How do Christians think the U.S. should accomodate the practices/beliefs of other religions in the workplace?

I go with we have a secular government that is unfettered by the beliefs/practices of any religion. I mean, if a person wants to bow their head in prayer, for a few seconds, at a meal, that’s one thing. Even throwing a mat down on the office floor and bowing to the east for 15 minutes during your break is fine with me.
But to not be able to adequately do their job because of their religion? They need a different job.

Will there be a room for the Satanists to make their ritual sacrifice to Baal? No? Then keep religion out of the workplace, unless it’s a religious workplace.

@Dutchess_III It’s my understanding that the Founding Fathers were in agreement that they didn’t want a theocracy or a state declared religion. At the same time, they were sure to make room for personal spirituality of any persuasion.

The ‘God’ in their documents represents any god, defined by anybody, in any manner, and not a singular god to whom all citizens pray.

Christians seem to think that we live in a Christian nation simply because their numbers dominate. I disagree with that thinking, hence my question.

I’m ok with a “meditation room” where people can pray, nap, whatever they need to do to recharge during the day. Beyond that I’m not very sympathetic. When I moved to NC it was the first time I saw all sorts of religious stuff all over people’s work spaces. It took me back a little. To be clear the company wasn’t putting that stuff up, it was the individual employees in their workspace. Still, I find it very odd. I wouldn’t want my employees doing that if they regularly have clients into the office.

There is of course no universal fixed position among Christians on such policies. However,if there is one characteristic common to the world’s major religions it is virulent intolerance of one another among the many and varied sects. These tendencies only accelerate with elevated stresses in the surrounding societies. Shia, Sunni, Christians and Jews coexist peacefully in times of peace and abundance, but any disruption invariably leads to rising radicalization among the multitude of competing sects in the boiling pot, with all too predictable results. Despite the insistence of fearful Christians in this country that ours is a Judaeo Christian society with a government REQUIRED to defend that demographic from the intrusion of all comers, the urgent plea falls on increasingly deaf ears as our beleaguered citizenry is increasingly forced to abandon “frivolous” matters of spirituality in the pursuit of the very secular goal of earning enough to eat. In truth the only possible effective government in a land infested with a limitless hodge-podge of irrational faiths is strict ironclad secular government refusing to grant accommodation to ANY of them.

@JLeslie I agree with you. A tastefully decorated meditation room is fine. Just keep the crosses, the Jewish stars, and whatever out of it.

I googled, but didn’t find any mention of God in the constitution, @bossob. Can you help me out?

If your religion causes you to decide to not do your job properly, find another job.
That goes for muslims butchers or grocery clerks who do not want to touch pork, and christian doctors that refuse to perform abortions, and state employees that refuse to perform gay marriage now that it is legal, and any other instance where something similar occurs.
even a separate prayer room is borderline.

Going to totally agree with @ragingloli and @Dutchess_III on this one, well said ladies.

@stanleybmanly Good points.

What I’m hoping is that christians come out of their black and white ideological boxes to discuss pragmatic solutions in the world of various shades of grey in which the rest of us live.

@Dutchess_III No, I can’t help there.

Well, can you explain what you meant by this @bossob: “The ‘God’ in their documents represents any god…,” What God in their documents?

@ragingloli Yes. The classic example is the Amish bus driver.

^^^ LOL!

I think you have to split the question. I see two scenarios.

First is workplace relation ship with customers – that is, does a catholic pharmacist have the right to deny selling birth control to unmarried women (for example), or does an anti-gay baker have an obligation to bake a cake for a gay couple? Or does a county clerk in Tennessee have the right to deny issuing marriage licenses?

In each of those cases, the customer(i.e. the public) must be served. There isn’t even a question about it – if you are open for business, you serve everyone.

The second half of the question ought to be * what’s the stance of religion in the workplace with respect to co-workers.

This gets murkier, because it depends on state labor policy, private versus public ownership, size of business, and so on. And it has a lot to do with personalities and management.

Are Christians willing to give up Christmas as a recognized paid holiday, or super paid if they work?

And if not, should others have a similar perk?

