitted to work Saturdays and Sundays. The other employees had to work most weekends because the co. said OK.

GA: My husband works for a major grocery chain. They have flexible schedules with everyone getting a weekend, or at least one weekend day off. After they were hired, some employees said "I'm a preacher,a dn can't work Sundays!" Others say, I have to go to church so I can't work Wed evening or Sunday! Co says OK.

I believe the company must disclose the job responsibilities to a potential employee before offering them a job, but damn it, if you accepet the job, you live by the rules!

If an employer wants to say OK to a turbin, a veil, oa toga, or what ever else someone night think of, thats fine, but it has to be across the board, and fair to all employees!

[FreedomAngel82]

40. My gathering from the bill

is that they'll only be off on holiday's. I don't think Sunday and Wednesday services count as holiday's (unless the holiday falls on that day). It's not fair that Christian's get holiday's off for things and not anybody else. Or other people get picked on for their religious items being worn and not Christians. I'm Christian and even know that they get off really easily on stuff like this being in the majority now days.

[globalvillage]

15. I will reserve judgement for now

and hope Sen Kerry promotes the necessary changes to this bill. I think the bill probably is well intentioned, but maybe not fully thought through.
My WTF is with Kerry/Santorum working on the bill together, but probably better together than to let Santorum run with it alone. At least we'll have a voice.

[Leilani]

19. What a crock!

I don't like Republicans getting involved in religion, so I'm sure not liking a Dem getting involved.

This is so obviously a pander to "religious communities."

Is this the MOST pressing thing facing our country?

The Fundies, including Santorum, have taken a hit in public perception..why work with him & legitimize him again? He has been targeted by DNC as a must to defeat. This works at cross purposes.

[Freddie Stubbs]

86. Kerry has sponsered this bill in past Congresses

[katsy]

20. Call me crazy or something...

but is there any way possible that these BASTARDS in congress would accomodate ONE, JUST ONE BLOODY GODDAMN ISSUE THAT DOESN"T INVOLVE RELIGION???

Oh wait... the last thing secular issue they dealt with was the bankruptcy bill.

:banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead: :banghead:

never mind... carry on kerry.

[LittleClarkie]

28. You're crazy or something

:D

[stillcool]

23. discrimination against anything not fundie....

is obviously alive and well for all to see. While if i never heard another word about baby jesus it would be just fine with me, i don't believe that all other religons should suffer because of the zeal of one.

[Mass]

37. Celebrating Yum Kippur is being fundie?

In certain states, you can be fired if you take the day and your boss does not want. Imagine for less wellknown religions.

[stillcool]

57. i believe what i said was...

that discrimination against anything 'non-fundie' was alive and well, meaning that all other non-christian religions are targeted for discrimination, actually all things interpreted as 'non-christian', be it art, medicine, education, whatever they choose to focus on. i applaud any law-maker looking out for the rights of those 'non-fundies', of which i include myself.

[Mass]

72. This bill is asked by plenty of people that are non fundies

and just would like to celebrate the basics of their religion without being fired. That was my point.

For the record, I am agnostic, and the bill does not disturb me at all. I dont see why these privileges are granted to Christians only.

[Nikki Stone 1]

27. Great. Another reason for people to avoid their work.

:/

[TayTay]

30. So, Santorum is in favor of Wiccans celebrating soltices?

This sounds like basic vanilla civil rights legislation. It is consistent with the law in many states, such as Massachusetts, that try to level the playing field on religious liberty.

I wonder if anyone explained to Santorum that pantheists could use this law to celebrate non-Judeo Christian holidays?

[Nikki Stone 1]

48. LOL!! I can just see telling my employer that I can't come to work because

I have to go to summer solstice! LOL!!!

I'm not even a Wiccan but it would be worth the laugh. :)

[incapsulated]

58. The military recognizes Wicca...

It's true, I nearly fell over when I read it.

It seems there were so many Wiccans coming into the military that they finally recognized the religion. I guess that means holidays, too!

:)

[Nikki Stone 1]

60. No kidding! Wiccans in the military...does the right wing know?

I don't know much about Wiccans. Aren't they supposed to be peace-loving people? (I have this very vague picture of tree huggers.)

[incapsulated]

63. More like "nature worshipers", heh...

And clearly, since they are in the military in enough numbers to cause this, they aren't pacifists across the board.

It's too varied a population to really make broad statements about their beliefs in that area, although there are plenty of tree-hugging hippie types, for sure. The religion, generally speaking, revolves around a God and a Goddess, and is very involved with nature, like most pagan religions.

