I suppose I'd have been more outraged if it involved sausages. :chew: :IA:
What happens when Muslims get fired for refusing to do their job?
- Thread starter Nathon Detroit
- Start date
glorydaz
Well-known member
Excellent point. "Barack Obama has closely aligned himself with Reverend Jeremiah Wright and Black Liberation Theology (BLT)"
Which actually addresses the fact that the Obama administration supported the Muslim truck drivers. Why didn't they just let the legal system do it's job? :think:
glorydaz
Well-known member
Now all we need is a Pac-man smiley to chase it and we're in business.
A silly business, but it's booming.
drbrumley
Well-known member
An Illinois jury awarded $240,000 in damages and back pay to two former truck drivers who claimed religious discrimination when they were fired in 2009 after refusing to make beer deliveries.
A jury was convened to determine damages after US District Court Judge James E. Shadid ruled in favor of Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale when Star Transport admitted liability in March. The men, both of whom are Somali-American Muslims, were represented by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers must make accommodations for workers' religious beliefs unless doing so would impose "undue hardship" on the business.
the trucking company admitted that drivers often switched their assignments, meaning it would have been reasonable to accommodate the men's request, rather than firing them.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Societ...rs-refuse-to-deliver-beer-win-240-000-lawsuit
A jury was convened to determine damages after US District Court Judge James E. Shadid ruled in favor of Mahad Abass Mohamed and Abdkiarim Hassan Bulshale when Star Transport admitted liability in March. The men, both of whom are Somali-American Muslims, were represented by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers must make accommodations for workers' religious beliefs unless doing so would impose "undue hardship" on the business.
the trucking company admitted that drivers often switched their assignments, meaning it would have been reasonable to accommodate the men's request, rather than firing them.
http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Societ...rs-refuse-to-deliver-beer-win-240-000-lawsuit
Ah, thanks for putting the cherry on top then. Makes sense.
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
about the Christian baker choosing who to enter into a business contract with?
of course he's not right
glorydaz
Well-known member
He was right about the cases being different. Are you going to look at what I put in yellow, or just donkey down and refuse to give Town any credit whatsoever?
He wasn't saying whether it was right or wrong, he was talking about the legal differences. :sigh:
glorydaz
Well-known member
"were represented by the federal Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC).
Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers must make accommodations for workers' religious beliefs unless doing so would impose "undue hardship" on the business."
.Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, employers must make accommodations for workers' religious beliefs unless doing so would impose "undue hardship" on the business."
Okay, it wasn't really Obama. It was the EEOC.
And, it was judged according to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
I withdraw my objection. :sherlock:
ok doser
lifeguard at the cement pond
:rotfl: buwuhahahahahaha
Homosexual behavior is immoral. Drinking beer, whiskey, or wine is not. By the way, she upheld the law.
glorydaz
Well-known member
Crud. That's just about stupid. I put the yellow in after your response, and then scolded you for not paying it any attention. Sorry.....my bad.
I think I'll just exit stage right.....er....up. :rapture:
musterion
Well-known member
Bullseye!
glorydaz
Well-known member
drbrumley
Well-known member
In other news about christians and muslims...
A federal appeals court said police violated the free speech rights of Christian evangelists by telling them to leave a June 2012 Arab-American festival in Dearborn, Michigan after an angry crowd began pelting them with bottles, eggs and other objects.
By an 8-7 vote, the entire 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday said Wayne County, Michigan and two deputy police chiefs were civilly liable to members of Bible Believers for violating their First Amendment rights.
The case now returns to a federal district judge to award damages and attorney's fee
http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/...ichigan-speech-case-over-Arab-festival-430355
A federal appeals court said police violated the free speech rights of Christian evangelists by telling them to leave a June 2012 Arab-American festival in Dearborn, Michigan after an angry crowd began pelting them with bottles, eggs and other objects.
By an 8-7 vote, the entire 6th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals on Wednesday said Wayne County, Michigan and two deputy police chiefs were civilly liable to members of Bible Believers for violating their First Amendment rights.
The case now returns to a federal district judge to award damages and attorney's fee
http://www.jpost.com/Breaking-News/...ichigan-speech-case-over-Arab-festival-430355