Many seem to be of the opinion that no accommodations should be made at all. However, those people also think that the Christians who support tolerance are heretics, so it really depends on which Christians you ask. It’s worth noting that the only part of America that seems to be having major issues is the part that tried seceding about 150 years ago and still don’t exactly consider themselves part of the US.

@josie It isn’t actually Christians, but everyone threatened with the removal or rather the ignoring of Holidays and particularly paid holidays of any sort in the relationship between workers and their employers.

“God Bless America” not any other country? “In God We Trust”, etc.

My bad for posting this question on a Sunday morning!~

I don’t care what members of any religion do (legally) within their homes or places of worship. Nor do I think one religion is better than another, or should receive preference over another. Contrarily, theists seem to think that their teachings are the only views that are valid. That’s an obstacle that needs addressed in order to accommodate all beliefs equally.

@Dutchess_III I don’t believe ‘god’ is mentioned in the Constitution. By ‘documents’ I was thinking of the Declaration of Independence and some of the letters that were exchanged between the Founding Fathers that further explained their positions about religion.

Thanks @bossob.

@bossob The thing that most Christians fail to appreciate is that it isn’t godless atheists who are responsible for what (to them) appears a never ending assault on their values and what passed for norms in society. What they perceive as a growing torrent of secular humanism and rising disregard for spiritual considerations is absolutely accurate. And those of us who approve of what we regard as a “more rational view” of religion make a big mistake if we take this trend as evidence of the growth of reasoned enlightenment in our fellow citizens. It is in fact the grim realities of living these days that literally FORCE people away en masse from all things fluffy and divine. Every precept required of the model Christian of bygone days is being relentlessly ground away by the what is required to “get by” in an environment distinguished by ever ramping struggle.

I don’t think most Christians believe they should make any accommodations anywhere for people of different faiths. Though many believe they should be able to insist their beliefs and the rules they follow on all other people – regardless of their faith.

That being said, I don’t care what religion a person follows, one must “walk the spiritual path with practical feet.” If your religion requires you to pray several times throughout the day, find a job that accommodates it. If your religion prohibits caffeine, don’t work as a barista and if you feel religiously inclined against same sex marriage, for goodness sakes don’t work for the county issuing marriage licenses. Whatever you believe or wherever you work, a secular job is not the place to prostelytize and employers should not be required to accommodate you. Honestly if a person’s religion is that important to them, that person can live it in their actions instead of using some showy decor or making a show of prayer.

@stanleybmanly So you’re suggesting that runaway free markets that create class struggles are the driving force behind animosity towards religion? I can see that. It could also be a contributing factor to the rapidly growing enlightenment regarding equality for all, as 99.9% of us realize that we better start looking out for each other.

@FlyingWolf > “walk the spiritual path with practical feet” I haven’t heard that before; I like it.

Well, it depends on the scope of the accommodations.

@bossob thanks, I put it in quotes because it isn’t a FlyingWolf original, I was paraphrasing Abdul Baha’.

@bossob I think you’re wrong about that realization and PARTICULARLY those numbers. The proof is that what you’re talking about is the root justification for that great boogaboo- SOCIALISM, and if you think the sustained effort to remove the one logical and sensible solution to the GREAT majority of our problems unsuccessful, you are very mistaken. And what we’re living through is not “runaway free markets”. Such misnomers are exactly what permits the farce to continue unrestricted. There is this constant droning from the winners that all of this is like the weather. The wind just happens to be blowing all the rewards in their direction, while the turds of debt and impoverishment just happen to fall from the sky on the rest of us We are told that it is dangerous to mess with the “natural” way of things and interfere with the sanctity of the divine “market”. We are promised that the weather will improve if left to itself or even better if the turd shower is intensified. You can believe it if you want, The reality is that we are living through end stage capitalism, and the only question which is relevant is “how long will the suckers allow themselves to be squeezed?”

@flo Just for a little perspective, that really wasn’t until the 1950s when the Cold War was at it’s peak. The Pledge of Allegiance, written in 1892, did not have the words ”...under God” until 1954, our motto was “E Pluribus Unum” from 1782 until 1956, and “In God we trust” didn’t make it to our currency until 1957.

For once I agree with @osoraro. Religion and work should be kept separate.

