How Far Will the SCOTUS Go On Behalf of Muslims ?

[Harry Dresden]

i think most religious "rituals" are performed in private,alone or with other members of the sect....not at work.....i could be wrong though.....

Religious attire likewise should be worn at worship or with other members of the sect, not at work.

as long as jewish people get to wear their yarmulkes....dont bet on it....

 

[JakeStarkey]

I thought you said you believed in god?

OFF TOPIC!!!

Absolutely on topic. We are discussing religion and whether SCOTUS can rule against it within the boundaries of the Constitution.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Hey, all you Muslim ass-kissers!! Have you forgotten my question from the OP ? Here it is again. You don't get away with not answering it. >>

"So what's next ? As a longtime student of Islamization, I can assure you that stealth jihad Muslims aren't going to rest on this level. Now that they've gotten this, are they going to push for forcing US businesses to allow niqabs too ? (which cover the entire face except the eyes) That would be a disastrous (and idiotic) blow against our national security.

Niqab

Who knows what SCOTUS will do: certainly not you.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist and RV can make all the allegations they want, but without solid evidence, they have only assertions, which mean nothing.

 

[Kondor3]

Right up until we're being ruled by them. Funny how the left supports them even through islam hates the left.

Yes... it's the fate of bend-over-backwards over-accommodating types throughout history.

Egalitarianism without reciprocal participation is a path to slow suicide.

Useful idiots are only useful until the object of their doormat behaviors is in a superior position and no longer needs them, then the shit always hits the fan.

Always.

But it is the Fate of Man - and Useful Idiots in particular - that they do not learn from the past.

The trick here is to keep an eye on the Useful Idiots and not to leave them in power often enough or long enough to give away the farm.

I'm not sure that the principle applies here, within the domain of reasonable accommodation, but, stand-alone, you make a good point.

 

[dblack]

This has nothing to do with Islam. The problem is the bone-headed interpretation of the First Amendment that the Court and Congress are perpetuating.

 

[RandomVariable]

I thought you said you believed in god?

OFF TOPIC!!!

Absolutely on topic. We are discussing religion and whether SCOTUS can rule against it within the boundaries of the Constitution.

Not exactly. They merged my thread out of religion with this one so I get to claim any talk of God is within the scope of this thread.

[edit, Sorry, I was speaking to protectionist's comment. I did not word that clearly.]

 

[protectionist]

This has nothing to do with Islam. The problem is the bone-headed interpretation of the First Amendment that the Court and Congress are perpetuating.

Exactly right. A &F simply wanted to stay true to their "look policy" Any headwear could have been a breach of it.

 

[protectionist]

Right up until we're being ruled by them. Funny how the left supports them even through islam hates the left.

Yes... it's the fate of bend-over-backwards over-accommodating types throughout history.

Egalitarianism without reciprocal participation is a path to slow suicide.

Useful idiots are only useful until the object of their doormat behaviors is in a superior position and no longer needs them, then the shit always hits the fan.

Always.

But it is the Fate of Man - and Useful Idiots in particular - that they do not learn from the past.

The trick here is to keep an eye on the Useful Idiots and not to leave them in power often enough or long enough to give away the farm.

I'm not sure that the principle applies here, within the domain of reasonable accommodation, but, stand-alone, you make a good point.

The SCOTUS is now well underway to "give away the farm"

I'm not sure if they are fully comprehending what they have just done. The SCOTUS needs to meet among themselves, do some big time head-scratching, and realize they made a mistake in this hijab case. The precedent they are setting is one of forcing all American businesses and organizations of all kinds to remake themselves according to the dictates of activist (lawsuit filing) Muslims.

These are, for the most part, Muslim Brotherhood front groups (CAIR, ISNA, MSA, MAS, AMC, MAYA, FCNA, the SAAR Foundation, MWL, IRO, IIIT, WAMY, ICNA, UASR, IMANA, AMSE, and score of others) whose stated mission is to destroy America, and eliminate it, and replace it with an Islamic state.

 

[protectionist]

Protectionist and RV can make all the allegations they want, but without solid evidence, they have only assertions, which mean nothing.

"Solid evidence" of WHAT ? WHAT "allegations" ?

 

[protectionist]

Absolutely on topic. We are discussing religion and whether SCOTUS can rule against it within the boundaries of the Constitution.

Not discussing religion, and neither was A & F, which is why the SCOTUS had no business to inject religion or Islam into it, as posts 246 and 248 already stated.

 

[protectionist]

The SCOTUS decision in this A & F case opens up a horrific pandora's box of Islamization. It opens the door for the Muslim Brotherhood to do just what it has been waiting for, for 24 years. To force Islam down America's throat, Islamize the country, and essentially conquer it from within the Supreme Court, and other courts.

How soon before MB front groups start insisting that all descriptions of pigs be banned ? Or that dog walking not be allowed ? Or that alcoholic beverages be banned from here or there ? Or that music be banned ? Or that woman be banned from driving ? Or that Muslim husbands who beat their wives be allowed to do so ? Or that people be fired from jobs for bringing pork products to work ? Or that people be fired for saying anything against Islam ? etc. etc. etc.

 

[bodecea]

That is a lot of links. I have just learned some new things. My working theory is that islam was started by a single pissed off angel who wanted to destroy all of God's creation. What you just said supports exactly that. I do believe islam is divine but just not by God himself.

Islam is the world's longest running con job mixed with organized crime, kept alive by violence, mandated in the Koran. anybody doean't believe it ? No problem. Read the Koran. It is murder cover to cover.

Christianity is longer running....FYI

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


You mean, like a yarmulke?

Outside of a temple, no business will let someone wear a yarmulke at work. Jewelry is different, most jewelry is acceptable.

 

[Uncensored2008]

as long as jewish people get to wear their yarmulkes....dont bet on it....

At work?

They don't.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Protectionist and RV can make all the allegations they want, but without solid evidence, they have only assertions, which mean nothing.

"Solid evidence" of WHAT ? WHAT "allegations" ?

Your allegations, bub. Yes, this was a religious freedom issue; yes, Islam is a religion;yes, Islam gets the same level of civil rights protection as Christianity or any other religion.

Hint: look up definition of 'hat'.

 

[dblack]

This has nothing to do with Islam. The problem is the bone-headed interpretation of the First Amendment that the Court and Congress are perpetuating.

Exactly right. A &F simply wanted to stay true to their "look policy" Any headwear could have been a breach of it.

Well, that's not what I meant, and missed my point entirely. I'm shocked and dismayed.

 

[RandomVariable]

One of the main arguments muslims make for their violent attacks on non-believers is they believe they are being persecuted. Well let's say this good muslim girl gets a job at A & F. You think some people are not going to walk into A & F and be a little surprised by a mulsim asking if she can help them pick out a nice two piece bathing suit. There will be some comments made. Now this sweet young muslim is going to go on Facebook and tell everyone how she is being persecuted at her work for no other reason than being a muslim, fuel for the fire. If America continues to be blind to this cancer she will be killed from the inside.

This is how this person dresses. You think the middle of an Oklahoma summer this is not going to draw comments from A & F customers? She is intentionally trying to cause trouble. And by trouble I mean dead Americans. If they can't fly to Syria they will work from home.

 

[JakeStarkey]

RV and Protectionist, this is about religious freedom at work not fashion wear or accessories, such as Walthers or AKs or Berettas..

Please grow up.

 

[dblack]

RV and Protectionist, this is about religious freedom at work not fashion wear or accessories, such as Walthers or AKs or Berettas..

Not really. It's about special privilege for state approved religions. Real religious freedom would respect the business owner's right to hire people based on religion.