[snowbird]

A Wegmans supermarket in upstate (Rochester) New York has posted a sign on one of its checkout lines asking customers purchasing alcohol or pork to please use a different register. The clerk on that particular register is a teenage Muslima who says she's uncomfortable handling those things due to her religion.

It's called Stealth Jihad.

It's a one-way street, a master-slave relationship in which we do all the respecting and they give none in return. In fact, when they get large enough numbers, they do stuff like the Armenian Genocide, in accordance with their Koran's command to "slay the infidel".

Someone suggested we do a Rosa Parks on Wegmans, take our bacon and beer into this sharia line and dare them to remove us from the line. Others just say boycott Wegmans, or maybe sue them for discrimination.

Think this is too trivial?

But it's part of a jihad pattern. The Obama Administration has declined to prosecute the Muslim who threatened to "blow up the White House". Would he have been so lenient to a threatening white Christian Army veteran NRA member?

The FBI, in an Obama-ordered dhimmi move, has removed 876 pages of training material on jihad because it might offend Muslims.

But Islam is peaceful, right? Well, yesterday in Denmark, some truly peaceful SIOE (Stop Islamization Of Europe) people held a public moment of silence for the 7 people murdered in France by Mohammed Merah. Muslims, backed up by Leftist Dhimmi union thugs, wearing black masks, shouting Allah Akbar, tried (and happily, failed) to break through police lines. These punks call themselves Soldiers of Allah and live in nearby Vollsmose, a Muslim ghetto, made possible by leftist multicultural immigration policies. They then threw rocks and bottles, injuring 2 policemen.

Worldwide, today's total of deadly Muslim attacks has increased to 18,665.

But there is some good news: French police have arrested Willy Brigitte, a convert to Islam, who planned an attack on an Australian nuclear power plant.

Standing by now for either a dhimmi such as MAM to call me a "hater" for daring to speak the truth, or else for complete silence from the usual suspects. Seriously, we need to wake up before we're being herded into cattle cars...that's too late.

[Altaris]

So they are all up in arms because one person/store is saying you can't use one register for certain products. How is that different than the state enforcing a christian law that says the liquor stores can't even be open on sundays to sell it? (that is the law in Texas)

I do agree with you that it is stupid, and Islam(and the spread of it) is without question a huge threat/danger to this world. I find it a bit hypocritical though that Christians are all upset over things they themselves already have forced the governments to do.

[Wake_jumper]

so an employee is refusing to do the job they were hired to do... and why are they still employed?

[Kingarthurhk]

Doctor's aren't required to perform abortions either, but they are still allowed to keep their medical licenses. Welcome to a pluralistic society where everyone has the right to religious freedom.

[Vic Hays]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

Doctor's aren't required to perform abortions either, but they are still allowed to keep their medical licenses. Welcome to a pluralistic society where everyone has the right to religious freedom.

I remember a new Church member who was visited by a couple of JW's. She was all upset because they we teaching error and needed to be stopped. I reminded her that if you took away their freedom we would also lose ours.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by Vic Hays

I remember a new Church member who was visited by a couple of JW's. She was all upset because they we teaching error and needed to be stopped. I reminded her that if you took away their freedom we would also lose ours.

Exactly.

[Roering]

This country allows for religious freedom. Not just Christian religious freedom. Although, not so much anymore for us Catholics if this HHS mandate takes effect next year.

[Vic Hays]

Originally Posted by Roering

This country allows for religious freedom. Not just Christian religious freedom. Although, not so much anymore for us Catholics if this HHS mandate takes effect next year.

If you lose your religious freedom so do we.

I am glad you recognize that freedom of religion is a good thing. It is generally only a minor inconvenience, like going to another checkout line, to accommodate differing religious beliefs.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by Roering

This country allows for religious freedom. Not just Christian religious freedom. Although, not so much anymore for us Catholics if this HHS mandate takes effect next year.

That element got shot down already, because of the outcry. But, whether or not you are Catholic, Protestant, Islamic, Hindu, Bhuddist, or whatever-the First Amendment guarantee for freedom of religion is for everyone.