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One Aw, you and I agree on more than that. I’m also an avid ultralight backpacker.

@flo Are you saying God Bless America on money is the same as God being in our constitution or an official document? The founders of this country understood the need for secular government and freedom of religion much better than a lot of the law makers in the last 100 years in my opinion.

@JLeslie I personally don’t have a problem with it…but would you feel comfortable carrying around paper money that had the words “Praise Allah” on it?

@Dutchess_III Or Praise Vishnu

@Apparently_Im_The_Grumpy_One > “Religion and work should be kept separate.”

Thanks for that. For the benefit of Christians who have difficulty accepting that concept, can you share the thought process that allows you to get there?

@Dutchess_III I have always said that I feel our money shouldn’t say God Bless America, but it doesn’t bother me enough that I think there should be some sort of big movement to get it removed. Same with Christmas being a Federal holiday. We aren’t a Christian country, but we are a country whose majority is Christian.

As far as Allah, I strongly feel in America when translating Arabic into English for whatever reason, whether it is a lovely sweet Muslim grandma talking about her beautiful family and asking God to help them or translating hateful garbage said by Osama Bin Laden, Allah should be translated to the word English word God.

If I translate a Hebrew Prayer for you beginning “Baruch Ata Ado-nai
Elohanu Melech Haolam,” which is: Blessed are you our Lord our God, Creator of the universe, or some variation thereof. Some say King of the Universe, some use Praised instead of Blessed. You get the idea. My point is, I don’t translate it as, Blessed are you Adanoi, Elohanu… Just like if someone in Spanish said Gracias a Dios, I would interpret it for everyone as Thank God. Not Thank Dios.

I think it works against Muslims that we don’t translate Allah to God, implying it is a different God, or a God of only the Arabic speaking world.

In summary God Bless America actually covers Allah, because Allah is God.

God, don’t tell that to ISIS!

When it comes to faith, if it is a major recognized and established religion means within reason should be taken to accommodate them. There are some things that cannot be done for practical reasons or safety where I can see you can’t go along. However, I think it is up to one to examine themselves and their faith and not choose jobs that would run afoul with their faith. I would not take a job at a strip joint or titty-bar and expect all the women to walk around in pasties or robes because I don’t want the chance of seeing nipple (which doesn’t give me the heebie jeebies as with some people). I would not take a job in a bar and expect there to be a 1 ½ drink limit as to keep people from drunkenness. I would choose jobs that were in line with my faith beliefs.

@Hypocrisy_Central – that’s a perfectly reasonable approach to take (your last couple of sentences), and I applaud you for that stance.

@Hypocrisy_Central I agree that it sounds reasonable. Do you think that that approach would limit your opportunities for going into business for yourself where you would have to do business with ALL people per the law?

Would the Amish be a good example of how Believers can adapt to a modern world? Their faith prevents them from having plumbing, electricity, cars, etc., yet they drive delivery vehicles, and work in cheese factories and restaurants and shoppes that utilize all the latest and greatest utilities and technology.

“Would the Amish be a good example of how Believers can adapt to a modern world? Their faith prevents them from having plumbing, electricity, cars, etc., yet they drive delivery vehicles, and work in cheese factories and restaurants and shoppes that utilize all the latest and greatest utilities and technology.”
Sounds like a textbook case of hypocrisy.
And no different from pork eating christians.

It does sound like hypocrisy. But is it a matter of adapting or perish? They understand that the tenets of their faith reduce their opportunities for gainful self-employment in this modern world to next to nothing. They’ve decided that’s it’s better to work for an ‘outsider’ than to watch all their children leave home forever in order to escape the hardscrabble existence.

“God Bless America” is not on the money, I don’t think. “In God we Trust” is. Anyway, whereever te show up, (in the Constitution, in national Anthem, Pledge of Allegiance, in a presidents’as speech, don’t make sense.

In Georgia, the DMV, at the point of getting your license plate, gives the car owner a choice of stickers that they can put on the rear license plate.

Choice #1 is the name of the county (Cobb, Gwinnett, Fulton, Macon, Clayton, etc.).

Choice #2 is a similarly sized sticker (about 1“x7” wide) that says “IN GOD WE TRUST”.

I decided on the county sticker.

I did observe one clever fellow who did some creative things with spacing; his license plate displayed:

IN GOD WET RUST

(I always wondered if he was a chemist or a metallurgist)

@bossob I agree that it sounds reasonable. Do you think that that approach would limit your opportunities for going into business for yourself where you would have to do business with ALL people per the law?
I am not under the restriction the Amish interpret they are under, so I do not have to fight technology. Doing business with anyone is not the same as how you do business with them within the context of faith. Just as no business has to server someone if they don’t have shoes or a shirt, there is some autonomy left to the business owner. I can serve a skin head racist, but I don’t have to serve him in his endeavor, but I can serve him in a generic way as anyone else would be served.

In case you wondered about the following post and statement, Believers can eat pork.

“And the pig, because it parts the hoof and is cloven-footed but does not chew the cud, is unclean to you. You shall not eat any of their flesh, and you shall not touch their carcasses; they are unclean to you.” – Leviticus 11:7–8 ESV

“And the pig, because it parts the hoof but does not chew the cud, is unclean for you. Their flesh you shall not eat, and their carcasses you shall not touch.” – Deuteronomy 14:8 ESV

^ Do you know the differences of being under the Law and being under Grace? Then you would know why that was an ordinance for that time but not for now.

Think not that I am come to destroy the law, or the prophets: I am not come to destroy, but to fulfil. For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass from the law, till all be fulfilled. Whosoever therefore shall break one of these least commandments, and shall teach men so, he shall be called the least in the kingdom of heaven: but whosoever shall do and teach them, the same shall be called great in the kingdom of heaven.

For I say unto you, That except your righteousness shall exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.

I think “under grace” means, “Go ahead and do The Thing I told you not to do, because you’re under grace.

@Dutchess_III Does that mean they can also loot, rape, and pillage? I mean, if the rules are suspended….

Sure. Heard of the Crusades? They believed, literally, that God was the leader of their armies.

@Hypocrisy_Central I appreciate some of your pragmatic approaches to dealing with the conflict between your beliefs and the law. Can you offer any pragmatic suggestions for the stubborn Believers of any faith who insist that faith trumps law in the public domain, with no exceptions or compromises?

@ragingloli Keep trying, one day you may understand the context you are trying to use, I pray that day comes, though you may never allow it, but God bless you.

@Dutchess_III I think “under grace” means, “Go ahead and do The Thing I told you not to do, because you’re under grace.
Keep trying as well, if you claim to know the Bible so well, you know that is not true, hope you are not spreading a lie that will destroy someone’s soul.

@bossob Can you offer any pragmatic suggestions for the stubborn Believers of any faith who insist that faith trumps law in the public domain, with no exceptions or compromises?
Pray, and make sure your business is faith based, then they can invoke “Bona Fide Occupational Qualification” (BFOQ).” because anyone who is ungodly would not be able to do the job completely.

So explain what being “under grace” means, @Hypocrisy_Central.

^ So explain what being “under grace” means, @Hypocrisy_Central.
Not that I believe your eyes will be open enough to even take a look with an open heart, or any seriousness, however, I would be disobedient not to try even though it most likely will be fruitless.

Basis for being under Grace:
• Under the Law, you could only be saved by adhering to all of them and not breaking any, not one. Man could not do it, thus he had to go to the High Priest to give an animal sacrifice to atone, or cover that sin for that year.
• Because Christ came and lived a perfect life, fulfilled the Law, so He and He alone is able to possess the keys of sin and death.
• He offers us the chance to share in that with Him if we accept Him and His sacrifice and live in service of each other through Him, and follow His commandments.
• Because Christ paid for the sin, and all future sins one who believes on Him, not merely believed He lived, we do not have to keep sacrificing animals because Christ was the perfect sacrifice.
• Because of this Grace, sin doesn’t lead to physical death, or the second death which is separation from God.
• It only kicks in if you can admit you were wrong and a sinner and Christ alone is correct and is right, and thus took the punishment of death you deserved.

