DART suspends driver after she refuses to use bus bearing atheist ad

[Are_grits_groceries]

Controversy over a bus advertisement promoting a local atheist group has found its way to the driver's seat.

On Monday, the Des Moines Area Regional Transit Authority suspended bus operator Angela Shiel after she refused to drive a bus with an Iowa Atheists and Freethinkers ad on its side. Shiel, 41, said the ad's message, "Don't believe in God? You are not alone," went against her Christian faith.

Earlier this month, DART removed the ads from the buses following complaints from riders. DART returned the ads to the buses after receiving new complaints, including from the American Civil Liberties Union of Iowa.

The ads were put back on 20 buses in DART's fleet last week.

Shiel, a DART employee for eight years, now could be fired because of her refusal to drive the bus.

DART policy states that drivers cannot choose which buses they drive, DART General Manager Brad Miller said.
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/article/20090819/NEWS/908190370

The next GOP martyr. Soon to be seen forever along with Joe the Plumber: Angela the Bus Driver.
The ticket for 2012.

[provis99]

1. a sign on a bus goes against Christianity?

well, maybe she can have an inquisition and burn the sign at the stake.

[stopbush]

2. I guess she won't drive the bus with the "Executing your kids for sassing back is barbaric" sign

either.

Stupid, stoopid people.

[Starry Messenger]

3. I have never understood...

how a declaration of non-belief on the part of one person goes against the Christian faith of another person. Bizarre.

[Canuckistanian]

4. She must have a very shaky faith

And she cements the idea that Xtians are rigid authoritarians who have no tolerance for other's ideas.

[blondeatlast]

5. This Christian says good for DART. nt

[GodlyDemocrat]

7. Yeah, screw equal protection laws

:eyes:

[REP]

8. Explain

The ads don't condemn any religion. Please explain.

[GodlyDemocrat]

12. DART easily could have found a different bus for her to drive

If none were available at that time, they could have tried to rearrange her schedule. At the very worst, they could have given her unpaid time off.

Putting the policy considerations of allowing religious or anti-religious ads on public buses, employers have to make reasonable accomodations for people's faiths. Employers cannot ask Muslims to shave their beards and may be required to give them a break to pray. Similiarly, reasonable accomodations could have been made here.

[WeDidIt]

15. No, they couldn't

because they would be violating equal protection laws if they did.

Their policy applies equally to her. If they forwent that policy for her, they would be favoring her over everybody else.

Learn something before spouting off bullshit you know nothing about.

[GodlyDemocrat]

20. So companies don't have to provide reasonable accomodations?

Tell that to the Muslim who sues when he is forced to shave his beard.

How about you learn something before spouting off bullshit on things you know nothing about.

[blondeatlast]

23. How is she being forced to commit a heresy?

The Muslim who is forced to shave his beard is forced to commit a heresy. she doesn't have to look at the sign.

If HER faith can't take the sign, she's got more problems with Him than she does with DART.

[WeDidIt]

26. No, you're asking the company to provide an UNREASONABLE accomodation

Again, you need to learn something before you spout your bullshit.

A Muslim would have to drive the same bus.

[Forkboy]

40. You beat me to it.

:)

[JBoy]

30. I notice your strawman has a beard.

[Forkboy]

39. The Muslim would have to take the same bus as she does.

[dustbunnie]

41. It's more like, tell that to a muslim airport taxi driver who refuses seeing eye dogs --

and bottles of liquor in his car. They are fired as well. Religious people need to stop with their drama queen antics if they want to work for the city We ALL pay for their salaries. Thankfully, more people are not willing to bend over backwards to accommodate this kind of bullshit.

Your version of "equal protection" is what allowed Christian fundie pharmacists and doctors to refuse to supply the morning after pill to women needing it.

No thank you to your vision of "equal protection."

[immoderate]

45. Suppose she's a vegetarian, and the ad is about hamberger...

Here's the point. She won't drive a bus because she doesn't agree with the ad. What if all the bus drivers claimed that right? You can't say this ad is different because of content, not with the ACLU watching your ass.

You want to accommodate bus drivers with a veto on what ads are displayed? :rofl:

--imm

[Chemisse]

56. She is expected to drive a bus that happens to have a message

within in - among lots of other messages - that is contrary to her faith. I don't see how that is anything like being forced to shave a beard.

If I were a bus driver, could I refuse to drive a bus that had a Christian message?

[gleaner]

75. A Reasonable Accommodation ....

is an accommodation an employer makes because of a physical disability in order to help a disabled employee do the job they were hired to do, or another job within their physical capability. A reasonable accommodation also gives people with disabilities physical access to public places that they might not be able to access physically any other way.

This driver was hired to drive a bus, not to select advertising content. Her religion is her own business to be pursued by her and her alone. She did not sign on saying to the employers, "I'll drive any bus except for one that goes against my religious beliefs." Do you think they would have hired her if she had done that? If she didn't do that, she can't change the rules now. The company should not have assigned her a different bus to drive, because then any driver they had who had a subjective objection to any kind of advertising on any bus could have asked to be moved too. How do you run a transportation business without a consistent schedule which everyone follows?

If she doesn't want the job there are plenty of people without jobs who would welcome it, do the job well and not try to force the bus company to accept only certain types of advertising. Trying to force your religion on people who don't want it doesn't make you a better Christian, it just makes people avoid you. You go to work you do your job. If you don't like it, you find another job. This is right up there with the pharmacists at Walgreens who refused to sell prescribed contraceptives to customers because it went against their religious beliefs. Walgreens in an act of consummate stupidity went along with them. I am really sick of this type of mentality. DU sells or did sell a T-Shirt which said, "This is our country. Not your church." I'm with that. I do not want to live by another persons religion, and the constitution provides for separation of church and state so that no one has to.

And before you even go there, I am a Christian too. I'm a Quaker. We don't evangelize and we don't force our beliefs on anyone else. It has to do with tolerance, respect and the conviction that people's beliefs are their truth but not necessarily anyone elses. Everyone has a piece of the truth, but no one has the totality. If we could remember that and share our truths civilly, and treat each other with more respect there would be a lot less hostility in the world. In conclusion, I also have Multiple Sclerosis so I understand what a reasonable accommodation is. It helps me to have physical access to activities in daily living that other people take for granted. It does not alleviate pique against an institution or individual, and it does not simply ease my emotional distress at circumstances I find myself in. Wouldn't that be nice? To be able to say, "Gee boss, that customer/advertising makes me uncomfortable, can you just get rid of it?" I don't think is going to happen. You see, customers and advertisers bring in revenue. Employees are paid a salary, and take out revenue. Guess who is going to go first? Businesses exist to make money. Most people who take any kind of personal issues to work and try to dominate the work place with them get fired. Whatever else do they expect?

[mitchum]

83. "Verily, thou shalt not driveth a bus mocking the Lord God almighty"

yeah, I see your point

[blondeatlast]

100. "If thou's faith is shaky, thou must maketh thouself their won martyr."

Hell, I'm a Xtian--and this woman makes me want to vomit.

Jesus was a tolerant, forgiving soul, I don't think He would mind her ignoring the *damn* (intended) sign and driving the *damn* bus.

He would likely be peeved about HER mocking her false idol, though. Just a bit.

[REP]

19. What challenge to her faith? Atheists exist.

[blondeatlast]

31. She's got a really shaky faith--and she's not being FORCED to

do ANYTHING. She doesn't have to look at the *damned* (pardon the pun) thing.

[wolfgangmo]

65. You are mistaken.

She would have to be able to reasonably prove that an ad on the side of the bus was against a tenet of her religion. I should clarify by saying a WRITTEN tenet.

For example muslims of certain sects are told to keep their beards, Sihks are told that they must were a headdress, etc.

I can find no written tenet of christianity about not wanting to drive a bus with an ad on it.

Specious examples on your part. She is about to get fired because she has a weak personal faith.

[Dems2002]

82. Actually, as a Christian I would not want to drive the bus either

Look, I have no problem with the ad per se, particularly if the company has allowed religious ads as well and doesn't discriminate.

However, as a Christian, I would not want to drive the bus because the ad would make me feel a bit like Judas, decrying my faith in Jesus for a few pieces of silver. (Namely a job.)

This type of thing actually is a big deal for Christians, and I think some accommodations could have been made. At the very least, I don't think she should be FIRED over this issue.

It's interesting, but as much as I hate FOX news, and go up to any business I patronize demanding that the station be changed (I get rude fast on this one) I don't know if I would react the same to the Fox News Ad on the Bus.

However, the Atheist Ad, which wouldn't bother me at all if I viewed it, would make me feel like I was driving around promoting atheism...I'm sure that's strange to some folks here, but that would make me really uncomfortable.

Jenn

[blondeatlast]

99. This Christian thinks you faith is too shaky to be considered faith at al--and NEVER presume.

to speak for me: "This type of thing actually is a big deal for Christians."

Not for those who've tested their faith and managed to retain it.

I'm tired of Christians feeling persecuted. We are the VAST majority in this country and the Christ I know is a tolerant, loving soul. He'll forgive Angie for driving that bus--only Angie carries that dumbass guilt.

[starroute]

101. How is that possibly promoting atheism?

It doesn't tell anyone not to believe in God. It doesn't even say there is no God. It doesn't say that people who do believe in God are clinging to a psychological security blanket.

I can see how someone who considered themselves a Christian might be bothered by any of those statements, because they could be construed as proselytizing.

But the signs in question don't promote a particular belief system, badmouth anybody else's belief system, or attempt to convince anybody of anything. At the very most, they might be interpreted as saying, "It's okay not to believe in God. You're not the only one."

And unless you're the type of Christian who believes that disbelief is a sin, that all disbelievers will burn in Hell, and that the more disbelief there is going around the more the nation will be at risk of earthquakes, hurricanes, or terrorist attacks, I can't see where the problem would be with that.

Would you also be bothered by a sign saying it's okay to love someone of the same sex?

[WeDidIt]

104. If your religion won't let you drive a bus because of an ad

GET ANOTHER FUCKING JOB!

You're not suited for the one you cannot perform.

[girl gone mad]

74. The ads are neither religious nor anti-religious.

It's an ad campaign to promote a support group for those of no active faith.

[TommyO]

79. Here you go, right from the original linked article

DART policy states that drivers cannot choose which buses they drive, DART General Manager Brad Miller said.

"Drivers are not permitted to reject a working bus," Miller said. "It's a very fundamental policy for DART. ... It's an essential rule that we will maintain."

Driving a bus with an advertisement on it does not affect her ability to practice her faith in any way, shape, or form.

[blondeatlast]

11. What REP says. It doesn't say anything heretic.

And my faith is strong enough to take a challenge--I've challenged it myself a BIG lot. Sorry if yours isn't.

[GodlyDemocrat]

14. My faith is strong, but that doesn't change the law

Read my response to Rep's post.

[WeDidIt]

16. You're the one requiring the law to change

Equal protectin laws are what forces her to drive the bus or leave her job because equal protection means she gets no special privelages to pick and choose what bus is assigned to her and DART must place the ad or refuse all ads.

[Chemisse]

58. The law allows for free speech

She is simply on a bus with someone else's belief being 'spoken.'

She needs to suck it up. People other than Christians exist and they have the right to speak.

[WeDidIt]

13. Yep, equal protection laws are what REQUIRES DART to place the ads on the bus.

So you saying screw the equal protection laws protecting the Atheist sign says a lot.

[JonQ]

6. Sounds fine so far

she is in no way obligated to work for DART, nor entitled to. As an employee if she refuses to perform a task involved in her job (as is her right) they may fire her (as is their right). She isn't forced to do anything against her morality, they aren't forced to retain her services. Win win.

The downside is if she chooses to sue, that's when the whole thing falls apart and she's in the wrong.

[REP]

9. Go, Iowa!!

First, marriage rights for all and now this?!! This is the state where my gggrandfather held its first Granger meeting! Go, Iowa!!! Yay! Cranky and weird, but sometimes right!

[GodlyDemocrat]

10. Was there no other bus that the transit authority could find for her to drive?

Aside from the pure stupidity of putting religious or anti-religious ads on city buses, the city has opened itself to a major lawsuit on behalf of the bus driver because it did not make reasonable accomodations for her faith. Second, don't think that Chet Culver does not feel the heat of this in 2010, even though he is also against these ads.

[WeDidIt]

17. The policy, which must eb applied equally across the board, says no.

IF an ad for sausage was on a bus, a Muslim driver would have to drive the bus.

No differences.

[blondeatlast]

43. Exactly, and I think his faith could tolerate the very mild discomfort.

Geez, sometimes I wonder how my fellow Christians get all the way to their day jobs without offense to their delicate constitutions.

I must be made of the stuff of Muslims, Jews, Atheists, etc. I have to WORK to be offended in this society (and I still fail).

[REP]

18. Faith is not a disability; does not need reasonable accomodations

She didn't need Ash Wednesday or Yom Kippur off. She refused to drive a bus with an that told non-believers there were other non-believers. There was no challenge to her faith.

[me b zola]

103. I would argue

...that for some people, faith is a disability.

[walldude]

21. "Reasonable accommodations for her faith"

What are you kidding? It's a fucking bus not a church. Try living as a Jew or an Atheist for awhile and learn what it's really like not to have your faith accommodated.

[MindPilot]

35. Or lack thereof.

Next time I travel for business, I'll be sure to insist that my employer accommodate my lack of faith by demanding a hotel room without a bible.

[blondeatlast]

36. ...

:spray:

[Starry Messenger]

38. I wish to use different money.

Mine says "God" all over it and as an atheist I should be accommodated. Maybe I should be paid for my job in gold doubloons!

[dmallind]

47. How is this sign anti-religious?

Is telling people that others may agree with them saying anything against those who do not agree?

How is the faith of a driver not accommodated by her driving a bus bearing an ad proclaiming others may disagree? I'm fairly well up on most variations of Christian theology and I know of none that places any onus on a believer not to be driving a public transit vehicle with an ad on it mentioning that some people might not be believers.

[blondeatlast]

98. It isn't--and I am a self-identified Xtian. If the sign challenges Angie's faith,

her faith" isn't strong enough to be considered faith. The sign isn't heresy, it isn't anti-any religious belief, and Angie is yet another in the long list of failed RRR martyrs, AFAIC.

[TommyO]

77. Did you bother to read the article?

DART policy states that drivers cannot choose which buses they drive, DART General Manager Brad Miller said.

"Drivers are not permitted to reject a working bus," Miller said. "It's a very fundamental policy for DART. ... It's an essential rule that we will maintain."

This is in part because of a federal law that requires DART to rotate buses to different routes on a regular basis and because buses must run on time, he said.

"DART's No. 1 priority is to provide a reliable, quality, safe service," Miller said. "We may try to work with them, but if we're short on drivers, we need to get them out on a bus."


She's the one in the wrong here, not DART.

[BolivarianHero]

81. What?

"he is also against these ads"

Are people who support theocracy welcome in the Democratic Party? Perversely, the right is right about one thing and only within a very limited context; progressives and centrists are too damn tolerant.

[Matt 6_5]

90. Oh, here's something

[Dont_Bogart_the_Pretzel]

97. Good one!

:hi:

[Matt 6_5]

92. I assume you would be making excuses for a driver who wouldn't work on a bus with

a democraticunderground.com sticker on it...right?

[armyowalgreens]

22. .

.

[seabeyond]

25. man....

i wanted to come back and read your post after i posted mine. curious what you were saying.

[armyowalgreens]

34. I realized I posted too soon. I need to contemplate this...

on a philosophical level before I come to any proper conclusions.

That doesn't mean my original post is wrong. It just means I didn't think about it enough to be confident.

[dustbunnie]

duperectomy... n/t

[dustbunnie]

44. What's to contemplate?

Allowing people to bring their religious bigotry onto a city job means the people who pay their salaries in the form of taxes suffer.

Like the worker at city hall who refuses to marry a gay couple, or doctors and pharmacists who refuse to provide morning after pills to rape victims. Same bloody thing.

[armyowalgreens]

49. Let's not jump to such drastic conclusions, okay?

It isn't as simple as "religious bigotry". I have no reason to assume she is a bigot. Just like I have no reason to assume an atheist that refuses to drive a bus with a Christian advertisement is a bigot.

Sometimes people are not willing to compromise their morals. I can completely understand why.


We don't need to argue about the appropriateness of her actions. What we need to discuss is the reaction by DART.

And I have not come to a logical conclusion on that yet. On some level, I can understand the actions by both parties.

[dustbunnie]

53. People who are not willing to compromise their morals don't have to work for the city.

That's why people with fervent beliefs generally find employment in an area funded by their "group."

What a scheduling nightmare having to accommodate everyone's religious sensibilities. Not to mention, again, that EVERYONE pays for city workers' salaries. We should ALL be able to enjoy the same services. What if all Christians walked out on the job because they don't like a Hindu, atheist, or orthodox jewish message on the side of the bus? Where does it end? By refusing to allow hindu, atheist or orthodox jewish messages on a bus ad? By accommodating a fundie Christian or muslim who doesn't want to issue a marriage license to people they deem "unworthy?" No. It's up to the religious person to find some other employment venue.

And you can bet that the person who refuses to drive a bus with an "insulting" ad on the side, is going to have even bigger issues with marrying "unworthy" people.

[armyowalgreens]

59. Sorry, but just because you work for the city does not mean you are the peoples bitch...

It isn't a direct democracy. You have basically no control over this situation. So lets not spend time building our citizen ego up to such great heights.

Nothing in that story implies that the woman wanted the advertisement removed. She simply refused to drive the bus. There is a significant difference between the two. One implies that she is attempting to force her own religious beliefs on all of us. The other simply implies that she has uncompromising morals. Which makes your other straw man scenarios pointless.

Anybody can walk out on the job for whatever reason they feel like. If this woman does not want to drive a bus with atheist advertising, that is completely fine. The question is whether or not the city must accommodate her and supply her with a different bus.

On a legal level, the answer is fairly obvious; No. But I'm trying to figure out the moral answer to this problem.

[dustbunnie]

69. Your subject line and first sentence contradict each other.

And I'm not sure how long you've been in the workforce, but the general rule of thumb is that everyone is someone's bitch.

I know the woman didn't want the advertisement removed. She wanted special treatment for her religious beliefs, beyond that of wearing a crucifix or having 'Jesus is in me" tatted across her neck. She wanted management to go out of the way to accommodate her sensibilities at the expense of tax payers and customers who want the bus to arrive on time.

You seem to agree with me and the other posters who've made the point that this is a slippery slope, and that legally, no one needs to put up with religious drama queenishness. So that's all good, as far as I'm concerned. No need for me to continue in this vein. And if it's a personal moral thing for you, sure, go ahead and ruminate over the details. Some day you may find yourself the manager of a company with a diverse group of people needing lots of shit just in order for them to be able to walk through the door in the morning. Heh heh.

[BolivarianHero]

84. All right...

Can you provide me with an example of an atheist driver who refused to drive a bus with Christian advertising or of a Muslim bus driver who refused to drive a bus promoting a religious trip to Israel for Jews?

I don't fucking think so!

Once upon a time in Toronto (I think it was in 2006, actually...), a group of Muslim extremists were angry about the fact that changes to the school curriculum were to include lessons dealing with homophobia and anti-gay bullying. Thus, they followed in the foot steps of more successful lunatics from Kansas and Texas and attempted to take over the school board in the subsequent local elections. The wackos lost so badly that even an overwhelming majority of Muslims voted for their non-Taliban opponents. If only American evangelicals were as quick to accept living in a society that operates in concordance with scientific theories and laws of which they disapprove as Canadian Muslims are to accept living in a society where people have sexual identities and lead lives in a manner that contradicts their conception of moral hygiene.

Advertising on public transportation in the United States is subject to regulations pursuant to the First Amendment, which essentially bars transit authorities from refusing any advertising unless such advertising is obscene or advocates hate as per the norms of American jurisprudence. As such, refusing to drive a bus with an advertisement advocating a religious viewpoint aside from one's own in an insult to American values and represents a material breach of the tasks involved in the job that they are paid to do. A bus driver can't require a bus' advertising to conform to his or her religious beliefs anymore than the federal government could force to D.C. Metro authority to ban ads telling the truth about cannabis prohibition and the war on drugs.

[seabeyond]

60. i hear ya

can respect that.

[seabeyond]

24. all people cheering dart on, would also cheer the dismissal of the atheist that did not want

to drive a bus with a christian message

[blondeatlast]

28. Edit: misread the post. nt

[WeDidIt]

29. No, we wouldn't

because I've never met an Atheist who would be STUPID ENOUGH to refuse to drive a bus with a Christian message on it.

[armyowalgreens]

37. I would probably refuse...

Unless, of course, it was the ONLY way to make money.

[Maru Kitteh]

76. But you do volunteer for Catholic charities? Seems inconsistent.

[armyowalgreens]

78. If there was a non-religious charity that provided the same kind of care...

I would volunteer for them. But I cannot find one.

[BolivarianHero]

86. Furthmore...

I would offer financial and material support to organizations involved in doing charitable works and fighting for social justice if they were doing their work from a liberation theology or a social gospel perspective before I would offer the same to the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation. Like me, Bill Gates is an atheist. Unlike Bill Gates, I use FireFox and OpenOffice.

[BolivarianHero]

85. That's not true....

G. Gordon Liddy is an atheist, which offers an empirical proof that there are no minimum requirements in regards to intelligence, common sense, or critical thinking skills to which atheists must adhere.

[WeDidIt]

102. Nope, G. Gordon Liddy is a Deist, not an Atheist n/t

[katandmoon]

32. An atheist who refused to drive a bus with a god ad wouldn't even make the news

[Chemisse]

63. They would be promptly relieved of their duties nt

[MindPilot]

42. Christian messages are so ubiquitous,

most Atheists wouldn't even notice. Just like that bible in the hotel room; it is just something to be moved aside to get the phone book out.

[dmallind]

48. Suire - when that happens let us know

And be sure it's only a message that says "believe in God? You're not alone" or something equally innocuous, as opposed to any complaints about driving a bus festooned with images damning gays to hell or some such.

[immoderate]

51. You're serious?

The atheist could AGREE to drive the bus and get fired just for being an atheist. :rofl:

--imm

[Chemisse]

61. I wouldn't - that is stupid either way you look at it

Nobody is being forced to participate in the other belief, just to see that other beliefs exist.

[surrealAmerican]

64. Most of the busses I've ridden on have christian ads.

They're always putting little bible quotes in the ads on the busses and trains here in Chicago. It's tacky, but atheists don't protest them. If a driver refused to drive a bus with such a message, there wouldn't be any other bus without one for them to drive. They would be unceremoniously fired.

[seabeyond]

72. jsut a little self reflection or thought. having seen so many posts on du, i dont wonder if we

wouldnt be outrage if instead of an athiest message it was a christian message and it was the athiest that refused.

i just feel many people would jump on that thread outraged that an athiest would eb asked to ride on the bus.

hence my question.

i agree with the poster that says a message on side of bus means nothing

i also think a pharm or doctor that refuses to do their job cause of belief, should not take the job.

[BolivarianHero]

87. Depends...

If the Christian message were to insinuate that non-believers were inferior as human beings or that gays and lesbians deserved to be treated like shit, I would expect any decent human being to object, regardless of what they may believe about deity, philosophy, or after life. Chances are, an ad that extreme would be lucky to see the light of day even in places like Cousinfuck, Mississippi.

[wolfgangmo]

68. Amen brother

Amen.

[SidDithers]

27. Fire her bigoted ass...nt

Sid

[DU GrovelBot]

33. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

This week is our third quarter 2009 fund drive. Democratic Underground is
a completely independent website. We depend on donations from our members
to cover our costs. Please take a moment to donate! Thank you!

[KamaAina]

46. No, it'd have to be "Jane the Bus Driver"

Not Jane. Not a bus driver. :P

[blondeatlast]

50. Des Moines bus riders must be the TAMEST in the nation if that ad is what sets Angela off.

I've seen bus drivers with people screaming (literally) in their ear, men taking wizzes, nutso religious zealots (fellow Christians, sorry to say) crooning dementia all the way from the southern end of the route to near the northern end.

Wow--poor, weak, pathetic little Angela. :nopity:

EITHER SHE DRIVES THAT BUS OR SHE GETS THE BOOT. My faith can take it, what's wrong with hers?

[cynatnite]

52. But would she drive a bus with ads selling cigarettes or condoms? n/t

[marmar]

54. Maybe the bus was going to convert her with noxious atheist gases....

Religious fundamentalism is like a brain-wasting disease....

:freak:

[Chemisse]

55. Welcome to my world lady!

I - and other atheists - have to put up with all the Christian messages and references that are EVERYWHERE!

How's it feel, you stupid shit?

[Maru Kitteh]

57. I feel this is no different than the Muslim meatpacking workers prayer protests and the pharmacists

who refuse to dispense birth control.

When you are at your job, you are there to practice your JOB - not your religion. If you just can't live with that, go home and look for a different JOB.

[armyowalgreens]

62. Straw man. This is about the applicability of reasonable accommodations.

There can be no reasonable accommadations for a pharmacist that refuses to dispense birth control. That is a key role to his or her job and deals with public health.

This situation is drastically different.

[Chemisse]

67. Nobody cares about accomodating the needs of atheists

Every day I have to spout out the Pledge of Allegiance, including the words 'under god'. It's part of my job as a teacher.

I could refuse to say those words, but I would be risking my job in this very Christian community, which I am not willing to do.

That is a whole lot worse than laying eyes on an advertisement, so I have absolutely no sympathy for this woman.

[armyowalgreens]

71. You actually do not have to say "Under God" and I'd be willing to bet...

that you do not have to say the pledge at all. If someone is forcing you to do either, a phone call to the ACLU should get that fixed up quite nicely.

There are a lot of people who care about accommodating atheists or fighting for their rights to accommodation.

[Chemisse]

88. Technically you are right of course, but . . .

The school board, in a burst of patriotic zeal after 9/11, mandated that the Pledge of Allegiance be recited each morning throughout the school. Of course the kids won't say it (this is high school and that is so uncool), so it is just me in my classroom.

If I didn't say it, I would be violating a school board mandate, (however unlawful it may be) plus bringing my personal beliefs to the attention of the students.

The school can fire me for any reason at all until I get tenure, and they don't have to tell me what it is. So I don't take a stand.

This is just one small way Christians dominate our society. So I really resent having a Christian kick up a hissy fit over a sign on a bus that she does not even have to look at.

[Maru Kitteh]

80. I do not think that word means what you think it means

Seriously though, I wasn't arguing the law. I was stating my opinion about religion in the workplace. I don't think it should be there.

[mrbarber]

95. How is their reasonable accommodation to a bus driver....

Who refuses to drive a fully functional bus because of something as minor as an ad?

[wolfgangmo]

70. another straw man.

Muslims are REQUIRED by their religion to pray several times a day.

Their is not similar written requirement in the christian faith regarding ads on busses.

[Chemisse]

89. Lol - good point. n/t

[BolivarianHero]

91. And besides...

Taking a break every few hours to look to the East and pray for 2 minutes is different from refusing to do your job at all. Not that fundietards are smart enough to grasp such nuances.

[and-justice-for-all]

66. LOL...Sorry, but not every one has invisible friends...nt

[notadmblnd]

73. Good, now quit and experience the lack of health care and the difficulty of obtaining work.

[Touchdown]

93. Imagine what her reaction would be if there was an atheist comvention

along her route, and she had to pick them up and drop them off all day, all night. All those drunk heathens, not thinking about God, and sitting in her seats, and talking about things not God! Her head would explode all over the dashboard.

What a thin skinned ninny! Now she's probably going to lose her job in a bad economy with high unemployment. What is she thinking?

[bullwinkle428]

94. So if I was a tee-totaler, would it be cool (to the supporters of the bus driver)

if I refused to drive a bus that had an ad that said "Budweiser...The King of Beers"?

[Joanne98]

96. YAY

[eppur_se_muova]

105. Sic transit Angela. nt