Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


1 posted on 06/02/2015 4:48:40 AM PDT by markomalley
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies ]


To: markomalley

2 posted on 06/02/2015 4:50:47 AM PDT by Travis McGee (www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

Sharia on the march.

Coming to a madrassa (formerly known as high school) nearest you...


3 posted on 06/02/2015 4:57:06 AM PDT by Old Sarge (Its the Sixties all over again, but with crappy music...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley
Bad call by the Supreme Court here. Abercrombie & Fitch sells clothing, so what their employees wear matters. So A&F should have the final say on attire.

This would be less important if A&F sold, say, pizza or furniture.

As a side note, many pet stores sell dogs. Must such a store now be forced to hire a muslim who refuses to touch a dog?

4 posted on 06/02/2015 5:01:02 AM PDT by Leaning Right (Why am I holding this lantern? I am looking for the next Reagan.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

SCOTUS continues to march into illrelevency. Roberts could easily have made up some proper laws here.


6 posted on 06/02/2015 5:11:50 AM PDT by Paladin2 (Ive given up on aphostrophys and spell chek on my current device...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

While I utterly despise islime, this ruling seems logically consistent. If Jews and Sikhs are allowed to wear the accoutrements of their religions, so must muslimes.

But I don’t want to hear a peep from A&F or the courts when an employee shows up wearing a cross necklace or with ashes on their foreheads.


7 posted on 06/02/2015 5:12:51 AM PDT by IronJack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

I know that if I ever saw a Muslim either in A&F or Victoria’s Secret, I would go to another saleslady. So I guess if a self proclaimed nudist could work at A&F nude? Some nudist could say nudism is their religion.


8 posted on 06/02/2015 5:13:43 AM PDT by ExCTCitizen (I'm ExCTCitizen and I approve this reply. If it does offend Libs, I'm NOT sorry...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

What about Bibles or having a Bible verse on my computer?

And the wearing of a cross or crucifix?

What about celebrating the birth and resurrection of my saviour?

Will those protections also apply to me?


9 posted on 06/02/2015 5:14:15 AM PDT by Cowgirl of Justice
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

Yet they don’t question why a muzzie wants to work there. Every company needs to institute free bacon day.


11 posted on 06/02/2015 5:17:01 AM PDT by King Moonracer (Bad lighting and cheap fabric, that's how you sell clothing.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

I would never work at A&F, because modest appearance and chaste conduct are standards of my religion. This woman is a hypocrite.


14 posted on 06/02/2015 5:21:58 AM PDT by Tax-chick (Rant off.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

I could never live in a world (much less shop in one) where everybody scurries about dressed as Casper’s evil twin...


15 posted on 06/02/2015 5:23:46 AM PDT by Hatteras
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

It is a private business and if this female wanted to show her religion then wear a necklace with a crescent .

According to the SCOTUS.
So a muslim inmate can grow a beard because of his religion and this woman can wear her scarf because of her religion , but a Christian has no rights and has to bake a cake, take photo’s etc to homosexuals and their sham wedding when it goes against their religion.


18 posted on 06/02/2015 5:25:56 AM PDT by manc (Marriage =1 man + 1 woman,when they say marriage equality then they should support polygamy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

If one studies the reasoning and holdings of this opinion it strongly helps the legal argument that a Christian business cannot be forced to violate its religious beliefs by facilitating a gay wedding. I believe this issue was very much in Justice Scalia’s mind when he wrote the opinion.


19 posted on 06/02/2015 5:37:37 AM PDT by circlecity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

Due to the religious basis for the headscarf one truly has to wonder how scotus thinks the Fed can force businesses to violate their religion but businesses can’t do the same with their employees. It’s the first amendment on it’s head. “Business shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion, nor denying the free exercise thereof.”

That must be how it actually reads.


23 posted on 06/02/2015 5:56:37 AM PDT by xzins (Donate to the Freep-a-Thon or lose your ONLY voice. https://secure.freerepublic.com/donate/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley
I remember a time when stores had the right to post this:

"No shirt,
No shoes,
No service."


24 posted on 06/02/2015 6:00:26 AM PDT by TomGuy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

Question:
How does a head scarfed woman, serve a deaf customer
that gets by, by reading lips?

I’m partially deaf, and have found reading lips comes
in handy. Since i can’t see what that woman might b
saying , in my mindset, i might take that wrong and
deck the broad.


33 posted on 06/02/2015 6:47:22 AM PDT by Terry L Smith
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley
Abercrombie & Fitch, which is known for some pretty scanty outfits, must accommodate a sales employee who wears a head scarf in accordance with her Muslim faith.

This is one reason why Islam is incompatible with and does not belong in a free society. Most religions make no requirement that adherents dress a certain way. But Islam does along with many other requirements (no images of Mohammed allowed, prayer fives time per day).

There is a long list of 'accomodations' Moslems want from the more open and free societies they invade. SCOTUS is wrong on this one.

And will SCOTUS also rule that food stores must accomodate Moslems where Islam prohibits them from handling pork? This has already been an employment issue, though I don't think it's made it into the court system yet.

Customers purchasing pork must not enter checkout lines with a Moslem clerk? Employers must never ask Moslem employees to stock pork products, or otherwise handle them? Same questions for restaurants which serve port.

Once institutions start caving and 'accomodating' Moslem demands, the list will become longer and longer.

36 posted on 06/02/2015 7:02:25 AM PDT by Will88
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley

This is America & people who come here from other lands with different customs have apparently done so voluntarily. If they can’t deal with our laws,customs,& job requirements,then they can voluntarily hit the road back home where they might fit in.


37 posted on 06/02/2015 7:09:47 AM PDT by oldtech
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

To: markomalley
Two of the job descriptions include:

Outgoing & Promotes Diversity & Inclusion

Would that not automatically make Muslims unqualified to fill the positions? I've never met a Muslim that was either outgoing, or inclusive. Furthermore they would never ever promote diversity as it goes against their religious teachings.

41 posted on 06/02/2015 7:30:15 AM PDT by Robert DeLong (u)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson