Sharia law
Paul in Cannon Beach
4,703 Posts
Maybe I have been listening to Fox News too much but I am starting to hear stories about "sharia law" infiltrating parts of the country where the percentage of Muslims is fairly significant.
Its been difficult finding actual news stories but the reports I have heard indicate Target and Walmart are dealing with Muslim employees who refuse to "scan pork" through the register, sell alcohol, etc..
Is this actually happening or just internet rumor-mongering fueled by a sensationalistic media?
Blessings.
Its been difficult finding actual news stories but the reports I have heard indicate Target and Walmart are dealing with Muslim employees who refuse to "scan pork" through the register, sell alcohol, etc..
Is this actually happening or just internet rumor-mongering fueled by a sensationalistic media?
Blessings.
Comments
Interesting. I know pretty much nothing about the Muslim religion, but I can't see how this would conflict with their religious beliefs.
Now I'm just being snarky, and possibly disrespectful. I know your shoes aren't green, Ray. The pants, though... I don't know what to tell you.
All joking aside now, I'm trying to see the other side of this: does the religion prohibit actual handling of wrapped pork or being in the presence of alcohol?
Target shifts Muslims who won’t ring up pork
Department stores in Minn. reassign some cashiers over religious conflict
Updated: 10:14 p.m. CT March 17, 2007
MINNEAPOLIS - Muslim cashiers at some local Target stores who object to ringing up products that contain pork are being shifted to other positions where they don’t need to, the discount retailer said Saturday.
The Star Tribune reported this past week that some Muslim cashiers at local Targets had declined to scan pork products such as bacon because doing so would conflict with their religious beliefs. They would ask other cashiers to ring up such purchases, or sometimes customers would scan those items themselves, the newspaper reported.
Minneapolis-based Target Corp. has now offered its local Muslim cashiers who object to handling pork the option of wearing gloves while cashiering, shifting to other positions or transferring to other nearby stores.
“We are confident that this is a reasonable solution for our guests and team members,” Target spokeswoman Paula Thornton-Greear said in a statement e-mailed to The Associated Press on Saturday.
Greear said it was a localized problem and that it would be handled on a case-by-case basis.
“It is not an issue in most of our stores in the Twin Cities,” she said in separate comments via e-mail. “There is also no indication that this is an issue in the Minnesota market overall or nationwide.”
Islam teaches that pigs are unclean and eating pork is a sin, and some Muslims feel selling or handling pork is also forbidden because it would make them complicit in the sins of others.
Collision of work and faith
As the local Muslim population grows, fueled by immigration from East African countries such as Somalia, efforts by Muslims to live by the rules of their faith often come into conflict with the realities of the American workplace.
Disputes over how employers should accommodate prayer times surface from time to time, and there’s an ongoing dispute involving cab drivers who serve Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport—many of whom are Muslim—who refuse to take passengers who are carrying alcohol.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission is expected to vote in April on a proposal that would hand out 30-day license suspensions to cabbies who refuse service for any reason, with a second refusal leading to a two-year revocation.
Suhara Robla, who works at the SuperTarget in St. Louis Park, told the Star Tribune that more than a dozen Muslim cashiers were asked Thursday to do other jobs.
“They told all of us who don’t touch pork to go to the sales floor,” she told the newspaper. “They really didn’t say why. They just said it was a new policy.”
Worker walks over issue
Muse Dahir told the AP this past week he quit his job at the Sam’s Club in Bloomington after he was transferred from another position to cashiering and was ordered to ring up pork purchases.
Several times on his first day as a cashier, Dahir said, said customers brought pork products to his register. He asked them to take their goods to another register, and a customer complained to management.
“They told me, you have to check this,” Dahir said. “I told them, I can’t do this. You want me to do something that’s against my religion.”
Dahir said a manager told him that was part of the job, so “I just put down my uniform and I left.”
He said it doesn’t matter if the pork product is packaged. “Even if you just sell it to someone, you break a promise to Allah,” he said.
Jama Omar, a clerk at Otanga Grocery in Minneapolis, told the AP his store caters mostly to East African immigrants and doesn’t carry pork products, so it’s not an issue for him personally. But Omar also said Muslims shouldn’t expect special treatment.
“If it causes a big problem for your employer, they have to make the decision that’s best for them,” Omar said. “It’s not something to go on strike or file a civil suit. Go somewhere else that will accept your beliefs. There’s millions of jobs.”
We all know there will be lawsuits and there will be good companies hung out to dry.
But it's a beautiful day in the neighborhood, right Paul?!
I thought about my previous post - I was having fun, but it could be perceived as making light of others' seriously held beliefs. I still have the same questions and am still concerned about Ray's purple pants, but I do apologize if I crossed a line with the joking.
However, I also believe you must learn to adapt to your environment and not expect your environment to adapt to you.
If I do not believe in eating pork, then I wouldn't work at a store that sold pork.
End of story.
Apparently I'm incorrect though.
Here in the Land of 10,000 Protected Classes, we have a law forbidding discrimination against anyone who uses or is using legal products. The law's original intent was to protect smokers and drinkers. I guess now it includes pork. Bottom line, THESE people are violating state law by discriminating.
Back to the Imams, the generic chapel, prayer room, or whatever you want to call it, at the airport was not good enough for them and they wanted a special room just for Muslims. The Metropolitan Airport Commission politely refused to give special recognition to any religion.
Stay tuned. We haven't heard from the atheists, PETA, Greenpeace, or the ACLU yet.
What is unclear to me is whether you must accommodate an employee's request in a way that discriminates against others.
For example, do you accommodate a Muslim employee's request to "not work with Jews"?
What if a hotel employee refuses to check in a gay couple?
It will be interesting to see how this continues to develop in Europe, Canada, and high density Muslim populations in the US like Minnesota.
Its very possible that an organized group of Muslims in a large company might express a desire to have their employee grievances worked out through a Sharia-based council rather than a typical union system.
Its already happening in England where Sharia councils are deciding criminal cases and divorces.
What about religious institutions who serve the public and require their ee's to agree to a specific doctrinal statement? That is already a problem in some areas where courts are saying that is a discriminatory practice. Same principle with Muslims refusing to work with Jews.
Canada too is involved with the Sharia Law problem. May not be long before we begin to deal with it.
What is different is the idea that Muslims should be able to live under a totally seperate set of laws, rules, guidelines, etc.
It will start with minor issues like not wanting to scan pork products. It will move towards allowing Sharia councils govern divorces and minor criminal acts. At least that has been the pattern in Europe.
The other difference is the element of Islam. Many people, including myself, have very ambivalent feelings towards Islam.
It could be argued that Western society is in a very real war with Islam. Not merely a war of ideas but a war of murder, terror, and violence.
Islam means "submission". Where Islam is practiced, people die and liberty is constrained. Where Islam is challenged, people die and live in constant terror.
Unless you are intentionally self-blinded by political correctness, you can't argue the fact that the tenets of Islam inspire the overwhelming majority of all terrorism around the globe.
This is the same Islam that is beginning to demand accommodation here in the US, Canada, and Europe. The tension is obvious.
>very real war with Islam. Not merely a war of
>ideas but a war of murder, terror, and violence.
It could be, but I don't think it would be a very compelling argument.
>Islam means "submission".
Right, submission TO GOD. Derived from a root word meaning "peace."
>Where Islam is
>practiced, people die and liberty is
>constrained.
The same is true of many religions.
>Where Islam is challenged, people
>die and live in constant terror.
The same could be said about other religions or establishments as well.
>Unless you are intentionally self-blinded by
>political correctness, you can't argue the fact
>that the tenets of Islam inspire the
>overwhelming majority of all terrorism around
>the globe.
Er, you mean unless you are "blinded" by actually being aware of current and historical events? The statement you make above suggests a blinding by common misconceptions and irresponsible media reporting. It's not political correctness to recognize that the majority of terrorism has nothing to do with Islam. Ever hear of ETA (Basque separatists)? The Red Brigades, Red Army Faction, Direct Action (European anti-capitalism groups)? The Irish Republican Army? The National Liberation Army? Shining Path? The Christian Patriots? Kach/Kahane Chai? Ku Klux Klan? Tamil Tigers? Aryan Nations? White Aryan Resistance? Symbionese Liberation Army? Nazis? For example.
I mean, with the Holocaust, Darfur, Rwanda, Bosnia, etc., I think we can find many examples of terrorism that are not Islam-inspired. Obviously Islamic terrorists exist, but I find it disappointing that anytime someone kills in the name of Islam, people use that to make generalizations about Islam's teachings, when those acts actually run counter to Islam's teachings. Meanwhile, when people are inspired by the Bible to burn crosses on people's lawns, bomb abortion clinics, enact violence against homosexuals, people do not accuse Christianity of inspiring violence. People did not accuse Christianity of inspiring violence when bombings by Catholics in Northern Ireland were a common occurrence. People do not accuse Judaism of being a religion of violence when Israelis bomb a mosque. Why is it that when people of other faiths are violent, it's because they're nutcases who've misinterpreted their religious teachings, but when Muslims are violent, it's because they're doing what Islam teaches?
>This is the same Islam that is beginning to
>demand accommodation here in the US, Canada, and
>Europe. The tension is obvious.
Puhlease. For every accommodation you can find requested by a muslim who doesn't want to handle pork or alcohol, I can name two from christians who don't want to work on Sunday, or who don't want to sell birth control pills, or refuse to treat homosexual patients, or insist on being able to preach their beliefs about things they consider sinful, jewish people or seventh-day adventists who don't want to work on Saturday, members of the church of body modification who insist on displaying their numerous piercings/tattoos at work, and the list goes on. The "demand" for accommodation is not an Islamic phenomenon. It is a natural result of a law that requires employers to accommodate their employees' religious beliefs. Whether the law is reasonable is another issue, but the problems it causes are not due to Islam.
No where in the Bible are Christians commanded or even given the OK to burn crosses on lawn, bomb abortion clinics, enact violence against those they disagree with, or other acts of violence. Those who do those things pervert biblical teaching as opposed to Muslims who take the Koran at face value.
Unless you have read the entire Quran (and perhaps you have), I caution you against claims that it "clearly says" what Islamic fundamentalists claim it does. The words may be there, but without context, we can't begin to analyze them usefully. Take the following quotes from the Bible:
Exodus 21:17: "And he that curseth his father, or his mother, shall surely be put to death."
1 Samuel 15:2-3: "Thus saith the LORD of hosts, I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, how he laid wait for him in the way, when he came up from Egypt. Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass."
Leviticus 20:2: "Whosoever he be of the children of Israel, or of the strangers that sojourn in Israel, that giveth any of his seed unto Molech; he shall surely be put to death: the people of the land shall stone him with stones."
Leviticus 20:10: "And the man that committeth adultery with another man's wife, even he that committeth adultery with his neighbour's wife, the adulterer and the adulteress shall surely be put to death.
Leviticus 20:13: "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Leviticus 20:16: "And if a woman approach unto any beast, and lie down thereto, thou shalt kill the woman, and the beast: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them."
Matthew 10:34-35: "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law."
Matthew 15:4: "For God commanded, saying, Honour thy father and mother: and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death."
Mark 9:43: "And if thy hand offend thee, cut it off: it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be quenched."
Romans 1:30-32: "Being filled with all unrighteousness, fornication, wickedness, covetousness, maliciousness; full of envy, murder, debate, deceit, malignity; whisperers, backbiters, haters of God, despiteful, proud, boasters, inventors of evil things, disobedient to parents,
without understanding, covenantbreakers, without natural affection, implacable, unmerciful:
Who knowing the judgment of God, that they which commit such things are worthy of death, not only do the same, but have pleasure in them that do them."
To give just a few examples. These are the sorts of things that people use to justify violence against foreigners, against adulterers, against homosexuals, against "haters of God," whatever. People who kill in the name of Christianity do so based on the Bible, which "clearly says" what those Christians claim it does.
Now, these passages may not seem especially shocking to someone raised in a Christian-Judeo tradition, because people in our society generally are familiar with the greater context of the Bible and those religions. But if we *weren't* familiar with the greater context, those quotes could seem pretty damning, and might cause someone to doubt whether Christianity and Judaism really are peaceful religions. If I killed someone for being a braggart based on Romans 1:30-32, or cut off my hand when it offended me based on Mark 9:43, would I not be taking the Bible "at face value"?
I mean, come on - I agree that fundamentalist Islam is a cause for MAJOR concern, but that doesn't mean that all Islam is. The same way that fundamentalist Christians aren't representative of Christianity. And there's really no logical reason to make one extrapolation and not the other.
Sharia law isn't simply religious accommodations. Its an attempt to set up seperate rules for one group of people that are different from the rest of society.
And whether you want to face it or not, this same group of people who wants special rules to apply to them has also voiced loud and clear their committment to our destruction. That is documented and undeniable.
That should concern you.
>would hold onto her job if she refused to serve
>a hamburger to someone on Good Friday?
Well, that's not really a great analogy, since Catholics don't believe that it is per se sinful to eat meat on Good Friday; just that *they*, as Catholics, are obliged to fast and not eat meat as part of their religion; to honor the sacrifices that Jesus made. They don't believe that, for example, the Bible prohibits the eating of meat on Good Friday.
So a better analogy might be: "Can you imagine how long a Catholic pharmacist would hold onto her job if she refused to fill someone's prescription for birth control pills?" And the answer is: pretty effin long.
Interesting...
Seriously though, are though no Muslims or employers of Muslims on this forum to tell us why we are all wrong headed about this concern?
Apparently polygamy is alive and well in NY. According to Islamic law, a man may have up to 4 wives at once. Don't know why they would, but they can.
>Apparently polygamy is alive and well in NY.
>According to Islamic law, a man may have up to 4
>wives at once.
That's some pretty harsh penance. Can't they just self-flagellate until they pass out?