On a side note, I suspect that the whole health care bill will be found unconstitutional

[English]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

Doctor's aren't required to perform abortions either, but they are still allowed to keep their medical licenses. Welcome to a pluralistic society where everyone has the right to religious freedom.

There is a major difference. When laws allowing abortion were created there was stong religious objection from substantial parts of the existing population. On that basis, doctors with religious objections to abortion were allowed, under the terms of the law, not to take part in abortions. They are not, I believe, allowed to tell a woman that she may not have an abortion when the law allows or might allow it. They must refer the patient on to a doctor without religious objections.

Doctors, by their training, can only be expected to be doctors and removing that livelyhood would be very wrong. At the same time, hospitals and clinics where abortions are performed must be allowed to discriminate against the employment of doctors who object to abortion. In contrast, an individual who does not wish to handle particular types of item at a pay desk can go and work at a business where those items are not sold because one pay desk job typically needs no more training or skill than another. The only way in which a business will inconvenience its customers by making them go to a longer queue on occasion and thereby loosing some customers or increasing their costs is because the business is forced to do so. They are so forced by polite deputations carrying a subtle but unmistakable threat from Muslim or left wing activists.

The Muslim strategy throughout the democratic free societies is to apply such threats piecemeal until they add up to a major change in the nature of the society towards the presumtion that this process of blackmail is acceptable and virtuous. It is neither. It is a process of invasion and takeover without outright war and it is essential that it is understood in that light by every person with the wits to think for themselves.

English

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by English

There is a major difference. When laws allowing abortion were created there was stong religious objection from substantial parts of the existing population. On that basis, doctors with religious objections to abortion were allowed, under the terms of the law, not to take part in abortions. They are not, I believe, allowed to tell a woman that she may not have an abortion when the law allows or might allow it. They must refer the patient on to a doctor without religious objections.

Doctors, by their training, can only be expected to be doctors and removing that livelyhood would be very wrong. At the same time, hospitals and clinics where abortions are performed must be allowed to discriminate against the employment of doctors who object to abortion. In contrast, an individual who does not wish to handle particular types of item at a pay desk can go and work at a business where those items are not sold because one pay desk job typically needs no more training or skill than another. The only way in which a business will inconvenience its customers by making them go to a longer queue on occasion and thereby loosing some customers or increasing their costs is because the business is forced to do so. They are so forced by polite deputations carrying a subtle but unmistakable threat from Muslim or left wing activists.

The Muslim strategy throughout the democratic free societies is to apply such threats piecemeal until they add up to a major change in the nature of the society towards the presumtion that this process of blackmail is acceptable and virtuous. It is neither. It is a process of invasion and takeover without outright war and it is essential that it is understood in that light by every person with the wits to think for themselves.

English

No offense, but the First Amendment means something here in the United States. I realize you are comming from a very Socialistic background and the only real rights afforded to you are under the Magna Carta.

We still believe in religous liberty for all people.

[cowboywannabe]

i wont stand in line for who knows how long to buy my booze and pork only to get the register and be told i know have to got the back of the line at another register because the clerk wont ring up the items i want to buy from the store she works.

id leave the items on the counter and go elsewhere, and do this a few times a week until they hired somebody to do the job right or until the muslima got over her phobias.

now, i wont intentionally stand in a long line just to bug her if there is a shorter line next register over. but if her line is the shortest she needs to do her job when i have my items for ring up.

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

Doctor's aren't required to perform abortions either, but they are still allowed to keep their medical licenses. Welcome to a pluralistic society where everyone has the right to religious freedom.

I can't imagine forcing a doctor to perform abortions if it were against his religion.

On the other hand it seems having pharmacists not dispensing birth control because of their beliefs is ridiculous, as is a cashier refusing to handle pork or alcohol in checkout. Yarmalka's for Jews, turbans for Sikhs in Army uniforms, fine with me.

Guess I need to think on this some more to resolve my conflicting positions on this...

I'm generally in favor of reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs in the workforce. Guess it boils down to what seems reasonable...

I have no sympathy for those who whine and cry about their religious beliefs being trampled and infringed when they have no problem with others beliefs being similarly infringed, but I would still stand up for their rights regardless of their position. (Not talking about you here, just in general, don't recall you doing so, and as proof, you're surely on the side of the angels on this issue).

Thanks for turning yet another snowbird troll thread into something useful and food for thought. Glad to see people standing up for religious freedom in the thread instead of Muslim bashing for the most part.

Randy

[IhRedrider]

She has the right to not have to handle things she finds religiously objectionable. Wegmans has the right to not employ people who will not or cannot do the job they are hired to perform. We have the right to not spend our money at the establishments that we do not wish to support.

They are so forced by polite deputations carrying a subtle but unmistakable threat from Muslim or left wing activists.

I agree with English, however the left does not have a monopoly on interfering in other peoples rights. The extreme "religious Right" does plenty of rights grabbing. As some of the atheists on this forum have pointed out, the RR interferes with peoples rights to do business with others. That is just as wrong as what the left does.

I believe in God. You do not have to, but you have not right to interfere with me.

I believe that God wants me to not eat things that are unclean. You can eat what you want, I do not answer to God for your actions.

I do not believe in Allah. You can, but you do not get to force sharia law on me. You live under it if you want.

I believe I have the right to free speech. You have the right to not listen to me.

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by steveksux

I can't imagine forcing a doctor to perform abortions if it were against his religion.

On the other hand it seems having pharmacists not dispensing birth control because of their beliefs is ridiculous, as is a cashier refusing to handle pork or alcohol in checkout. Yarmalka's for Jews, turbans for Sikhs in Army uniforms, fine with me.

That is the beauty of the First Amendment, you don't get to decide for anyone, and neither do they get to decide for you.

There are a lot of Catholic pharmacists. Would you force them to dispense day after pills? I wouldn't. However, the thing about living a pluralistic society with First Amendment freedoms, is you can go to the next pharmicist who will dispense them to you.

I have no beef, no pun intended, with the Muslim lady who is not dealing in pork or alcohol. It is a mighty fine thing her employer respects the First Amendment, and realizes that we do live in a pluralistic society with different religious beliefs. Good for them. In protecting her, they are setting an example to protect the rest of us within society as well.

Guess I need to think on this some more to resolve my conflicting positions on this...

That is something we all must do.

I'm generally in favor of reasonable accommodation of religious beliefs in the workforce. Guess it boils down to what seems reasonable...

Once someone decides what is reasonable, they define what is reasonable for everyone. That is the danger in that.

I have no sympathy for those who whine and cry about their religious beliefs being trampled and infringed when they have no problem with others beliefs being similarly infringed, but I would still stand up for their rights regardless of their position. (Not talking about you here, just in general, don't recall you doing so, and as proof, you're surely on the side of the angels on this issue).

I understand. I have a similar frustration.

Thanks for turning yet another snowbird troll thread into something useful and food for thought. Glad to see people standing up for religious freedom in the thread instead of Muslim bashing for the most part.

Randy

The original intent in this country was religious freedom. It hasn't always been properly manifested, that is why the founders got together and decided on the Bill of Rights.

I will advocate religious freedom always. I believe in it for several reasons. First, it guarantees liberty for all people.

Now, here is the ironic part. Next, I firmly believe that free will was endowed to all of creation by it's Creator. God is about free will and choice. Love cannot exist without choice.

So, I am perpetually confused by those who claim to be Christians who fail to see that aspect of God, and feel the world would be a better place if they could just compell everyone to "be" Christian. That very thought process is UNchristian by its very nature. Frankly, it is more Satanic than anything else.

If they would just stop and look at the life of Christ, Jesus never compelled anyone to follow Him. He asked, and they either came to Him, or they went away.

[steveksux]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

That is the beauty of the First Amendment, you don't get to decide for anyone, and neither do they get to decide for you.

If only everyone had that part figured out....

There are a lot of Catholic pharmacists. Would you force them to dispense day after pills? I wouldn't. However, the thing about living a pluralistic society with First Amendment freedoms, is you can go to the next pharmicist who will dispense them to you.

There's competing rights too, people have a right to buy legal product, too, if there's too many catholic pharmacists, not right to deny people contraceptives.. that's the point I start to waffle. As long as there's a healthy mix, and therefore options, no problem.

I have no beef, no pun intended, with the Muslim lady who is not dealing in pork or alcohol. It is a mighty fine thing her employer respects the First Amendment, and realizes that we do live in a pluralistic society with different religious beliefs. Good for them. In protecting her, they are setting an example to protect the rest of us within society as well.

Absolutely right. Great example of an employer trying to do the right thing, in my book.

Once someone decides what is reasonable, they define what is reasonable for everyone. That is the danger in that.

When one group predominates, there can be oppression of the unpopular minority rights also..

The original intent in this country was religious freedom. It hasn't always been properly manifested, that is why the founders got together and decided on the Bill of Rights.

Not so much, originally 1st amendment applied only to the Feds, and some states had official religions back in the day. Once 1st became incorporated, states were also forbidden to push a particular religion. Which is as it should be. If they're rights, NOBODY should be able to infringe them, not the Feds, not the States, not the local municipality... Cannot understand why all those rights were not considered incorporated from the start. Its been a slow piecemeal process getting the Bill of Rights, all of them, applied to the states.

I will advocate religious freedom always. I believe in it for several reasons. First, it guarantees liberty for all people.

Now, here is the ironic part. Next, I firmly believe that free will was endowed to all of creation by it's Creator. God is about free will and choice. Love cannot exist without choice.

So, I am perpetually confused by those who claim to be Christians who fail to see that aspect of God, and feel the world would be a better place if they could just compell everyone to "be" Christian. That very thought process is UNchristian by its very nature. Frankly, it is more Satanic than anything else.

If they would just stop and look at the life of Christ, Jesus never compelled anyone to follow Him. He asked, and they either came to Him, or they went away.

My favorite saying is the Disciples were called fishers of men. Some were actually fishermen, were they not? Then why didn't Jesus have them fashion nets to throw over people to get them to convert? That's how they fished back then, right?

Randy

[Vic Hays]

Originally Posted by steveksux

My favorite saying is the Disciples were called fishers of men. Some were actually fishermen, were they not? Then why didn't Jesus have them fashion nets to throw over people to get them to convert? That's how they fished back then, right?

Randy

Well actually, yes

Matthew 13:47 Again, the kingdom of heaven is like to a net, that was cast into the sea, and gathered of every kind:
13:48 Which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.
13:49 So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just,
13:50 And shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth.
13:51 Jesus said to them, Have you understood all these things? They say to him, Yes, Lord.

[creaky]

Originally Posted by IhRedrider

I do not believe in Allah. You can, but you do not get to force sharia law on me. You live under it if you want.

This is a typical nice American sentiment, live and let live. However, islam does not cater to live and let live.

When we have given enough ground and there are enough of them, you will have sharia forced on you.

Europe as a whole is beginning to fathom their horrible miscalculation. Will we?

English seems to be the only atheist on this board with a lick of sense concerning the threat of and by islam.

He is living with the folly daily.

Creeping sharia is real and we had better wake up fast.

[IhRedrider]

However, islam does not cater to live and let live.

I am aware of goals of Islam when it comes to freedoms and rights, however Islam is not the only threat to our freedoms.

This is a typical nice American sentiment, live and let live.

That is why I have made personal choices and have made preparations for the time when some group of individuals comes to force themselves upon me. I don't know how committed they are to their cause, but I know how committed I am to maintaining my Rights. I hope no one is relying on the government to protect them. The government is the cause of more problems then they solve.

Regardless of any ones religious beliefs, I hope that everyone here has decided in advance what they are willing to accept from the bast***'s who wish to steal from them.

[muscogee]

Originally Posted by snowbird

A Wegmans supermarket in upstate (Rochester) New York has posted a sign on one of its checkout lines asking customers purchasing alcohol or pork to please use a different register. The clerk on that particular register is a teenage Muslima who says she's uncomfortable handling those things due to her religion.

It's called Stealth Jihad.

It's a one-way street, a master-slave relationship in which we do all the respecting and they give none in return. In fact, when they get large enough numbers, they do stuff like the Armenian Genocide, in accordance with their Koran's command to "slay the infidel".

Someone suggested we do a Rosa Parks on Wegmans, take our bacon and beer into this sharia line and dare them to remove us from the line. Others just say boycott Wegmans, or maybe sue them for discrimination.

Think this is too trivial?

But it's part of a jihad pattern. The Obama Administration has declined to prosecute the Muslim who threatened to "blow up the White House". Would he have been so lenient to a threatening white Christian Army veteran NRA member?

The FBI, in an Obama-ordered dhimmi move, has removed 876 pages of training material on jihad because it might offend Muslims.

But Islam is peaceful, right? Well, yesterday in Denmark, some truly peaceful SIOE (Stop Islamization Of Europe) people held a public moment of silence for the 7 people murdered in France by Mohammed Merah. Muslims, backed up by Leftist Dhimmi union thugs, wearing black masks, shouting Allah Akbar, tried (and happily, failed) to break through police lines. These punks call themselves Soldiers of Allah and live in nearby Vollsmose, a Muslim ghetto, made possible by leftist multicultural immigration policies. They then threw rocks and bottles, injuring 2 policemen.

Worldwide, today's total of deadly Muslim attacks has increased to 18,665.

But there is some good news: French police have arrested Willy Brigitte, a convert to Islam, who planned an attack on an Australian nuclear power plant.

Standing by now for either a dhimmi such as MAM to call me a "hater" for daring to speak the truth, or else for complete silence from the usual suspects. Seriously, we need to wake up before we're being herded into cattle cars...that's too late.

And still the republic survives. What's next? Blue laws?

[Kingarthurhk]

Originally Posted by creaky

This is a typical nice American sentiment, live and let live. However, islam does not cater to live and let live.

When we have given enough ground and there are enough of them, you will have sharia forced on you.

Europe as a whole is beginning to fathom their horrible miscalculation. Will we?

English seems to be the only atheist on this board with a lick of sense concerning the threat of and by islam.

He is living with the folly daily.

Creeping sharia is real and we had better wake up fast.

Honestly, given the 1260 years of Catholic opression, I could make the same argument to you.

The point is, she isn't harming anyone.

I don't bear her anymore malice than a Catholic wanting Sunday off to go to mass.

[JimBianchi]

I private company can do what ever it wants in my mind.

And I can choose to never give them a dime of my money and I will encourage everyone who listens to do the same.

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk

That is the beauty of the First Amendment, you don't get to decide for anyone, and neither do they get to decide for you.

There are a lot of Catholic pharmacists. Would you force them to dispense day after pills? I wouldn't. However, the thing about living a pluralistic society with First Amendment freedoms, is you can go to the next pharmicist who will dispense them to you.

I have no beef, no pun intended, with the Muslim lady who is not dealing in pork or alcohol. It is a mighty fine thing her employer respects the First Amendment, and realizes that we do live in a pluralistic society with different religious beliefs. Good for them. In protecting her, they are setting an example to protect the rest of us within society as well.

This isn't a first amendment issue, other than the question of whether or not expecting customers to use another checkout line is a reasonable provision for the clerk's religion. I suspect that if the store had refused to make an accommodation and the employee had sued they wouldn't win based on the fact that checking items out is a core part of the duties for which they were hired.

[Animal Mother]

Originally Posted by snowbird

Standing by now for either a dhimmi such as MAM to call me a "hater" for daring to speak the truth, or else for complete silence from the usual suspects. Seriously, we need to wake up before we're being herded into cattle cars...that's too late.

Only in your crazed mind is a store, a private business, deciding to accommodate an employee equivalent to people being loaded into cattle cars.

[JK-linux]

.....