MPSL/St Paul: Muslim workers at Target refuse to handle pork

Sounds like a classic case of the curly tail wagging the pig.

Let's get real here.

Originally posted by Odium



That's a blatent lie and you know it.

They refused to carry dogs, not blind people. Somedays I do wonder what the mobs do on this site when people are allowed to openly spread such lies.

You can pick on the statement all you want but that will not change the fact that a blind person could not get a ride in their cab because they had a dog. Go a head a Nit pick the fact is the invidual was still blind.

Somebody use some b***s here and step up an prosecute somebody on the grounds of discrimination...one way or the other.

Let's roll somebody, I can't wait to see some action. Why if one group is capable of behaving poorly, I for darn sure want to right to behave poorly my self.

N'est pas?

Originally posted by marg6043
The muslin worker is not the problem, the one to blame should be target for putting the worker in controversial position.

Oh please, marg. That's the same as saying that a person who voluntarily joins the military should object when being sent into battle beause they don't believe in killing.

Originally posted by jsobecky
Oh please, marg. That's the same as saying that a person who voluntarily joins the military should object when being sent into battle beause they don't believe in killing.

You and shots are missing my point. In American we can not have discrimination base on religion, races and political views.

But when the law is applied and people gets hired with religious preferences and they interfered with their work . . .

Who should we blame? the government laws? the company following the law or the employee that is just protected by the same laws so he or she doesn't get discriminated against.

That is the question, who should be blamed?

Originally posted by marg6043

Originally posted by jsobecky
Oh please, marg. That's the same as saying that a person who voluntarily joins the military should object when being sent into battle beause they don't believe in killing.

You and shots are missing my point. In American we can not have discrimination base on religion, races and political views.

But when the law is applied and people gets hired with religious preferences and they interfered with their work . . .

Who should we blame? the government laws? the company following the law or the employee that is just protected by the same laws so he or she doesn't get discriminated against.

That is the question, who should be blamed?

Let me help you to answer your own question, marg:

Is it legal to ask what one's religion is when hiring?

That should tell you whose responsibility it is.

See JS, then when somebody that is working is confronted with the dilemma of how to deal with an issue that is against their believes be Christian or Muslin, who should be blame for the problem?

I say we are seen one of the problems when certain laws are not define.

Nobody should be fire for their religious believes, but the employee or the employee should be able to know what these believes are to avoid a problem as the muslin refusing to sell pork, or a Christian pro life in a pharmacy dispensing day after pill.

Like that everybody is happy.

Whose problem is this?

Does it affect anyone personally?

Are you not happy that they don't touch pork?

Are you their boss?

Is it between them, or are we involved?

The media should be held accountable for this no one else. Not the workers, not Target.

cold faced petty discrim c$*p from the media.

[edit on 15-3-2007 by Selmer2]

I don't eat or like pork myself, but for f'n sakes, it's contained in a package. She should be fired immediatley.

Originally posted by marg6043
See JS, then when somebody that is working is confronted with the

Nobody should be fire for their religious believes, but the employee or the employee should be able to know what these believes are to avoid a problem as the muslin refusing to sell pork, or a Christian pro life in a pharmacy dispensing day after pill.

I have to assume you meant employers and employees above marg which our laws are well defined already. An employer cannot ask you what your religion is so that leaves only the employee t blame in either instance ham or abortion. The solution is also very simple if you do not want to handle pork you do not apply for a job where they sell pork. With that said, how many anti abortion people do you think apply for jobs at abortion clinics?

Originally posted by marg6043
See JS, then when somebody that is working is confronted with the dilemma of how to deal with an issue that is against their believes be Christian or Muslin, who should be blame for the problem?

I say we are seen one of the problems when certain laws are not define.

Nobody should be fire for their religious believes, but the employee or the employee should be able to know what these believes are to avoid a problem as the muslin refusing to sell pork, or a Christian pro life in a pharmacy dispensing day after pill.

Like that everybody is happy.

You have to ask, who or what made it a "problem", marg? Target? No.

Is selling pork against any laws? No.

We have to live by the rules of our Constitution, not the rules of the Quran.

The laws of the nation overrule the laws of a religion.

Well I think the question is did the employee explain this to her employer before she took the job that she could not handle certain products? If she did and the target store still made her a cashier then it is the stores fault. If she did not tell the store that she could not handle certain products before she took a job as a cashier then it is her fault.

Also, keep in mind this is the Internet and people lie. Yeah, I said it, PEOPLE LIE!!! lol I know, big shocker right? The entire story could be bogus.