Think Native American religions, for a comparison. Not pacifist by any means, although deeply steeped in the natural world.

[JI7]

64. i remember a few years ago

some right wing Christians were protesting the Wiccans in the Military. they said they would not enlist unless the military changed their policy and banned Wiccans from serving.

[incapsulated]

65. They're desperate enough...

for warm bodies that they would probably take avowed Satanists, now, lol.

Well, it seems that the military would rather keep the Wiccans they have than take seriously the threats of a group of fundies that probably never intended to serve, anyway.

[jmowreader]

90. They used to take Satanists!

And they still might.

In Berlin one of my troops was a guy named Matt. He was a great soldier who kept getting stuck with...uhh, questionable roommates. One Sunday morning he came downstairs and said he needed a new roommate, right now.

"What's wrong with the one you have now?"

'He worships the devil.'

"How do you know that?"

'He's upstairs doing it right now.'

So we head upstairs and sure as shit this guy was holding black mass right in the middle of his mod's common area. (Building 908, where we lived, was a modular barracks; four rooms shared a common area.) We went downstairs and called the company commander.

"Specialist so-and-so is worshipping the devil in his mod's common area. What do we do with him?"

'Tell him he can't worship the devil inside because he'll burn the barracks down.'

"His roommate says he wants this guy out of his room, right now."

'All right...we have an empty room on the first floor (Matt lived on the third), ask Matt if he'd like to move down there and be in there by himself until the end of his tour, I can do that for him.' Matt liked it, we moved all his stuff downstairs, and my devil worshipper adapted: he found some low-voltage lamps that look like candles at a store downtown and went back to worshipping the devil in the privacy of his own room.

* * * * *

I think this kid became a Satanist at language school. The chaplain at the Presidio of Monterey bussed troops to all the church services the Army didn't offer--Wiccan circles, black masses, you name it and except for maybe Santeria (which isn't practiced in California) or Voodoo, he was running troops to it.

[Larkspur]

84. Fort Hood in Texas is where most Pagans are and the military recognizes

Wicca as a religion because the Supreme Court does. And yes the Reichwing knows about Pagans in the military and Bob Barr, when he was in Congress, was one congress critter trying to eradicate Pagan worship from being held on military bases.

When I attended my eldest brother's funeral at Veterans Hospital, Bay Pines, FL, the Roman Catholic priest recognized that me, my 2nd eldest brother and his wife were not practicing Catholics. He said that the chapel where we met was a non-denominational one and that any religion, including Wicca, could be practiced there.

[zulchzulu]

31. Labonte is an opportunistic horse's ass

He exposes his petulant ignorance of the bill by assuming that people who would be able to take time off for religious holidays or wear a burka at work somehow would be able to put up a "Jesus Hates Fags" poster by the water cooler.

What a pathetic cry for help...

[cestpaspossible]

39. From the letter

The concern is that WRFA will expand religious rights of some employees while failing to preserve state and local laws and employer policies against discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity or gender expression. Many proponents of WRFA argue that since employers need only ìreasonably accommodateî the religious practices of employees, those rights are sufficiently balanced against any harm of discrimination against gay employees. However, without any countervailing federal law protecting employees in the workplace based on gender identity and expression, there is nothing on a federal level to balance the expansion of religious rights with the fair treatment of other employees that may be trampled upon by others religious expression.

The Human Rights Campaign believes that most religious members of our society are fair-minded. We know that they would not use these new-found religious rights under WRFA to pursue discrimination or harassment against members of the LGBT community. However, as written, WRFA leaves significant room for some employees to potentially voice discriminatory views in the workplace or to refuse to work with LGBT co-workers or clientele.

I have news for Labonte. Human rights is not a zero sum game. Also, even if you find someone's views distasteful, they do have a right to voice them, nor can people be compelled to work. :eyes:

[lastknowngood]

38. Yea that's what we need more tolerance for the American Taliban

n/t

[karynnj]

47. No this is more tolerance for everyone

If you are in the majority or in a large sized minority, this probably isn't needed. I live in NJ and am Jewish. Getting off for Jewish holidays was never a problem - we had floating holidays where I worked. If I lived in (random red state with few Jews), it could well be a problem.

I'm glad that someone as open to other cultures as Kerry is doing this. It's also consistent with his interest in civil rights.

[Still_Loves_John]

49. I support the bill

Just like protecting free speech means defending the most vile, hateful, ignorant people, protecting religious freedom means protecting the freedom to practice all religions, including fundamentalist pseudo-christians.

By definition, if you stand for religious liberty, you don't get to decree which ones are ok and which arent. Freedom means the freedom to be an asshole, and to be completely wrong. Whether its the right or the left which is deciding what is acceptable and what it not, it's always detrimental to democracy.

