• 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!

If an Employer Believes In Sharia Law

Should an employer be allowed to impose Sharia Law on their employees?

  • Yes

    Votes: 8 16.7%

  • No

    Votes: 34 70.8%

  • Other

    Votes: 6 12.5%
  • Total voters
    48
I guess if an employer puts that in their employee rules and regulations and employee contract upfront and the prospective employee is told about it clearly when being offered the job, then yes. But they cant impose it later on employees. People are not forced to take the job.

Of course, anything against current state or fed law they cannot do, just like any other employer.
 
Threegoofs said:
Well, gosh... forcing people to go to non sex segregated clinics (which dont exist in the US) would be forcing them to voilate religious beliefs.

Forcing Jehovahs witnesses to pay for blood transfusions comes to mind. Forcing Christian Scientists to get ANY health insurance is an issue too, no?
Click to expand...

Allowing them to work in a non-segregated workplace and deal in person with customers of the opposite gender would be violating religious beliefs then.
 
1750Texan said:
How does an employee know the relgious faith of their prospective employer...that pre-supposes that Muslims look or act a certain way. What does a Christian look like?
Click to expand...

People are, or at least should be, informed of the rules and company guidelines when they take a job. They usually get a handbook. They are told the hours, expectations, benefits, etc. The minute a prospective employer says something like, "we only offer 2 paid holidays a year" or "our dress code is" or "we do not allow..." and then "would you have a problem with this?", that is when you ask further questions to see where those go.
 
Maenad said:
Conversely, no one is forced to work at HL.
Click to expand...

But the owners of Hobby Lobby are not required by their religion to run a business, either. Furthermore - since they claim to be Christian - Jesus required His followers to obey the law, and he backed this up by submitting to Roman law even though it resulted in His death as an innocent man.

Add to that the fact that HL's insurance does cover vasectomies, and much of what they sell comes from sweatshops in China, that nation where abortions are often required by law and performed against the wishes of the woman. That, and never before have our federal courts agreed that the religious beliefs of the business owner trump federal law.

The HL decision was judicial activism on the part of the conservative judges and nothing more.
 
Glen Contrarian said:
But the owners of Hobby Lobby are not required by their religion to run a business, either. Furthermore - since they claim to be Christian - Jesus required His followers to obey the law, and he backed this up by submitting to Roman law even though it resulted in His death as an innocent man.

Add to that the fact that HL's insurance does cover vasectomies, and much of what they sell comes from sweatshops in China, that nation where abortions are often required by law and performed against the wishes of the woman. That, and never before have our federal courts agreed that the religious beliefs of the business owner trump federal law.

The HL decision was judicial activism on the part of the conservative judges and nothing more.
Click to expand...

The US government is not invested in holding people accountable for the teachings of Jesus. (And I find it quite laughable that we have so many athiests who try to do just that when they themselves do not understand His teachings.) The US government is secular and it is responsible to balance the interests of all its citizens. If the owners of HL find this to be objectionable, it is within the purview of the government to see that their interest is balanced with those who do not. This is by far not the first time that our government has refused to force someone to do something they find morally reprehensible. Does the term 'conscience objector' mean anything to you?

The HL case was not about vasectomies. It was about the type of birth control that causes an abortion. And the women involved are not forbidden to use it.
 
Dooble said:
Only if all its employees are adherents to Islam.
Click to expand...

No, short of imposing rules that would violate the U.S. law, he should be able to impose whatever rules he wants in his own private business and that would include Sharia rules and restrictions.
 
tres borrachos said:
In what country? In the USA, people choose where they want to work, unless something changed. Don't want to work for Muslims? Don't take the job.
Click to expand...
NO , this is wrong !
I, for one, do not care if I work for Dick Cheney, or the Shah of Iran , as long as they leave their credo at home, where it belongs ..
Sharia Law belongs NOT here at home, not even on the surface of the moon (its an innocent place, not in need of hatred) .
 
Maenad said:
The US government is not invested in holding people accountable for the teachings of Jesus. (And I find it quite laughable that we have so many athiests who try to do just that when they themselves do not understand His teachings.)
Click to expand...

Are you assuming I'm an atheist? FYI, except for when I was deployed or was otherwise physically unable to attend, I've missed exactly two Worship Services at the Church of which I'm a member since 1993. You should be more careful to refrain from making assumptions about those with whom you disagree.

My point wasn't that the government is to hold people accountable for Christian teachings - my point was that HL's claims were hypocritical.

The US government is secular and it is responsible to balance the interests of all its citizens.
Click to expand...

You should check out how many people on the Right - and specifically down in the Bible Belt - believe that our government was always meant to be a "Christian" government run on Christian rules and values.

If the owners of HL find this to be objectionable, it is within the purview of the government to see that their interest is balanced with those who do not. This is by far not the first time that our government has refused to force someone to do something they find morally reprehensible. Does the term 'conscience objector' mean anything to you?
Click to expand...

FYI, the term "conscientious objector" does not refer to businesses and corporations, but to INDIVIDUALS. Oh, but I forgot - most of today's Right believes that businesses and corporations should have the same rights as individual Americans...never mind that businesses never, ever get sent to jail or find themselves in firefights with opposing enemy forces.

The HL case was not about vasectomies. It was about the type of birth control that causes an abortion. And the women involved are not forbidden to use it.
Click to expand...

If you'll check, the day after the HL ruling, the conservatives on the Supreme Court "clarified" their ruling so that the exemptions that businesses want apply to ALL forms of birth control used...

