Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community - View Single Post - Hiring based on a person's religion: Good or Bad?

raveneye · 03-04-2005, 08:11 AM

Some things to consider:

(1) it is entirely legal and constitutional for faith-based groups receiving federal money to hire based on religion if that hiring practice satisfies the Lemon Test:

As long as the federal money is used for a secular purpose, and doesn't enhance or inhibit religion, and doesn't foster excessive govenmental entanglement with religion, all is OK.

One of the defining cases here is the Dodge v. Salvation Army case in 1989 (U.S. District Court in Biloxi). Here the Salvation Army fired a woman because it found out she was a Wiccan. Because her position as a secretary was funded almost entirely with a federal grant, the court decided that the Lemon Test was violated; ie that the federal money was being used to inhibit her religion and promote the Salvation Army's religion. So she won her suit against the Salvation Army.

(2) The bill that just passed is a bill reauthorizing federal funding for job training programs. What it essentially is saying is that a faith-based organization can use religious criteria to fill any position regardless of the funding of that position. So under this bill, Ms. Dodge would presumably have had no case against the Salvation Army.

For those of you still in favor of this religious discrimination, consider this scenario:

Let's say we have a faith-based organization. This particular organization has a religion that explicitly excludes all racial and ethnic groups except for whites. That exclusion is a conscious, purposeful tenet of their religion. They are funded by the federal government. Do you (people who support yesterday's bill) believe that this organization should be allowed to hire only white people for all their federally funded positions? This is entirely in line with their religion -- you can't be a member of their religion unless you are white, therefore they are hiring only people who can fit into their religious belief system.

I don't see anything in any of your positions that would allow me to conclude you would not be in favor of this religion-based discriminatory hiring. Nor do I see anything in yesterday's bill that would prevent this from happening.

And if you don't believe this is a real-life question, think again: Bob Jones University.

03-04-2005, 08:11 AM	#40 (permalink)
raveneye Born Against	Some things to consider: (1) it is entirely legal and constitutional for faith-based groups receiving federal money to hire based on religion if that hiring practice satisfies the Lemon Test: As long as the federal money is used for a secular purpose, and doesn't enhance or inhibit religion, and doesn't foster excessive govenmental entanglement with religion, all is OK. One of the defining cases here is the Dodge v. Salvation Army case in 1989 (U.S. District Court in Biloxi). Here the Salvation Army fired a woman because it found out she was a Wiccan. Because her position as a secretary was funded almost entirely with a federal grant, the court decided that the Lemon Test was violated; ie that the federal money was being used to inhibit her religion and promote the Salvation Army's religion. So she won her suit against the Salvation Army. (2) The bill that just passed is a bill reauthorizing federal funding for job training programs. What it essentially is saying is that a faith-based organization can use religious criteria to fill any position regardless of the funding of that position. So under this bill, Ms. Dodge would presumably have had no case against the Salvation Army. For those of you still in favor of this religious discrimination, consider this scenario: Let's say we have a faith-based organization. This particular organization has a religion that explicitly excludes all racial and ethnic groups except for whites. That exclusion is a conscious, purposeful tenet of their religion. They are funded by the federal government. Do you (people who support yesterday's bill) believe that this organization should be allowed to hire only white people for all their federally funded positions? This is entirely in line with their religion -- you can't be a member of their religion unless you are white, therefore they are hiring only people who can fit into their religious belief system. I don't see anything in any of your positions that would allow me to conclude you would not be in favor of this religion-based discriminatory hiring. Nor do I see anything in yesterday's bill that would prevent this from happening. And if you don't believe this is a real-life question, think again: Bob Jones University.