Which of the following hypothetical public employees should be fired?

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

Superfly said:
Or maybe you could stop being so insensitive. It's her faith and it's been with her for 40 years. You aren't a person of faith, so I know that you don't understand, but someone who has had this way of life their entire life can't (or won't) walk away from it anymore than one could expect you to wake up one morning and decide to become a God-fearing Christian.

And I didn't get mad at you. :lol:

I used to be a Christian for a very long time, then I grew up. So yes, I do understand. But this is the point, she is doing it to herself, nobody is holding a gun to her head and forcing her to profess this particular faith. Apparently your brother didn't have a problem walking away from something he believed for a long time. Yes, it's her choice, but you also have to acknowledge her part in that choice and her responsibility for what happens to her because of that choice.

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

How the hell did this thread get on the topic of Catholic marriage and who cares? It doesn't have anything to do with Muslims who work for the government not giving out liquor licenses.

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Mycroft said:
Thanks. I honestly wasn't aware that this was going on.

Those clerks in Kentucky are making three mistakes, in my opinion. They are denying same-sex couples the ability to be married and they are punishing opposite-sex couples by not issuing them licenses, as well. Since they are citing religious grounds for their action, that makes them hypocrites. They are also not doing their job.

Cruz is just plain wrong.

Religious viewpoints have no place in a public office and public employees who cannot separate their religious views from the job they hold, need to resign...or be fired.

Ted Cruz is just plain kooky.

molten_dragon · Jun 30, 2015

SouthernDemocrat said:
OK, this is a multiple choice, so select all that you feel applies. Which of the hypothetical public employees should be fire or moved to a different position for not doing their job?

All four of them. Not immediately, but they should be disciplined, and if they keep it up, they should be fired.

If your job is to do X, and your religion forbids doing X, don't take the job. If your job didn't used to require you to do X, that's too bad, but now it does, so you should find a new job. Your religion isn't a valid reason to avoid doing your job duties and not get fired. This is no different that people who are required to work on religious holidays.

Superfly · Jun 30, 2015

Fearandloathing said:
That is the paradox of the Roman Church argument. They insist the marriage is intact despite decades of separation while ignoring the other "sin" of living together in civic union.

It has been taught that the Romans base that no remarry clause on "what I have brought together, let no man put asunder". They assume that because THEY performed a ceremony He was in it. From personal experience I have to ask how that can be, as Jesus was also clear no one will stand between and his sheep....in other words he ended "divine clergy", that and the fact the guy who performed my first marriage was as drunk as a skunk

I don't know - I'm not Catholic, but did ask my husband about it, and he mentioned how Jackie Kennedy had to go to the Pope to get an annulment so she could marry Onassis.

I do know quite a bit about the religion my sister-in-law is in. Most of my family is in that religion, so I know how seriously they take it.

WorldWatcher · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
There's a solution for that though. She can just realize what an idiotic religion it is and walk away too.

Ummm not quite the solution from a public employee issuing a marriage license.

That has to do with the Public Employee refusing service based on their religious beliefs and denying a marriage license to someone that is divorced against the Public Employees religious beliefs.

>>>>

Superfly · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
I used to be a Christian for a very long time, then I grew up. So yes, I do understand. But this is the point, she is doing it to herself, nobody is holding a gun to her head and forcing her to profess this particular faith. Apparently your brother didn't have a problem walking away from something he believed for a long time. Yes, it's her choice, but you also have to acknowledge her part in that choice and her responsibility for what happens to her because of that choice.

Of course I understand that. It is her choice, and she has to live with it, good and bad.

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

WorldWatcher said:
Ummm not quite the solution from a public employee issuing a marriage license.

That has to do with the Public Employee refusing service based on their religious beliefs and denying a marriage license to someone that is divorced against the Public Employees religious beliefs.

>>>>

Actually, it can be a solution there too. People who would rather keep their jobs can either change their religious views or go find jobs that do not conflict with them.

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
Actually, it can be a solution there too. People who would rather keep their jobs can either change their religious views or go find jobs that do not conflict with them.

Or if they have a good manager and are a good, otherwise contributing employee, the manager can help get them a transfer.

People are transferred and reassigned when they don't get along with someone else (including co-workers and managers), can't fulfill all of the specific duties, aren't the right fit, etc. Options abound.

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

tres borrachos said:
Or if they have a good manager and are a good, otherwise contributing employee, the manager can help get them a transfer.

People are transferred and reassigned when they don't get along with someone else (including co-workers and managers), can't fulfill all of the specific duties, aren't the right fit, etc. Options abound.

And that's possible too. But there are people who have gone into fields that aren't really transferrable. What do you do when you're a pharmacist and refuse to give anyone any birth control? Where can that training transfer? I'm all in favor of finding alternate places where these people can't affect the public with their religious prejudices, but when that's not possible, what then?

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
And that's possible too. But there are people who have gone into fields that aren't really transferrable. What do you do when you're a pharmacist and refuse to give anyone any birth control? Where can that training transfer? I'm all in favor of finding alternate places where these people can't affect the public with their religious prejudices, but when that's not possible, what then?

Pharmacists who work for corporate chains (CVS etc.) have back ups. And they can possibly be transferred to a different role but I have no idea because I don't work in that field.

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

tres borrachos said:
Pharmacists who work for corporate chains (CVS etc.) have back ups. And they can possibly be transferred to a different role but I have no idea because I don't work in that field.

No, actually, if you walk into a Walmart, there is only one pharmacist on duty at any time and according to new rules they have (which I think are stupid), the cashier is unable to hand you the prescription you just paid for, the pharmacist has to do it, at least that's what I was told last Friday when I picked up a prescription for my wife and was told the cashier couldn't just slide it into the bag, the pharmacist had to do it.

