Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The Supreme Court has sided unanimously with a church sued for firing an employee on religious grounds, issuing an opinion on Wednesday that religious employers can keep the government out of hiring and firing decisions.
By requiring the Church to accept a minister it did not want, such an order would have plainly violated the Church's freedom under the Religion Clauses to select its own ministers. ...
"The exception ... ensures that the authority to select and control who will minister to the faithful is the church's alone," the ruling reads.
Of course, obama’s DOJ tried to argue that religious organizations held no "extra" rights in their hiring practices.
Obama's war on religion hits a bump in the road.
I'm thinking other cases of religious discrimination might be applied as well.
Instead, it astonished some onlookers by urging the Court to reconsider the ministerial exception entirely.
President Obama's appointees at the EEOC and other agencies have consistently taken a highly aggressive approach toward broadening the scope of the anti-discrimination laws they enforce, as evidenced by the steady flow of new efforts to restrict employer consideration of job applicants' criminal convictions, credit records, English fluency, obesity and so forth, as well as the president's own proposal to establish unemployed job applicants as a new protected category.
I can see a church not wanting to hire an atheist priest.
But giving them the right to deny a person employ as a janitor or an accountant etc. based upon religion is not something they should have the legal right to do. After all, I can't NOT hire someone because they are religious...
Of course, obama’s DOJ tried to argue that religious organizations held no "extra" rights in their hiring practices.
Obama's war on religion hits a bump in the road.
I'm thinking other cases of religious discrimination might be applied as well.
What an innacurate and misleading thread title. That and the linked Fox news article is horribly biased. Just read the completely incorrect first sentence: "The Supreme Court has sided unanimously with a church sued for firing an employee on religious grounds". She wasn't fired on religious grounds - she was fired because of her disability. The firing had nothing whatsoever to do with religion.
Last edited by hammertime33; 01-12-2012 at 09:19 AM..
I can see a church not wanting to hire an atheist priest.
But giving them the right to deny a person employ as a janitor or an accountant etc. based upon religion is not something they should have the legal right to do. After all, I can't NOT hire someone because they are religious...
I agree. If your job duties involve some sort of religious activities then I have to side with them, but if it doesn't like the examples you cited, than I can't support this.
SCOTUS pounds the White House on religious liberty
It seems that a woman who qualified to be a minister in the Lutheran Church sued the church because they wouldn't allow her to practice because of some secular things she said. Well now the WH supported her in her attempt to have the courts get her job back. I believe that this decision was issued from the court unanimously.
Doesn't matter who is/was President at the time. This is a clear example of government intrusion and I'm glad the Supreme Court did the right thing.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.