Many of the Old Testament laws were for the Jewish people to keep them holy for God, they were not for the pagans, in fact the pagans could do whatever, here on Earth there was no law imported to them, same as today, if you are not a Believer of Christ, you will not be stoned or such for anything. Your account will be to stack your actions up against the Law once you are dead, if you violated any of it, Heaven is closed off to you. If you accepted Christ, even though you could not keep it all, Christ is your advocate and covered you to enter Heaven on His reputation and deed and not your own action. Because the Jews rejected Him, he grafted in the pagans so there are no need for certain physical laws to keep us two different camps, so laws that were for the Jews, were no longer needed.

So…It’s already known that man can not live a perfect life…he will break God’s laws, so they used to sacrifice animals to atone.
Then came Jesus, so when we break God’s laws we don’t have to worry about sacrificing animals, because Jesus was sacrificed.
So we can break God’s laws and not worry about it.

Please folks, this is general, and we’re waaaaay off topic.

@Dutchess_III So we can break God’s laws and not worry about it.
That is if you break them because of your sinful nature of your flesh, then you do not, because no matter how perfect you try to be, you can’t. The lynch pin is to have a here not to do what God said is right and if you concede to your temptation and acknowledge you were in rebellion. If you just go on sinning thinking that Grace will abound because Christ paid for it but you have no intention to live for Him, or keep His commandments, you will not full Him, He knows the condition of your heart and if you are truly sorry for your actions or just trying to game the system for fire insurance.

@bossob Yes, but I think that the remarks of @Hypocrisy_Central and the resulting digressions illustrate a few things that are relevant. A lot of disruption caused by just one person of faith… imagine the same thing that happened in this thread on a larger scale involving millions and without the civility and restraint of Fluther’s generally respectful atmosphere! And if we can’t even have a discussion amongst a few people with that sort of disruption, how can you expect any sort of effective discourse in a legislative body? Given how many times I’ve seen legislation stalled to death, how many pieces of state legislature I’ve seen trying to do an end-run around federal law, I’d say that this thread going off-topic is pretty mild compared to what been going on elsewhere.

The best that could be hoped for is those not of Christian faith (and quite likely those of different sects of Christianity) would be silently condemned. That is the absolute “sunshine and lollipops” best case scenario though, thus rather unlikely.

While many (in fact, probably most) other Christians are a lot more accommodating, there are a depressingly large number that refuse to acknowledge the legitimacy of any rule other than their own unless it caters to them and them and only them. If that were not true then there is NO possible way that we would have wanna-be-Theocrats in office; the reason we have so many legislators and governors with such views is because there are a lot of voters who want that sort of rule.

So the real question isn’t whether we accommodate every religion or make concessions for no religion; it’s how the rift between America and Fundamentalist Christianity will play out. They won’t accept either of the endings that you point out, and it’s not entirely out of the question (or unprecedented) for them to try taking by force that which they cannot take by law.

@bossob Please folks, this is general, and we’re waaaaay off topic.
Frankly, I do not even know why there is a General question thread, it should be technical, because that is the only threads that cannot be hijacked by soapbox grandstanding. I have tried to ask question seeking a specific answer, and the mods allow people to make comments that has nothing to do with the question, just their own grandstanding opinion. And when everyone hi-fives and pats their own backs lurve style, it just encourages more of the hijacking behavior.

@Hypocrisy_Central That sounds like a good topic for Meta.

@jerv You’re right: we’ve always had them, and always will, and at least in our lifetime, there will be no meeting in the middle.

If the company or government goes as far as giving special privileges to Muslims, while telling Christians they cannot wear crosses or pray before they eat then it is discrimination. Although I see that persecution of Christians, like beheading them all over the middle east is quite in Vogue today, without even a whimper from our government or PREz! So if we have to take off our hats for the DMV then they have to take off their scarf, and if they want to pray 5 times a day for fear of going to hell if they don’t and need the time off to do so, then the other non muslim should get out earlier from work, of at least the same break to pray or whatever they want. Equality is what we all need here people. People never blast the Muslim – they’re scared they will get beheaded! But everyone knows Jesus was a man of Love and Peace, so everyone Trashes Jesus, and his loving nature, cause he taught us to not to behead people, but to turn the other cheek, and love one another!! Now some GaY Guy is suing Bible Publishers and gonna probably take that to the Supreme Court for a ruling on what the Bible can say or not say! I am sick of all this Political Correctness it is really giving me a pain, people are so stupid, sensitive, and moronic today, it is pitiful!! What is going to end up happening is there will be a law against everything soon, sugar, popcorn, cursing, etc…...will be a crime punishable by guillotine!! YIKES!!

