(February 4, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Heywood Wrote:(February 4, 2015 at 4:11 pm)Cthulhu Dreaming Wrote: A few problems with your thought experiment.
Can't say for sure about Kentucky, but around here, strip club performers aren't employees, and aren't subject to the same anti-discrimination laws as employees.
Second, what Ham is doing isn't a lawful form of employment discrimination for a for-profit company.
First, where you live one could probably employ a person to be a strip club performer but that is not usually done because it make business sense not too(why pay the taxes and L&I if you don't have too). My point is that sometimes it is legal to discriminate in hiring practices.....including those of for-profit ventures.
Sure. Where a "Bona Fide Occupational Qualification" exists.
(February 4, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Heywood Wrote: Regarding your second point, this is an issue the court is going to have to decide.
Correct. I'm sure as fuck not accepting Ken Ham's word on anything.
(February 4, 2015 at 4:31 pm)Heywood Wrote: Last, I think an argument could be made that believers are simply better equipped to do the job that Ark Encounters wants them to do. Hell I don't believe in the flood, but if I were building this thing strictly as a business venture, I would want the front line employees to truly believe the flood story. A believer is going to be more passionate in selling the story than a non believer.
Better equipped (and that's arguable) is not the same as unequipped. Is what one believes a BFOQ? No, though it may have an impact on a particular individual's ability to perform the job duties. Can a non-believer sell Ken Ham's brand of snake oil? Yes. Whether an individual *will* or not is a valid basis for employment decisions - but denying anyone not willing to sign a statement of belief is not.
