[Burninator]

Originally Posted by PowerPlayoffs06

I didn't say on me, I said on her company. Expecting exceptions to be made because of her and her religion. I think you're choosing to ignore the correlation here to try and prove your point is right. Imposing religion does not have to mean attempting to convert people. It means making other people act according to your beliefs which she is clearly doing by expecting her employer to make special rules just to accommodate her and her beliefs that 2" of fabric is the difference between eternal bliss or eternal damnation.

No it isn't imposing religion on the employer either. Your definition of imposing is very loose and broad. In Canada citizens have the right to not be discriminated against because of their religion. There is no other way to up hold this without talking about your religion.

From fredr123's post on the second page.

Under the Ontario Human Rights Code, discrimination because of religion (creed) is against the law. Everyone should have access to the same opportunities and benefits, and be treated with equal dignity and respect, regardless of their religion.
Religion includes the practices, beliefs and observances that are part of a faith or religion.

It doesn't matter whether or not discrimination is intentional: it is the effect of the behaviour that is important.
Where a rule conflicts with religious requirements, there is a duty to ensure that individuals are able to observe their religion, unless this would cause undue hardship because of cost, or health and safety reasons. Unlawful discrimination because of religion can include:Refusing to make an exception to dress codes to recognize religious dress requirements

Sorry, I've got no memos or any secret documents. I could say that my sister worked at American Eagle and was told not to say Merry Christmas, or that my wife works at Canada Post and was told not to as well. But you'll probably brush it off as hearsay or go back to the seperation of church and state thing since Canada Post is a government business.

I could easily brush it off as hearsay, seeing as I asked for evidence, and hearsay is anything but. Either way it doesn't matter because this doesn't relate to this thread anyways. Saying Merry Christmas to someone has religious implications, a longer skirt does not. Besides I was originally talking about your personal life, not your on the job life, you're the one that brought workplace up.

I'm still waiting for you to explain to me where the seperation of church and state is with the RCMP having to make exceptions for muslim men and their turbans. That's imposing Muslim religion on a Canadian icon. But you're conveniently and repeatedly ignoring that point of mine as well in your attempt to cherry pick your way through the debate.

I didn't respond to one point and now I am cherry picking? Settle down champ. Who said I agreed with the RCMP and their turban decision? Who said I agreed with every decision made by the courts and our government? I certainly didn't say those things. But I'll give you my thoughts on it before you accuse me of cherry picking again.

I don't like the decision, and heres why. The "tradition" of the uniform doesn't mean anything for me in this situation. That's not a reason to not allow a man to wear a turban. The problem I have with it is it's a safety issue. As I understand it RCMP officers are required to keep short hair so people can't grab it. It's a rule for their personal safety. And as I understand it men typically have long hair underneath their turbans. That's why I don't like the decisions. BUT it doesn't relate to this issue at all. Because her wearing a longer skirt doesn't imped her ability to do her job. It's not a safety issue, it's a silly dress code rule. And if you think that dress code rules are more important that religious freedoms, I'd say your priorities need readjusting.