[IndianaGreen]

56. What, they going to ban lavender head scarves?

I would like to know what Teresa Heinz thinks of this bill. She has a better grip on the sort of scum that Rick Santorum is.

[LittleClarkie]

59. Indeed

I've read articles where Kerry thought Santorum had changed and Teresa said there was still no way she was EVER going to forgive him or be civil.

But I can see where this bill would be good where people might be tempted to take the "France" option and deny headscarves and such.

I do wonder what Santorum's angle on all of this is though.

[IndianaGreen]

61. The French option is really a bad option, LittleClarkie

Of course, there is another angle to what is happening in france. Some Muslim girls are pressured to wear the veil, which is really an extremist position since Islam only requires men and women to dress modestly.

I do wonder what Santorum's angle on all of this is though.

I wonder that too!

[incapsulated]

66. Funny thing about the French ban...

Even the right wing here didn't like it. Why? I think it's because we are a very religious nation and that even extends to muslims. Because of our history, we are paranoid about any religious oppression.

That doesn't save you from getting your head bashed in for wearing a turban, though. We are also a stupid and violent nation.

[Mass]

75. The right wing does not mind headscarves.

The bill also apply to crosses that are not worn under your clothes.

[Mass]

70. Not exactly true

headscarves are only denied for public servants so that religion does not mix with governement (and it is not only headscarves, but other religious symbols), and we are talking about a tradition that is 100 year old and was done to avoid what we see in this country now and preserve separation of Church and State.

Dont let the anti-France propaganda in this country disinform you. This measure has been more played in this country than it has in the French media, because as we know, what is French is not good. Only the American way is.

[incapsulated]

71. But it's in schools as well

Is it not? Aren't French children in public schools disallowed from wearing any religious garb or symbols?

[Mass]

73. The school system is part of the goverment

in France and has been for one century.

Why I happen to disagree with the law, I know that the American media have largely overblown the problem. Actually, the first protest against this law turned into an antisemitic protest, which makes it very clear what this is about, which they totally forget to say at the time.

[incapsulated]

74. But that's not what you said

You said this only applies to "public servants". School kids aren't public servants.

I don't have a problem with it if the French don't, and even the religious leaders in the muslim communities ultimately supported this.

But it is what it is, a restriction on symbolic, not literal, religious expression in public life, and it would never be accepted here. I and wouldn't like it either, and god knows I'm no fundie.

edit to add: and if my religion demands that I wear cover on my head, then the choice I have is: forsake my beliefs or forget a job in government.

That's absurd to me.

[Mass]

76. I understand that

Different traditions apply to different countries, which is why the religious ban in France is a bad example to this problem.

Let say that three years of anti-French bashing in the media has made me a little to quick to react sometimes.

[incapsulated]

77. OK

Headscarves where what was brought up, and really what was causing a lot of the controversy in France, so that's what I was addressing.

[cestpaspossible]

85. I have mixed feeling on the "loi sur le voile"

At first I was dead set against it as a limitation on religious expression. But I was moved by the solidarity of the French in rejecting the demands of the kidnappers of Georges Malbruneaux and Christian Chenot to suspend the law -- even the French Muslim community rallied 'round the tricolor. And very few problems have developed, not many defied the ban, and who knows, perhaps the French have something to teach us as far as how to build a tolerant society.

[Carolab]

62. I'm not so sure about this.

It seems to me that one could argue that if one person believes homosexuality is "wrong" based on THEIR religious beliefs, then they cannot object to another person's belief that it is NOT wrong, and therefore cannot discriminate against them.

Read Jefferson on religion and how it impacts all civil rights:

http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1650.htm

[elehhhhna]

82. Once a Stewardess shows up for work in a Burka, game over.

[Larkspur]

83. So New Dems like Kerry & Repukes like Santorum will support Pagan holidays

So if I want to take off Samhain, Halloween in the commercial world, as a religious holiday my employer can't penalize me?

Also, this bill would allow me to wear my dragon and pentagram amulets in public at work? Goddess! I can't wait for the Repukes to start a new witch hunt when Pagans demand from Repuke bosses our holidays. Oh, and can't wait for the "fire and brimstone" when Satanits do the same.

[BurgherHoldtheLies]

87. Sun worshippers need all sunny days off....

Hmmmm...could cause problems with productivity in the sunbelt.:evilgrin:

[DemGirl7]

88. It is things like this that will make you wonder

if the fundies are right sometimes when they say the Rapture is approaching soon.:wtf: