Compare this story to the Kim Davis story

I don't think those people should have won. Instead, they should have been told to look elsewhere for work, since their views aren't in line with the goals of the company.

I mean...............most jobs have qualifications that you have to meet. Hauling beer was one of the requirements for this job.
 
If I was told that I had to do something in my job that would go against my spiritual or religious beliefs, I wouldn't take that job, because I don't want to go against my beliefs.

They applied for truck driver jobs at a beverage company. They knew that hauling beer was a possibility. If they were going to run a chance of being offended, they shouldn't have applied.
 
If I was told that I had to do something in my job that would go against my spiritual or religious beliefs, I wouldn't take that job, because I don't want to go against my beliefs.

They applied for truck driver jobs at a beverage company. They knew that hauling beer was a possibility. If they were going to run a chance of being offended, they shouldn't have applied.

They did not work for a "beverage company", they worked for a trucking company.
 
If I was told that I had to do something in my job that would go against my spiritual or religious beliefs, I wouldn't take that job, because I don't want to go against my beliefs.

They applied for truck driver jobs at a beverage company. They knew that hauling beer was a possibility. If they were going to run a chance of being offended, they shouldn't have applied.

They did not work for a "beverage company", they worked for a trucking company.

But they still knew that hauling beer was a possibility.
 
If I was told that I had to do something in my job that would go against my spiritual or religious beliefs, I wouldn't take that job, because I don't want to go against my beliefs.

They applied for truck driver jobs at a beverage company. They knew that hauling beer was a possibility. If they were going to run a chance of being offended, they shouldn't have applied.

They did not work for a "beverage company", they worked for a trucking company.

But they still knew that hauling beer was a possibility.

What makes you say that, exactly?
 
If I was told that I had to do something in my job that would go against my spiritual or religious beliefs, I wouldn't take that job, because I don't want to go against my beliefs.

They applied for truck driver jobs at a beverage company. They knew that hauling beer was a possibility. If they were going to run a chance of being offended, they shouldn't have applied.

They did not work for a "beverage company", they worked for a trucking company.

But they still knew that hauling beer was a possibility.

There were other trucks. These men did not have to be assigned those routes. An accommodation could have been made.

Kim Davis REFUSED the religious accommodation offered her.
 
Kim Davis was the boss. She could've allowed deputy clerks to issue the license , but she wouldn't do that.

Now if these truck drivers stopped other drivers from
Delivering the booze , then Yes they could be fired .
 
I'll compare

Kim Davis was elected to uphold the Constitution
The constitution says th
I'll compare

Kim Davis was elected to uphold the Constitution
Er..no, she wasn't.

Yet again you prove that the left has no idea what the fuck they're talking about at any time of the day.

Yes, she was. Every elected official takes an oath to uphold the Constitution.

http://www.lrc.ky.gov/statutes/statute.aspx?id=21176
 
If the drivers had initially asked for religious exemptions when they applied for the job, I might buy it.

However...............if they started working and halfway into their employment they asked, they should have been fired.
 

Forum List

Back
Top