5 ms·

> for a sincerely held religious belief. You can't just let every single human claim whatever they want is a religious belief. To claim that having your likene

> for a sincerely held religious belief. You can't just let every single human claim whatever they want is a religious belief. To claim that having your likeness captured (whether it's a photo of your face, your foot, your fingers, or whatever) is against your religious beliefs is laughable. Does the person not have no drivers license (their face captured by a camera)? If we can claim whatever we want, well it's against my religious belief to be fired.

selcuka 5y ago
You are cherry picking from the comment (and the article): > the key thing is that another employee did get an alternate background check It doesn't matter if it's a religious belief that you approve of or not. The point is it was possible but was not offered as an option for this person.
- markdown 5y ago
  Nah, you're assuming I'm discussing the case in the article, when in fact I'm just talking about religious belief exemptions in general.
gizmo686 5y ago
The courts really do not want to get into the bussiness of dictating people's religion. They explicitly do not require that a religious belief be well supported by the text, orthodoxy, or any denomination of the religion. Nor do they require that a religious belief is self consistent or unchanging through time. It is possible to argue that a belief is not sincerly held, but it is very difficult to win such an arguement. As such these legal arguemnts are almost always about what constitutes a 'reasonable accomodation'. Perpetual employment is not a reasonable accomodation; but if you work in HR at a large company, you could probably get out of handling the firing of other employees. In practice what this means is that if an employee says they have a strong personal conviction about something, the employer must offer reasonable accomodations if any are available, or be prepared to show that the claim was made in bad faith.
mod 5y ago
I legitimately knew a ~50 year old person, when I was a child, who believed that having your photograph taken captured part of your soul, and she would not allow her photograph to be taken. Apparently it was a widely-held Native American religious belief: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-c...
klyrs 5y ago
> Does the person not have no drivers license It's legal to not have a driver's license, if one does not drive on public roads.

selcuka 5y ago

You are cherry picking from the comment (and the article): > the key thing is that another employee did get an alternate background check It doesn't matter if it's a religious belief that you approve of or not. The point is it was possible but was not offered as an option for this person.

markdown 5y ago
Nah, you're assuming I'm discussing the case in the article, when in fact I'm just talking about religious belief exemptions in general.

gizmo686 5y ago

The courts really do not want to get into the bussiness of dictating people's religion. They explicitly do not require that a religious belief be well supported by the text, orthodoxy, or any denomination of the religion. Nor do they require that a religious belief is self consistent or unchanging through time. It is possible to argue that a belief is not sincerly held, but it is very difficult to win such an arguement. As such these legal arguemnts are almost always about what constitutes a 'reasonable accomodation'. Perpetual employment is not a reasonable accomodation; but if you work in HR at a large company, you could probably get out of handling the firing of other employees. In practice what this means is that if an employee says they have a strong personal conviction about something, the employer must offer reasonable accomodations if any are available, or be prepared to show that the claim was made in bad faith.

mod 5y ago

I legitimately knew a ~50 year old person, when I was a child, who believed that having your photograph taken captured part of your soul, and she would not allow her photograph to be taken. Apparently it was a widely-held Native American religious belief: https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-cultures-believe-that-photography-can-steal-your-soul https://skeptics.stackexchange.com/questions/8380/did-some-c...

klyrs 5y ago

> Does the person not have no drivers license It's legal to not have a driver's license, if one does not drive on public roads.