4 Expelled From Private University Over Sabbath Exams

[phkrause]

A court says the four can file a legal appeal for their right to worship.

http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/4-expelled-from-catholic-university-over-sabbath-exams

[fccool]

Why would Adventists attend Catholic Private University and have expectations for such accommodations without stipulating it as prior contractual agreement prior to taking of such class?    Likewise, why would they demand money from the school in such case, when scholarship award is a prerogative of a private institution? 

 

A Catholic school would have a set of beliefs consistent with certain order that all of the students have to comply with.   Why would making institutional preference in a private institution be a problem in such case?   Do you want Catholics attending Adventist institutions and complaining about the schedule or the food? 

[CoAspen]

One can only shake the head at what people think their rights may be in the face of another.

 

The only RL issue here, possibly, is that of the Catholic school, being violated.

[Gregory Matthews]

Religious Liberty issues, in part (Note that I said in part.") are a function of law.  As this happened in another country, we can only depend on what we know of the Court's reasoning in this situation.

 

However, in the United States, the Courts would probably not consider this to be an issue of the religious rights of the school.  Catholic universities, with the exception of Seminaries and some other schools, do not function as a part of the worship system of the Roman Catholic Church. s The right of the Catholic Church to worship as it pleases in not infringed upon by allowing someone to take an exam on a day other than the Sabbath. 
Further, Roman Catholic Universities, in the U.S., generally admit students who are not Roman Catholics.  On that basis, they assume a requirement to abide by the anti-discrimination laws.  NOTE:  I am not saying that is the only basis for their requirement to abide by those laws.

 

I did my graduate work in psychology in a University that was run by a religious denomination.  (It was neither Catholic nor SDA.)  My final examinations for my degree were scheduled for a Saturday.  I requested a religious exemption and it was immediately granted with no trouble. 

[fccool]

I understand the issue of reasonable acommodation, but it really becomes the problematic standard in a context of functioning organization with certain preferences.

 

For example, a recent article from AR:  http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/new-zealander-awarded-$31,025-for-sabbath-dismissal

 

The guy went back to the church, and asked his company not to schedule anything on Saturday.   Company tried to acommodate it, but it didn't work out.  When he was fired, he sued.   The morality of the issue doesn't merely lie with "legal protection in the country".  I hope we can agree on it.  The morality of the issue lies with justifiability of forcing an employer to honor something that may be detrimental to their business at expense of someone's changing religious views.   In intricate economies of scale, and for some small businesses it would be problematic.

 

I'm a business owner, and there are some days that I simply can't have workers miss.   Let's say someone has a change of heart and decides that a Tuesday is their holy day and asks every Tuesday as a day off.  Why should I honor it in the scope of the business requirements and that my company can potentially be hurt by such lack of certainty... especially if their original job description spells out certain requirements?  I'd have to hire someone else part-time to fill that time, and it really becomes detrimental, and threatens everyone else's job in reality of small business which can at times operate month-to-month in terms of the budget and income. 

 

I completely understand religious freedom in the scope of contractual agreement, but outside of such agreement... what grounds are there really for such demands?     If I was sued for $31,000 because someone doesn't seem it fit to work on a certain day, and it ruins my business ...  how well do you think the reputation of such religion holds up in the eyes of my employees who lose their jobs?

 

I really don't think people and church leaders and lawyers think of the far-reaching implications of their actions in such cases

[Woody]

It is only a minor hardship to allow the Adventists to have the tests on a different day other than Saturday.

 

Surely this hardship is worth it for Religious Liberty.

[Gregory Matthews]

^{In the United States, the law only requires "reasonable accommodation."  Also, it requires that the beliefs be sincere.}

 

 

^{The issues that fcool raises are not problematic.}

 

^{In reality, many times the employee is legally terminated.}

[joeb]

I understand the issue of reasonable acommodation, but it really becomes the problematic standard in a context of functioning organization with certain preferences.

 

For example, a recent article from AR:  http://www.adventistreview.org/church-news/new-zealander-awarded-$31,025-for-sabbath-dismissal

 

The guy went back to the church, and asked his company not to schedule anything on Saturday.   Company tried to acommodate it, but it didn't work out.  When he was fired, he sued.   The morality of the issue doesn't merely lie with "legal protection in the country".  I hope we can agree on it.  The morality of the issue lies with justifiability of forcing an employer to honor something that may be detrimental to their business at expense of someone's changing religious views.   In intricate economies of scale, and for some small businesses it would be problematic.

 

I'm a business owner, and there are some days that I simply can't have workers miss.   Let's say someone has a change of heart and decides that a Tuesday is their holy day and asks every Tuesday as a day off.  Why should I honor it in the scope of the business requirements and that my company can potentially be hurt by such lack of certainty... especially if their original job description spells out certain requirements?  I'd have to hire someone else part-time to fill that time, and it really becomes detrimental, and threatens everyone else's job in reality of small business which can at times operate month-to-month in terms of the budget and income. 

 

I completely understand religious freedom in the scope of contractual agreement, but outside of such agreement... what grounds are there really for such demands?     If I was sued for $31,000 because someone doesn't seem it fit to work on a certain day, and it ruins my business ...  how well do you think the reputation of such religion holds up in the eyes of my employees who lose their jobs?

 

I really don't think people and church leaders and lawyers think of the far-reaching implications of their actions in such cases

How about because you would like to be treated the same way they are asking to be treated?  You know, the Golden Rule, which is the basis of Christianity.  And don't tell me Christianity has nothing to do with how a Christian runs a business he or she owns.  If it doesn't, that person's Christianity is name only Christianity.

[joeb]

^{In the United States, the law only requires "reasonable accommodation."  Also, it requires that the beliefs be sincere.}

 

 

^{The issues that fcool raises are not problematic.}

 

^{In reality, many times the employee is legally terminated.}

I really have a problem with this.  As Christians we are responsible to a much higher law, and a much higher moral standard.  The world may not think that they are, but they are as well.  No one can break God's laws with impunity.

[Gregory Matthews]

^{So what do you have a problem with?}

 

^{Is it because you think that the person is not sincere?  I once dwelt with a soldier who wanted relief from physical training on Saturday.  The SGt. MAJ talked to me before I talked to the soldier and told me that he would accommodate her if I told him she was sincere.}

 

^{I told her that I had arranged for her to do the training on Sunday.   She immediately informed me that she would rather do it on Saturday.}

 

^{Is it because you do not like the fact that some are fired because the employer cannot make reasonable accommodation?}

 

^{I will remind you that a person who does not want to serve alcoholic beverages should not expect to be hired to attend a bar that serves alcoholic beverages.   That employer cannot make a reasonable accommodation.}

 

^{I may not like how some employers attempt to define "reasonable accommodation."  Be that as it may, the law is the law, as defined by the courts.  We have to live with it.  Our personal standard should be beyond what the law may require.  But, when dealing with others, we should expect no more than what the law requires--unless we ask for grace.}

 

 

 

^{Yes, there is the so-called Golden Rule.  So, you are a SDA who runs a business.  You close on the Sabbath and are open on Sunday.  Will you accommodate your Baptist employee who has a religious objection to working on Sunday?}

 

^{NOTE:  Some of our SDA colleges have had non-SDA students who objected to taking exams on Sunday.  I have known of people who have said that they should not be accommodated!}

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[CoAspen]

I have always been a bit uncomfortable with person taking an employer to court over 'religious issues'. I am not forced to work for any employer. If I decide the conditions of my employment are something I would like to see changed, I may ask.But, why should  I take that employer to court for something 'I' want? Maybe I should just gracefully accept the answer and find another employer. Better to leave on good terms and a reference then to force yourself into their business. Far to often people like to say God is on their side and others should agree with that. God is over all, not just those who 'claim' to be in the front of the line.