@averagejoe1 saidDidn't it end with the settlement telling the employers it was illegal?
I agree of course, but it begs this question.
Kroger just paid a settlement after firing persons who refused to wear Gay Pride pins at work. Phranny, tell us where this stops. Tell us of the 100 other pins that many of us, including you, Phranny, would refuse to wear at work.
What if Shav's employer can force him to wear a pin that says Jesus is Lord. The cou ...[text shortened]... ld rail on but can you answer this question straight out? And I applaud your well-written post here.
1 edit
@wildgrass saidYes. I am asking if it would likewise be legal to ask them to wear other kinds of buttons? Who decides? Are libs going to create panels to 'dictate' such matters? Would Marauder not call this dictating.....the court telling this business what to do?
Didn't it end with the settlement telling the employers it was illegal?
Here is a link.
https://www.fox19.com/2022/10/31/kroger-pay-180k-lawsuit-over-workers-who-objected-rainbow-apron/
@averagejoe1 saidEmployers should decide. In this case the court upheld a constitutional protection of religious liberty. This is not a place where more government oversight is a good idea.
Yes. I am asking if it would likewise be legal to ask them to wear other kinds of buttons? Who decides? Are libs going to create panels to 'dictate' such matters? Would Marauder not call this dictating.....the court telling this business what to do?
Here is a link.
https://www.fox19.com/2022/10/31/kroger-pay-180k-lawsuit-over-workers-who-objected-rainbow-apron/
You picked a good example that shows our society is not whatever ben stein thinks it is.
@wildgrass saidI truly wish a liberal on this forum would answer a straight question. Your post refers not to my post. My post does not mention Ben Stein. And you state the a court protects religious liberty.
Employers should decide. In this case the court upheld a constitutional protection of religious liberty. This is not a place where more government oversight is a good idea.
You picked a good example that shows our society is not whatever ben stein thinks it is.
And I do not know what you mean when you say 'Employers should decide." I just linked where a court said an employer does NOT decide. So I don't get your post.
3 edits
@averagejoe1 saidActually the settlement did exactly the opposite.
Open up, Marauder. See my post here, the court has dictated to Kroger that they can require an employee to support Gay Pride.
Can you give us your thoughts on that? Can they tell me to wear a pin that says Atheism Rules?
It's hard to answer your questions when they are almost always based on your own stupid misconceptions and/or misinformation from right wing media.
EDIT: It appears to me that Kroger merely settled because it was a nuisance; the design on the uniform is pictured here (https://www.hrdive.com/news/the-end-of-the-rainbow-lawsuit-kroger-settles-religious-bias-claim-for/635156/) and it's a heart with a few colors, not all of the rainbow, and isn't any type of "Gay Pride" symbol.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidHa. YOU should write a book on Interpretations.
Actually the settlement did exactly the opposite.
It's hard to answer your questions when they are almost always based on your own stupid misconceptions and/or misinformation from right wing media.
EDIT: It appears to me that Kroger merely settled because it was a nuisance; the design on the uniform is pictured here (https://www.hrdive.com/news/the-end-of-the-rainbo ...[text shortened]... nd it's a heart with a few colors, not all of the rainbow, and isn't any type of "Gay Pride" symbol.
"Appears to me"?haha
and then you decided that the uniform is not gay pride when all the web stories say it is. Geez.
Everybody, believe Marauder, or believe my facts, where I did not say they 'appeared' to do anything. Marauder and Sonhouse are big on telling us why people do things, why Kroger decided to settle. Geez again
1 edit
@AverageJoe1. Don't leave, Phranny, it can be entertaining. We got one guy here who thinks everyone in the world has a right to housing, and will not relent!!!!!
And several here say that if someone North of town makes $50K, and he finds out that some unknown person on the South side makes $1M, that something should be done about it.
I kid you not.
@averagejoe1 saidNot a single web story said it was a "Gay Pride symbol"; they said the two employees thought it was.
Ha. YOU should write a book on Interpretations.
"Appears to me"?haha
and then you decided that the uniform is not gay pride when all the web stories say it is. Geez.
Everybody, believe Marauder, or believe my facts, where I did not say they 'appeared' to do anything. Marauder and Sonhouse are big on telling us why people do things, why Kroger decided to settle. Geez again
Maybe you should start reading the articles you link to.
1 edit
@no1marauder saidWhy did Kroger fire them?
Not a single web story said it was a "Gay Pride symbol"; they said the two employees thought it was.
Maybe you should start reading the articles you link to.
@no1marauder saidnext thing you know they will think the ok sign stands for white power
Not a single web story said it was a "Gay Pride symbol"; they said the two employees thought it was.
Maybe you should start reading the articles you link to.
undoubtedly kroger felt like they were caught so they settled the lawsuit
@averagejoe1 saidRead the article.
Why did Kroger fire them?
Then look at the damn insignia.
Then find me somewhere, anywhere, describing a heart with four colors in a ring around it as a "Gay Pride" symbol.
I'll wait.
@no1marauder saidNo, no, no no.....I simply asked why they were fired.
Read the article.
Then look at the damn insignia.
Then find me somewhere, anywhere, describing a heart with four colors in a ring around it as a "Gay Pride" symbol.
I'll wait.
@averagejoe1 said"The workers had a sincerely held religious belief that homosexuality is a sin, the commission said, and believed the Kroger logo was a rainbow that represented support for LGBTQ individuals. They requested permission to cover the logo or wear an apron without the logo, but the employer declined and eventually fired them for refusing to comply with the dress code."
No, no, no no.....I simply asked why they were fired.
https://www.hrdive.com/news/the-end-of-the-rainbow-lawsuit-kroger-settles-religious-bias-claim-for/635156/
@no1marauder saidYou are correct, I guess I just read it too fast. Put one in the win column for you. Sure took a while to get around to the meat of the matter
"The workers had a sincerely held religious belief that homosexuality is a sin, the commission said, and believed the Kroger logo was a rainbow that represented support for LGBTQ individuals. They requested permission to cover the logo or wear an apron without the logo, but the employer declined and [b]eventually fired them for refusing to comply with the dress cod ...[text shortened]... //www.hrdive.com/news/the-end-of-the-rainbow-lawsuit-kroger-settles-religious-bias-claim-for/635156/
Here is one for you. Should a restaurant be able to deny service to children, while at the same time bakers are required to bake a homosexual cake? See Link, just happened.
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/restaurant-bans-kids-under-10-over-crazy-messes/