@upyurts With the assumption you are American, where is an example of Christians not being able to pray when Muslims can? Or, Christians having fewer rights than Muslims? Regarding this particular Q about the workplace, I don’t think blowing things up is really what we are talking about. No one is discussing depicting a negative image of an important religious figure, or stirring a riot by speaking out against a religion. This is about accommodating religion in the workplace. Do you want the workplace completely secular or not? Do you want people to be able to pray at work? To display religious symbols at work? If you want to allow the cross you have to allow all the other symbols. If you want a place to pray, it should be open for all to pray.

Muslims pray 5 times a day, Jews need to leave early on Friday in the winter months, Christians get Christmas and Easter off, almost all the religions have their thing.

If there is a dress code at work everyone has to confirm in my opinion. If there is room for religious garb then it applies to everyone. What is it that some Christians can’t wear that the religion dictates?

@JLeslie GA thanks.

@upyurts Actually, that didn’t start until a rather notable percentage of Christians started trying to impose their will on others. The Christians you seem to think are persecuted are not the normal, everyday Christian who is generally happy to live and let live; it’s the bigots that try to get special treatment or pass a Christianized version of Sharia Law that get blasted, often by red-blooded Americans who respect the US Constitution and believe that the First Amendment gives the same rights to non-Christians.

Besides, it’s hard to claim persecution when your own organization has a history of persecution themselves. We don’t even have to go back to when Christians were blatantly genocidal to see it. We have some in office who feel that First Amendment protections apply only to Christians; that it merely grants the freedom to worship Jesus in the manner of your choosing but offers no protection for anyone else.

You can be sick of the political correctness all you want, but don’t be blinded to your own hypocrisy. The fact that the infallible Pope is getting blasted by the American Christians for being too liberal and all-loving is proof enough that many who claim to be Christian are more into justifying hatred than following the teachings of Christ or the Word of God.

The one part of your post that is correct it that allowing a Muslim breaks for prayer should be compensated for by allowing non-Muslims equal breaks. An extra couple of mid-day smokes while a Muslim coworker prays to Mecca would only be fair. As for the DMV, I consider that fair as us non-Muslims must remove our hats, though I think a private photo booth/room and a female photographer would be a workable compromise as it would prevent the Muslim woman’s face being seen by unknown men and thus preserve her modesty.

@jerv Probably at some point the Muslim woman is going to need to show her license to a man in America for some sort of ID reason. I actually lose my patience with some of the dress code requirements when it comes to covering the face. I just don’t support it. I think people have to show their face for identification.

@JLeslie Yes, but it’s still relatively private/discrete. Whenever I get carded, there isn’t a huge audience looking at my ID; just one person gets a look at the little picture before it goes back into my pocket. Showing one authority figure with legitimate “need to know” is not the same as public display.

To be sure, there would have to be a little compromise from the Muslim side too, but I also think that there is a way to accommodate without either side giving too much. At worst, the willingness to try and meet someone halfway still shows more respect than the “my way or the highway” attitude. I don’t know about you, but I’m more willing to bend to those who respect me than those who try forcing things down my throat, especially those who are open to compromise, and I’m fairly certain that most other people are the same.

I don’t know. I think when inside we should show our faces. Too hard to make a law for outside since our country enjoys below freezing weather in some places.

Does swearing on the Bible in court, still exist?

I don’t think it does, @flo.

^^ They no longer have a Bible in court, you just swear on yourself you are not lying.

When did it stop existing? Is there a Supreme Court ruling for example?
http://goo.gl/hgtNig
I just Googled

When did what stop existing, @flo?

I think they should be respectful, don’t make any stereotypical comments, and refrain from trying to convert people to any religion at all, unless an individual is interested.