Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Manx
You only dislike my post because you clearly fail to understand it.
I'm sure spirituality is very valuable - I never stated or implied otherwise. But as soon as you start claiming that one spirituality is more valuable than another, when the job description is not specifically based on the knowledge of a particular spirituality, you have crossed the line into discrimination based on spirituality.
And that is clearly far more morally bankrupt than even your misinterpretation of my post.
|
When the organization is one of a spiritual or religious nature, then the people involved with working for that organization should embody the nature of that organization. Otherwise, the fundamental underpinnings of that organization are in jeopardy.
For example: Suppose that the religious organization opposes smoking and drinking on religious grounds. Should they be forced to hire smokers and drinkers for the non-leadership positions? When their employees come in reeking of cigarette smoke or beer, shouldn't they be able to fire them? After all, by being employees of the organization, they are supposed to embody the philosophies of the overall organizations. While they may be working in positions not having to do with the establishment of the organizations religious beliefs, they should still be expected to embody the ideals as much as possible.
Your entire argument is predicated on the idea that religious organizations are no different from any other employer, and that's simply not the case. There is caselaw out there saying that secular organizations can discriminate in certain ways based upon gender and looks for people who interact with the public if such discrimination is a vital part of their public image. This is why ugly men can't get a job as a "Hooters Girl" waitress. Religious identity is FUNDAMENTAL to a religious organization, regardless of what part of the organization the employee is in.