[edit on 15-3-2007 by zerotime]

Originally posted by shots
First Cab Drivers refused to carry passengers who were blind

You will have to show us where anyone refused to drive someone for being blind. Last I checked, they wont allow dogs in the cab.

or carried liquor and now we get this. :shk:

Cab drivers have one of the most dangerous jobs in the US. Having a drunk person in the cab does not make it safer.

When is enough enough? It is fine if they have beliefs but when it infringes on others it is wrong.

You mean like how gay people can't marry because we live in a "free" society? Or how Christian fundamentalist pharmacists refuse to sell birth control pills? Or how about women losing the right to make their own decisions about their body?

Can you imagine the problems it can cause if a mother or father buys a lot of pork products and those products are stacked over the whole conveyor.

Oh the humanity! God forbid such a situation would occur to these pork loving individuals. I mean everyone knows it's impossible to have another cashier come and switch registers and scan them. It would defy all logic and possibilities!

[edit on 15-3-2007 by DJMessiah]

Originally posted by DJMessiah
You will have to show us where anyone refused to drive someone for being blind. Last I checked, they wont allow dogs in the cab.

It has happened in Canada and Australia and do deny your ignorance. when it comes to Dogs getting in cabs, Buses and yes even restaurants, here in the US you cannot refuse the dog from entering

Blind People Rejected by Muslim Cabbies

www.danielpipes.org...

Service Dog Information with regard to the ADA

I mean everyone knows it's impossible to have another cashier come and switch registers and scan them.

That is not the point,. The point is they are getting paid to scan store merchandise and too me that means all food items. Lets assume for one minute you were a checkout clerk in a store. How would you feel if you had to do both your job and the job of the clerk in the next isle. If you say it would not bother you well then I think you would be lying, because no one likes to do the work others are getting paid for.

All they are doing is testing the waters here too bad you can't see it.
Today it is pork next week it will be gloves, cosmetics etc., because they are made from pork

I bet you were the guy in line ahead of me that bought 300.00 in groceries when the store was jam packed and just stood there watching the cashier pack the entire order herself just because thats what they are paid to do.

Target promotes diversity in a huge way. So likely that person will be pulled from the register and put on the floor somewhere.

I do agree to s**t or get of the pot tho. We here in the US are constantly conforming our ideas and pricipals to "allow" for other differences all the while infriging on mine. I for one am damn tired of it.

It was not Target's responsibility to see this employee was placed in a position that didn't conflict with her religious beliefs. Target has no right to even ask what those beliefs are.

It was the employee's responsibility to make her employer known of the conflict. She failed to do this. Instead, she refused to perform the duties expected of her.

I don't think she should be fired. She could just be stupid. Stupid people have rights too. But she should be made an example of and Target should set written policy stating that if an individual employee's religious beliefs conflict with their work duties, they must make appropriate arrangements. Most employers already ask on their application for employment if the applicant will need any specific days off for religious purposes. Just expand it to "Are there any duties you will be unable to perform for any reason?" The employer can then choose not to hire these people if they can not find an alternate placement.

Originally posted by ThePieMaN
I bet you were the guy in line ahead of me that bought 300.00 in groceries when the store was jam packed and just stood there watching the cashier pack the entire order herself just because thats what they are paid to do.

First off it would cause many problems if two individuals tried to scan at the same time. How would you know if the item scanned correctly if two were swiping items across the scanner real fast?

Second many stores do not even allow customers to scan their items, do not believe me go into a Walmart and try to scan your own items. You cannot do it they will not let you, at least here you can't.

Originally posted by shots
First off it would cause many problems if two individuals tried to scan at the same time. How would you know if the item scanned correctly if two were swiping items across the scanner real fast?

Second many stores do not even allow customers to scan their items, do not believe me go into a Walmart and try to scan your own items. You cannot do it they will not let you, at least here you can't.

Yes of course its going to be confusing and things will get scanned twice just because the cashier asked the customer to scan 1 package of bacon.

Dude thats just such a lame excuse. You could care less about Target paying wages to a worker and them not performing a task 100%. The thing that really bugs you the most is that it was a Muslim cashier and the Muslim is in the USA. Thats what bugs you.

Dude I can't speak of shot's reasoning, and despite your attempt to, you can't either... but dude I for one have a problem with anybody using religion as an excuse for failure to perform an obligation they already agreed to.

For real dude, if someone has a problem with their employment expectations, they need to find different employment... dude.