santorum and Kerry reportedly joined to co-sponsor a bill to insure

[bearfartinthewoods]

the protection of religious freedom on the job. is this true?
i know there is a website that gives the text of bills before congress but i can't find it in my "favorites". anyone have details on this bill?

[danielftl]

1. http://thomas.loc.gov/

http://thomas.loc.gov/

[newyawker99]

21. Hi danielftl!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[Democat]

2. Why not free speech instead of religion, if they want a new law?

How many people got fired or punished in some way for speaking out against the war or against Bush in the last two years?

I would be interested to know what this law says you can do while on the job.

Will Satanists be allowed to sacrifice goats in their cubicles? :)

[flyingfish]

4. I know, at least I think you are, joking about....

...Satanism.
Actually, Satanism does not mean the definition of a true religion, so the practice is not protected.
There are certain objective criteria to define a religion, and Satanism does not meet those criteria.

[Devils Advocate NZ]

9. Such as?

Exactly what criteria are you talking about, and why does Satanism not meet them?

[Brian Sweat]

18. A religion must require you to take Jesus as your personal savior

</sarcasm>

P.S. I think we were the victim of a drive by freeping.

[bicentennial_baby]

16. Oh really?

"Satanism does not mean the definition of a true religion, so the practice is not protected.
There are certain objective criteria to define a religion, and Satanism does not meet those criteria."

Explain please...

[bearfartinthewoods]

3. thank you n/t

[searchingforlight]

5. Kerry should not join Santorum on anything!!!

[NewYorkerfromMass]

6. It shows a willingness to work with others

and I would worry not about any "laws" like this. They are usually done more for political brownie points than anything. The utterly ridiculous "Pledge of Allegiance" vote last year is a good example.

[bearfartinthewoods]

10. i think it will have a practical application. for instance the crucifix

in the classroom debate in which a teacher was dismissed because she insisted on wearing her cross on the outside of her clothing. or the wearing of a yamaka or other headwear. i 'think' that will be effected by this bill.

[jpgray]

11. Right. There was a female Muslim police officer

who was suspended for wearing her headgear on the job. I believe that was sorted out, but this kind of thing should be protected within reason. Let's make sure there aren't any stone replicas of the 10 commandments hanging around our federal courts, but let's also allow our culture to except the religious practices of others in the workplace.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

14. Sure, and my response is: BFD!

there are bigger fish to fry.

[searchingforlight]

12. And that is my point. Work with others, yes.

But why this bill? Why now? Why him? It gives Santorum credibility that I don't think he deserves.

[NewYorkerfromMass]

15. There are stupid idiots and there are idiotic actions

the 2 can be exclusive. Santorum can occasionally be correct about something, like that broken clock.

[Eloriel]

19. And that kind of political brownie points -- that kind of pandering

is xactly what I and millions of other Americans are SICK OF. Kerry seems to have elevated it to a fine art.

If he thinks this nonsense is going to help him, he's also delusional.

Eloriel

[NewYorkerfromMass]

20. No Dean doesn't pander or waffle

raise the Social Security retirement age????

[sangha]

22. Don't forget

about how the Consitution is filled with "technicalities"

Or how Dean "forgot" to give proper credit for the line about "the Dem wing of the Dem party"

Or how "made a mistake" about Kerry and Edwards at a Dem event.

[kwolf68]

24. Pandering

How the f*** do you know Kerry is pandering?

Maybe he...ahhh...try this on now...Actually BELIEVE in what he is doing.

OF course, we can't all be as principled as Ho-Ho Dean who let us see:

1) Is against the death penalty, except in some exceptions

2) Is against gun control, except he won't do anything about those gun control laws he would have presumably NOT signed into law

3) Had to get a black person in his campaign, because black people are diametrically opposed to #1, and #2.

Dean? Yea, he's a true princpled man. LMAO...

[Freddie Stubbs]

8. That will make the Democrats look like obstructionists

You can't be against everything. You have to be for something. Sometimes the things that you are for are also favored by your opponents. Should you oppose good thing just to spite them?

[Wonder]

17. DITTO

[bearfartinthewoods]

7. goat slaughteriing in the cubicle allowed?

as with all legislation, the devil is in the details and in this case, the details would be in the specification of "practices.

btw...Hillery is also a co=sponser with Lieberman and others.
http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:1:./temp/~c108S9IOSl::

any one that speaks legaleeze care to translate?

`(2) For purposes of determining whether an employer has committed an unlawful employment practice under this title by failing to provide a reasonable accommodation to the religious observance or practice of an employee, for an accommodation to be considered to be reasonable, the accommodation shall remove the conflict between employment requirements and the religious observance or practice of the employee.

[sangha]

23. Basically

they're saying that business policies which interfere with a religious persons expressing/practicing their faith must have a genuine business justification.

If the employer has a "no hat" policy which excludes Jews who were yarmulkes, then there better be a good reason for it that applies to the business, and not just "I think they work harder when they don't have a hat weighing their thoughts down"

[Sinistrous]

13. My read on this bill:

is that it is innocuous, actually it is a good extension of the Civil Rights law.

(Again, my reading) All this bill says is that, if an employer allows and employee to take leave for other purposes, the employer cannot deny the employee to take leave for religious purposes.

It also specifies that employers cannot restrict the wearing of clothing, stc. that does not unduly interfere with the performance of the employee's job functions.

[blm]

25. That's about the size of it...

I'm an atheist, but, I think there should be no discrimination towards anyone who is religious.