Here's A Dilemma

[Fidel_Castronaut]

I agree that the practice is discriminatory, but it may not be illegal. The business would have to prove that lifting the discriminatory practice would undermine the business operation; something I think they'll have a hard time doing.

Take for instance The Rockettes. In addition to their strict height requirements, I am sure they would have no problem legally enforcing a ban on religious headgear due to the nature of their business.

I hope SCOTUS sides with Abercrombie and Fitch. The hijab is not required by Islam. It is worn by some as a symbol of modesty and privacy. I don't understand how a woman that wears the hijab reconciles the importance of modesty with selling young women short skirts, tight fitting jeans, revealing tops, etc. Do we then take the next step and force retailers to accommodate modesty warriors by having someone else assist and check-out customers purchasing clothing that the worker finds objectionable in accordance with self imposed modesty standards?

This exact dilemma has happened in the UK with muslim pharmacists refusing to dispense contraceptive pills to women (I believe it was the MAP).

I'll dig out the story. It raises the issue of whether someone's personal religious convictiona have a right to superceed one's job description and contract, which of course they shouldn't.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/3...acist.html

There's been a discussion about the idea of opt-outs for pharmacists who believe dispensing could go against their personal beliefs. Note this is not medical ethical dilemmas, this is purely about fantasy make believe religious beliefs. I'm out of te loop on the conversation now so i don't know the outcome, but I would argue using nebulous religious beliefs as an exclusion clause in a pharmacist's contract is 100% unethical