So what happens when the one and only pharmacist, the only person who is able to give you your prescription for birth control (which is one of the things I was picking up), refuses to do it, declaring it's against their religious convictions?

Mycroft · Jun 30, 2015

tres borrachos said:
Ted Cruz is just plain kooky.

No...he's not kooky. Kooky is strange or eccentric. Cruz is neither. His position, while wrong, is neither strange nor eccentric.

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
No, actually, if you walk into a Walmart, there is only one pharmacist on duty at any time and according to new rules they have (which I think are stupid), the cashier is unable to hand you the prescription you just paid for, the pharmacist has to do it, at least that's what I was told last Friday when I picked up a prescription for my wife and was told the cashier couldn't just slide it into the bag, the pharmacist had to do it.

So what happens when the one and only pharmacist, the only person who is able to give you your prescription for birth control (which is one of the things I was picking up), refuses to do it, declaring it's against their religious convictions?

I'll take your word for it as I have never gotten a prescription filled in Walmart. In CVS here in NH the pharmacist doesn't give out our prescriptions. Most of them go through the drive up window from the cashiers. I never see the pharmacist unless I go inside, and even then he/she is in the back working.

I can't answer the hypothetical about the pharmacist filling birth control pills. I guess we'll see when it happens.

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Mycroft said:
No...he's not kooky. Kooky is strange or eccentric. Cruz is neither. His position, while wrong, is neither strange nor eccentric.

Um, okay, well I happen to find a candidate for the office of the President of the United States recommending to people that they ignore something that the Supreme Court of the United States says is Constitutional to be a kooky thing for many reasons. To you it isn't. We'll just have to agree to disagree.

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

tres borrachos said:
I'll take your word for it as I have never gotten a prescription filled in Walmart. In CVS here in NH the pharmacist doesn't give out our prescriptions. Most of them go through the drive up window from the cashiers. I never see the pharmacist unless I go inside, and even then he/she is in the back working.

I can't answer the hypothetical about the pharmacist filling birth control pills. I guess we'll see when it happens.

It is a real situation that actually exists though, where a particular pharmacy, perhaps the biggest and most popular pharmacy in the area, hell, maybe even the only pharmacy in the area, may have one person who can deny anyone birth control. It isn't like this hasn't happened before, there are tons of cases where pharmacists have done just that. So how should this be handled?

tres borrachos · Jun 30, 2015

Cephus said:
It is a real situation that actually exists though, where a particular pharmacy, perhaps the biggest and most popular pharmacy in the area, hell, maybe even the only pharmacy in the area, may have one person who can deny anyone birth control. It isn't like this hasn't happened before, there are tons of cases where pharmacists have done just that. So how should this be handled?

I think you need to ask the pharmacy?

Cephus · Jun 30, 2015

tres borrachos said:
I think you need to ask the pharmacy?

It isn't up to the pharmacy, they'll get sued if they fire the pharmacist for religious discrimination. So what policy do we set nationwide to handle these situations?

JANFU · Jun 30, 2015

We have a tie - Christians who refuse an SSM couple a Marriage license and Muslims who refuse to issue a liquor license. Odd results eh?

SmokeAndMirrors · Jun 30, 2015

SouthernDemocrat said:
OK, this is a multiple choice, so select all that you feel applies. Which of the hypothetical public employees should be fire or moved to a different position for not doing their job?

All of 'em.

Don't go into the public sector if you can't deal with the fact that some people live differently from you. You are paid by the general public. If you're not too good to take their money in your paycheck every month, then you're not too good to do the job they request of you.

DVSentinel · Jun 30, 2015

The one that acted individually without orders from a superior and is allowed to be fired without endangering the department for reprisals under Affirmative Action or messing up the departments Affirmative Action quotas.

Lursa · Jun 30, 2015

WCH said:
Yeh, this doesn't have any affect on religious freedom at all. :roll:

I see states stopping the marriage licence business all together over this.

Works for me. If marriage meant so much to people, that license wouldnt matter anyway.

Just like it hasnt for gay couples for decades.

Lursa · Jun 30, 2015

JANFU said:
We have a tie - Christians who refuse an SSM couple a Marriage license and Muslims who refuse to issue a liquor license. Odd results eh?

Nah, we all know lots of Americans hate gays and Muslims.

tres borrachos · Jul 1, 2015

Cephus said:
It isn't up to the pharmacy, they'll get sued if they fire the pharmacist for religious discrimination. So what policy do we set nationwide to handle these situations?

No clue. I would worry about someone maybe possibly not getting birth control at a random Walmart pharmacy if it was important, but in the grand scheme of things I can worry about, it ranks slightly below getting herpes from a toilet seat.

JANFU · Jul 1, 2015

Lursa said:
Nah, we all know lots of Americans hate gays and Muslims.

I would say some, a small minority.

Which of the following hypothetical public employees should be fired?

Select all that apply

A clerk that refuses to issue a marriage license to a same sex couple because they are a Christian.

A clerk that refuses to issue a permit to a slaughterhouse because they are a Buddhist.

A clerk that refuses to issue a liquor license because they are a Muslim.

A clerk that refuses to issue a drilling permit because they are a wiccan.

HoHoHo

HoHoHo

Anti-Hypocrite

Salty, defiant, and completely non-compliant.

Salty, defiant, and completely non-compliant.

HoHoHo

HoHoHo

Genius is where you find it.

HoHoHo

HoHoHo

HoHoHo

Land by the Gulf Stream

Tenacious

Tenacious

HoHoHo

Land by the Gulf Stream

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency