• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Sign at Wegmans draws attention

TacticalEvilDan said:
I'm not taking Thunder seriously, he has a consistency problem.
Click to expand...

Well, if you think about it, not really. He comes down against religious considerations consistently . . . first, the employer must accommodate the employee. Now, roles arguably being reversed, the employer shouldn't accommodate the employee.

So, yeah, he contradicts himself, but either way, he wants to squash the religious concerns of whomever.
 
TacticalEvilDan said:
I'm not taking Thunder seriously, he has a consistency problem.
Click to expand...

actually no, I don't.

setting up a Halaal-only check out line, may infact discriminate against non-Muslim shoppers.

if that line has only one person, and the other line has 12, the Jewish person can't buy his religiously-required wine on the Halaal-only line. that is discrimination.

its very simply boys & girls: if you DON'T want to touch pork or alcohol containing packages, DON'T work at a non-Halaal store.
 
Harshaw said:
Well, if you think about it, not really. He comes down against religious considerations consistently . . . first, the employer must accommodate the employee. Now, roles arguably being reversed, the employer shouldn't accommodate the employee.

So, yeah, he contradicts himself, but either way, he wants to squash the religious concerns of whomever.
Click to expand...



Okay, in that respect you have a point. He consistently shifts positions in order to serve an agenda.
 
buck said:
I realize this makes me a jerk, but I would go to whichever checkout line was the shortest - even hers. I suspect her line will probably be the shortest, since many people with pork or alcohol would not.
Click to expand...

Agreed, this does point to some level of failure in compassion (jerk)...but this is a free country, and there are many who would do the same.

Just go to any walmart for proof
 
Thunder said:
actually no, I don't.

setting up a Halaal-only check out line, may infact discriminate against non-Muslim shoppers.

if that line has only one person, and the other line has 12, the Jewish person can't buy his religiously-required wine on the Halaal-only line. that is discrimination.

its very simply boys & girls: if you DON'T want to touch pork or alcohol containing packages, DON'T work at a non-Halaal store.
Click to expand...

So, the shopper is empowered to impose their religious practices, but if the shoe is on the other foot that's a problem?

:lol:
 
Thunder said:
its very simply boys & girls: if you DON'T want to touch pork or alcohol containing packages, DON'T work at a non-Halaal store.
Click to expand...

Heh.

"If you want your employer to pay for your birth control, DON'T work for a Catholic employer."

Heh.
 
There should be a line for those who do not have anything considered un-kosher as well. And a line for all perscriptions other than birth control, etc. And a line where no feminine products or condoms are handled.

It would only raise the employment level. How bad can that be? LOL!
 
There are points to be made, for the good and bad related to this. But because it was the store that did it, not government telling the store how they must operate, it seems just fine in my book.
 
I have no problem with the sign because it is their business and their right to post whatever request they might post within the law. Remember -- it is just a request here.

That being said, the thought occured that here may be some out there who might intentionally bring non Halaal products through her line BECAUSE of the sign.
 
In the name of tolerance, inclusiveness, and diversity, I propose that ALL supermarkets & chain drugstores have:

Kosher-only checkout lines.

Halaal-only checkout lines.

Vegan-only checkout lines.

Pescatarian-only checkout lines.

Hindu beef-free checkout lines.

No kosher-food checkout lines (for Catholics).

....this way, everyone can have their own line, and our society will be happy & unified.



...and we should add no-birth control lines, for folks who are against the pill & condoms.
 
Last edited:
Thunder said:
In the name of tolerance, inclusiveness, and diversity, I propose that ALL supermarkets & chain drugstores have:

Kosher-only checkout lines.

Halaal-only checkout lines.

Vegan-only checkout lines.

Pescatarian-only checkout lines.

Hindu beef-free checkout lines.

No kosher-food checkout lines (for Catholics).

....this way, everyone can have their own line, and our society will be happy & unified.



...and we should add no-birth control lines, for folks who are against the pill & condoms.
Click to expand...

If there's a supermarket that opts to invent such a convoluted structure, more power to them. If I have difficulty navigating their checkouts, I'll use a store whose checkouts are more accessible.
 
Thunder said:
In the name of tolerance, inclusiveness, and diversity, I propose that ALL supermarkets & chain drugstores have:

Kosher-only checkout lines.

Halaal-only checkout lines.

Vegan-only checkout lines.

Pescatarian-only checkout lines.