...without regard to the fact (ruled "mostly true" by Politifact) that nearly 60 percent of women who use birth control do so for MORE that just "family planning".
 
All I know is that I'm starting my own company and I'll let the goverment know that my religious beliefs mandate child labor and discriminatory pay. I'll use Atlas Shrugged as my gospel.
 
Threegoofs said:
All I know is that I'm starting my own company and I'll let the goverment know that my religious beliefs mandate child labor and discriminatory pay. I'll use Atlas Shrugged as my gospel.
Click to expand...

images
 
There are so many things wrong with this question it is hysterical, but yeah, sure, an employee is there by choice, so, if they choose to remain there, that's on them.
 
Rainman05 said:
First off, sharia law is an oxymoron. Sharia = law in arabic. That's what the word means.

Secondly, no, because sharia also means that you cut off peoples' hands for stealing. It is not just a law affecting whether or not a certain medication is dispensed, it also dictates that you're going to behave in a certain way towards yourself and others. Not to mention that if you're a non-muslim, you'll be killed should you offend the muslim store owner. You must accept your role as a dhimmi.
Click to expand...

I think the term you're going for here is "redundancy."
 
earthworm said:
NO , this is wrong !
I, for one, do not care if I work for Dick Cheney, or the Shah of Iran , as long as they leave their credo at home, where it belongs ..
Sharia Law belongs NOT here at home, not even on the surface of the moon (its an innocent place, not in need of hatred) .
Click to expand...

It's wrong? In the USA, people no longer get to choose where they want to work? That's a new one on me. When did that change?
 
tres borrachos said:
It's wrong? In the USA, people no longer get to choose where they want to work? That's a new one on me. When did that change?
Click to expand...

This may come as a surprise to you but some people either have the choice of 1 low wage job (e.g. at hobby lobby) or to be jobless and wait for benefits. Many people don't even have that choice (hence high unemployment). They don't have the resources to just pass up on a job offer and wait for another.
 
Nilly said:
This may come as a surprise to you but some people either have the choice of 1 low wage job (e.g. at hobby lobby) or to be jobless and wait for benefits. Many people don't even have that choice (hence high unemployment). They don't have the resources to just pass up on a job offer and wait for another.
Click to expand...

This may come as a bigger surprise to you, but most people who work in retail have lots of choices. If there is a Hobby Lobby in town, there are probably at least 100 more retail stores within 15 minutes of Hobby Lobby.
 
tres borrachos said:
In what country? In the USA, people choose where they want to work, unless something changed. Don't want to work for Muslims? Don't take the job.
Click to expand...

"Women can be beaten for being in public unescorted" is not a rule an employer can impose on its employees. Doesn't matter if you chose to work there.

tres borrachos said:
This may come as a bigger surprise to you, but most people who work in retail have lots of choices. If there is a Hobby Lobby in town, there are probably at least 100 more retail stores within 15 minutes of Hobby Lobby.
Click to expand...

At 6% unemployment, there's still a lot of other people looking for work. "Just get another job" is an easy thing to say when you have one.

How come you don't just get a job that pays millions?
 
Last edited:
tres borrachos said:
This may come as a bigger surprise to you, but most people who work in retail have lots of choices. If there is a Hobby Lobby in town, there are probably at least 100 more retail stores within 15 minutes of Hobby Lobby.
Click to expand...

That doesn't mean they're all hiring, and it certainly doesn't mean that all people who get a job offer with hobby lobby have a choice about where they can work. If there was all this choice on offer, then why is unemployment so high? Or do you just believe all unemployed people are just lazy...?
 
Last edited:
Rainman05 said:
First off, sharia law is an oxymoron. Sharia = law in arabic. That's what the word means.

Secondly, no, because sharia also means that you cut off peoples' hands for stealing. It is not just a law affecting whether or not a certain medication is dispensed, it also dictates that you're going to behave in a certain way towards yourself and others. Not to mention that if you're a non-muslim, you'll be killed should you offend the muslim store owner. You must accept your role as a dhimmi.
Click to expand...

Just to be clear, the word "Sharia" means "path to the watering hole" in arabic - so, in translation, Sharia Law would be the moral path to the promised land, or something equivalent. The actual "laws" are fanatical because of the "prophets and holy men" who penned them along the way.
 
Maenad said:
I think you have asked a good question. No religion can follow doctrines that endanger the lives of its followers. So, would they be allowed to behead an employee for an offense, no.

But, they likely could insist that female employees wear burkas. This is why I said that the HL holding is NOT an indication that the Christians are winning.
Click to expand...

In my view, the court ruling does no such thing. The court ruling says that the government, in a very narrow set of facts, cannot impose a condition on an employer that is in contravention of that employer's faith teachings. It doesn't say that the employer is entitled now to force all his/her employees to follow the teachings of his/her faith at all. So your suggestion that the court ruling could force female employees to wear burkas is nonsense because a) an employer cannot force an employee to take up a particular religious belief and b) an employer cannot force an employee of his/her faith to be a strong adherent of that faith. Your analogy would indicate that Hobby Lobby now could force female employees not to use birth control of any kind, not to have sex out of marriage, not to marry gay partners, etc. and we all know that's nonsense.

Some common sense hopefully will prevail here one day soon.
 
Deuce said:
"Women can be beaten for being in public unescorted" is not a rule an employer can impose on its employees. Doesn't matter if you chose to work there.



At 6% unemployment, there's still a lot of other people looking for work. "Just get another job" is an easy thing to say when you have one.

How come you don't just get a job that pays millions?
Click to expand...

I don't need a job that pays millions.

There are, however, millions of retail jobs.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom