Religious accommodation...how far does it go?

[SkepticThinker]

I agree, but sometimes one has to be practical. It looks as if they resolved this problem, but what if one runs into this again with people that work directly with residents and patients. This does no appear to be such a case. What if they cannot be replaced? What does one do in that case?

Good point. I live just outside Toronto and we've been experiencing a medical personnel shortage for quite some time now which was has only been exacerbated even more by COVID and crappy leadership. My sister is a nurse and she says they are completely burned out at this point. They were short-staffed to begin with and on top of that it's summer holidays time. I don't know that they can afford to be losing staff at this point.

 

[Sheldon]

You should realize how passionate people are on religion.

I don't understand why being passionate about anything, represents a sound argument in its favour? I could invite some pretty obvious comparison, but surely they don't need to be spelled out, in order for anyone to see that passion for a belief alone is not any sort of argument for it.

I still maintain its your responsibility to protect yourself, not another's as harsh as that may sound.

Well they're not mutually exclusive, and the notion one can ignore potential harm one's actions may cause seems absurd to me, what manner of society would result from that?

I see no resolution other than one own responsibility for themselves.

A person may and should be bale to, believe whatever they wish, in any truly free society, they should not be allowed to use those beliefs to harm others.

It comes back to asking if you are your brother's keeper? A bit more complicated as it turns out I think.

I'd say it goes beyond that, and deliberately putting someone else in harms way shouldn't be permitted. Now of course this statement is firstly a subjective opinion, and secondly doesn't offer any solution to the scenario this thread is predicated on. However as I understand a potential solution was use people who refused to shave off their beards in roles where this action didn't place the most vulnerable at risk, why anyone would fight this decision is not clear to me?

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

That’s my point. I was really intrigued by the OP, but when the second piece of news came out you showed you weren’t really interested in finding a solution to a difficult issue. You already wanted things a certain way and we’re upset it didn’t turn out that way.

Also, I have no agenda. I’m not even right wing. So you might want to check yourself before making assumptions.

I hope you enjoy the rest of the day.

This may end up sounding like a double standard, but I ha

I don't understand why being passionate about anything, represents a sound argument in its favour? I could invite some pretty obvious comparison, but surely they don't need to be spelled out, in order for anyone to see that passion for a belief alone is not any sort of argument for it.

The degree to which people care about something they feel a conviction about determines how much of a personal impact they'll feel if they're asked to go against that conviction.

It's not the only factor involved and not necessarily even the most important, but it is in there.

 

[1213]

How exactly do you expect patients in a nursing home to do any of that? Not to mention the fact that these patients are already in their homes.

I think in own home, person can have own rules, meaning, if the person doesn't want mask-less people into his home, then mask-less people should not go there.

 

[1213]

Like guns, eh? People should feel free to shoot them in shopping malls if they like. Those who don't like breaking out in bullet holes should be free to dress in full body armor, or stay home or some other place they think is safer.

Very well thought out, yes.
....

Everyone should have personal freedom to live own life. Killing others is going against this rule, because it goes against the other persons freedom. If this is too difficult to understand, maybe you should try this:

But if any of you lacks wisdom, let him ask of God, who gives to all liberally and without reproach; and it will be given to him.
James 1:5

 

[SkepticThinker]

I think in own home, person can have own rules, meaning, if the person doesn't want mask-less people into his home, then mask-less people should not go there.

How do you reconcile this statement with your first statement, in light of the fact that nursing home residents are actually in their "own home?"

I would resolve it so that people should be free. If they don't want to use mask, or want to use it in a wrong way, they should be free to do so. Those who fear the virus, should be free to use more own protection, or stay at home or some other place that they think is safer.

 

[Bathos Logos]

...it is important to me.

I have cut your point down to the key portion I think you need to keep in mind. Important to you. Specifically you. Not your employer. Not the residents of a nursing home. You. If it is found to literally present a danger to others then their case against your beard becomes ridiculously more strong than your case for maintaining the modicum of "wisdom and power" (can I get a measurement on the amount please?) that your beard provides you.

 

[GURSIKH]

Special mask effective with beard can be prepared, they can be separated from vulnerable people, tested daily, there can be many mutual agreeable solutions rather removing them from service.

The word “Sikh” means “Seeker of Truth.” As a faith rooted in love, Sikhism stands for the equality of women and men and denounces any discrimination pertaining to gender, race, caste, creed, or color. There are three core tenets of the Sikh religion: meditation upon and devotion to the Creator, truthful living, and service to humanity. Sikhs are meant to uphold the values of honesty, compassion, generosity, humility, integrity, service, and spirituality on a daily basis. Sikh prayer ends with a wish for the welfare for all mankind. A Sikh place of worship welcomes people of all faiths and backgrounds. Many Sikhs wear five articles of faith to express their commitment to these values, including long hair that men and some women wrap in a turban. [emphasis added - JS]

I would urge the WSO to animate the tenets mentioned above and encourage their members to remove their beards as an act of devotion.

There are many Sikh doctors who removed their beards to serve in Covid. But that is not required in every situation.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Special mask effective with beard can be prepared, ...

That may well be true. Are you aware of any studies that you can share?

..., they can be separated from vulnerable people, tested daily, there can be many mutual agreeable solutions rather removing them from service.

There are many Sikh doctors who removed their beards to serve in Covid. But that is not required in every situation.

Agreed Thanks for taking the time to respond.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

Just because someone is religious doesn't mean they should get to have free reign over society and do whatever they want.

Where is this being argued? It is certainly not the position being advocated in post #79.

 

[Shadow Wolf]

Where is this being argued? It is certainly not the position being advocated in post #79.

It is being argued by many, such as those who believe religion is good enough to reason to not uphold health safety standards. That may not be post 79, but it is the OP.

 

[Sheldon]

I have cut your point down to the key portion I think you need to keep in mind. Important to you. Specifically you. Not your employer. Not the residents of a nursing home. You. If it is found to literally present a danger to others then their case against your beard becomes ridiculously more strong than your case for maintaining the modicum of "wisdom and power" (can I get a measurement on the amount please?) that your beard provides you.

Maybe I am misunderstanding something here, but no one has to shave their beard, they have that choice, but in this instance it means there might be consequences, since they can't be allowed to endanger the lives of others unnecessarily.

Just as anyone is free to take a drink, or drive car if they have a licence, but not both at the same time.

 

[Stonetree]

A beard can regrow..........Those religious authorities of a given sect should grant permission to shave under certain circumstances. IMO ....What do these folks do when they need facial surgery?

 

[Bathos Logos]

Maybe I am misunderstanding something here, but no one has to shave their beard, they have that choice, but in this instance it means there might be consequences, since they can't be allowed to endanger the lives of others unnecessarily.

Just as anyone is free to take a drink, or drive car if they have a licence, but not both at the same time.

No, that's my understanding as well. He doesn't have to shave his beard, but as you say, consequences to that may indeed be that he has to look for another job when, as I was trying to point out, the importance of him not having a beard in whatever situation he wants to be in outweighs the importance of him having the beard.

 

[stevecanuck]

What do these folks do when they need facial surgery?

That's when things get hairy.

 

[Stonetree]

That's when things get hairy.

You may be forgiven for this one if you're not Canadian.....

 

[stevecanuck]

You may be forgiven for this one if you're not Canadian.....

Alas, I am Canadian. I missed forgiveness by a whisker.

 

[Stonetree]

Alas, I am Canadian. I missed forgiveness by a whisker.

No matter, my forgiveness isn't worth a hockey puck......

 

[Kelly of the Phoenix]

I agree. I was looking at it from the practical side. Some jobs, at least in the US, are rather grossly underpaid, and those are often in the medical field. One may not be able to replace those workers quickly.

But I saw that these were security guards. They do not work directly with patients, or residents so it may be possible to find a work around.

So underpaid that full time DoorDash workers made more than my brother and I as NURSES.

 

[1213]

How do you reconcile this statement with your first statement, in light of the fact that nursing home residents are actually in their "own home?"

I would resolve it so that people should be free. If they don't want to use mask, or want to use it in a wrong way, they should be free to do so. Those who fear the virus, should be free to use more own protection, or stay at home or some other place that they think is safer.

If it is truly their home, then they should decide who they allow to be in their home and in what conditions.

Perhaps it would then also be nice, if they could prove the masks really work and are useful.

However, in this case, because I don't think they own really the "home", I think it would be better if those who fear use better own personal protection, instead of forcing others to use systems that probably don't even work really.