Hindu beef-free checkout lines.

No kosher-food checkout lines (for Catholics).

....this way, everyone can have their own line, and our society will be happy & unified.



...and we should add no-birth control lines, for folks who are against the pill & condoms.
Click to expand...

While I understand the sarcasm intent, and at some level agree with the reasoning ( I admit to my racism), to make an issue of compromise and compassion does society no good whatsoever, and thus your opinion.

To see kindness as e negative (which is what this is) requires a mind I choose to avoid.
 
Okay. The request is a little ridiculous, and if she came to me as her supervisor and asked me to accommodate her religious beliefs in that fashion, I'd probably laugh at her-- but then, unless I simply couldn't afford to do it, I'd probably give it to her. Why? Because it makes her job a little easier and doesn't cost me anything. If I saw that sign in a grocery store, I'd shrug and go with it.

On the other hand, if customers don't respect the sign I'm not going to help beyond that. Handling other peoples' groceries is her job and she needs to do her job if she wants to keep it. But if a little sign like that makes her job happier and easier-- which will make her do her job better-- and she still does her job when the sign doesn't work, it's a win-win situation.

If it starts getting out of hand and other employees start making silly requests, then I'll probably put my foot down. But if an accommodation doesn't cost you anything, then it's just good employee relations-- and thus good business-- to grant it.
 
tecoyah said:
While I understand the sarcasm intent, and at some level agree with the reasoning ( I admit to my racism), to make an issue of compromise and compassion does society no good whatsoever, and thus your opinion.

To see kindness as e negative (which is what this is) requires a mind I choose to avoid.
Click to expand...

Thunder is simply trying to shatter the stereotype that Jews are unusually intelligent. ;)
 
Viktyr Korimir said:
Okay. The request is a little ridiculous, and if she came to me as her supervisor and asked me to accommodate her religious beliefs in that fashion, I'd probably laugh at her-- but then, unless I simply couldn't afford to do it, I'd probably give it to her. Why? Because it makes her job a little easier and doesn't cost me anything. If I saw that sign in a grocery store, I'd shrug and go with it.

On the other hand, if customers don't respect the sign I'm not going to help beyond that. Handling other peoples' groceries is her job and she needs to do her job if she wants to keep it. But if a little sign like that makes her job happier and easier-- which will make her do her job better-- and she still does her job when the sign doesn't work, it's a win-win situation.

If it starts getting out of hand and other employees start making silly requests, then I'll probably put my foot down. But if an accommodation doesn't cost you anything, then it's just good employee relations-- and thus good business-- to grant it.
Click to expand...

My thoughts as well...likely you have been there.
 
AdamT said:
Thunder is simply trying to shatter the stereotype that Jews are unusually intelligent. ;)
Click to expand...


Dayum....pretty good young Padawan.

Called on the Sentimism, and lack of reasoning in one fell swoop. You Go!
 
אוטואנטישמיות

AdamT said:
Thunder is simply trying to shatter the stereotype that Jews are unusually intelligent.
Click to expand...

I doubt if that is ever his intention. It certainly is very often his effect, though, isn't it?


Arbo said:
There are points to be made, for the good and bad related to this. But because it was the store that did it, not government telling the store how they must operate, it seems just fine in my book.
Click to expand...

I think this is what he is really mad about—that the corrupt government of which he is a willing part wasn't given a “fair” chance to stick its nose into this situation. The employer and the employee came to an agreement that they both found acceptable, without either party having to go run crying to government to try to force its will on the other.
 
She hired on to do a job; she needs to do the job.

I understand that in some (all, maybe?) states it's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to sell alcohol. But, this girl knew she would have to sell alcohol and pork products to customers, so she needs to either suck it up, or find another job.
 
apdst said:
She hired on to do a job; she needs to do the job.

I understand that in some (all, maybe?) states it's illegal for anyone under the age of 18 to sell alcohol. But, this girl knew she would have to sell alcohol and pork products to customers, so she needs to either suck it up, or find another job.
Click to expand...

Um, actually, she doesn't need to. She asked for a dispensation and she received it. She's not in the wrong here.
 
it takes a REAL sense of entitlement, to take a job at a place that you KNOW sells alcohol & pork, and to then tell the boss "oh, btw, I can't touch any pork or alcohol. I can't even touch a bottle that contains alcohol or a container that has pork, so keep that **** away from me cause I aint touching it".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom