XPost: can.politics   
   From: weasel@stew.yum   
      
   On 9/15/2013 10:03 AM, Tom P wrote:   
   > On 9/15/2013 6:32 AM, Chom Noamsky wrote:   
   >> On 9/14/2013 9:02 PM, Tom P wrote:   
   >>> The employer has the right to impose a dress code. In this case its the   
   >>> province telling their workers to keep their religion at home.   
   >>>   
   >>> Personally, I don't have a problem with that. If it is that important   
   >>> that someone doesn't want to hide their religion at work then they   
   >>> should look for other employment.   
   >>>   
   >>> I don't want my children to be taught by teacher wearing a Kirpan or a   
   >>> male teacher wearing a dress and being openly Gay.   
   >>   
   >> I've never supported double standards for safety, like the right to wear   
   >> a turban instead of a helmet, or allowing kirpans in places where knives   
   >> are banned for secutiry reasons.  Otherwise, people should be permitted   
   >> free expression of their beliefs and values, in the workplace and   
   >> elsewhere.  You have to think of what could be next, Tom, maybe a ban on   
   >> Greenpeace logos on your clothing?   
   >>   
   >> Standing up for the rights of people you don't agree with is tough but   
   >> it's something you should do. The day will come when the people you seek   
   >> to oppress will feel completely righteous about curtailing your rights.   
   >   
   > I agree with you on the safety standards... That just makes sense. But   
   > going back to my other example, would you support your child's male   
   > teacher to be a cross dresser and show up to school in a dress and high   
   > heals? It may be an extreme example, but where is the line crossed?   
      
   Why not?  That would fall into the category of free expression.  I   
   certainly wouldn't like it but I would tolerate it, just because then I   
   may expect the same right to freely express myself.  One can't be   
   intolerant of others and then demand tolerance for yourself.   
      
   > Should there be a dress code for salesmen? Should your gas jockey wear a   
   > company uniform? These are required for the job. If you don't want to   
   > wear the company garb, then get another job.   
      
   You're saying private sector practices should now apply to the public   
   sector?  When do we ban unions?  Isn't the public sector a special case   
   because it serves all of our interests, not just shareholders?  Isn't   
   the public service supposed to be a reflection of Canada's multicultural   
   values?   
      
   > It's the same with religious symbols and civil servants who have to   
   > interact with the public. I don't see where it is a problem for the   
   > province to tell their employees to leave their religion at home when at   
   > work.   
      
   Tom, this is HR, we have received a complaint that you have a Greenpeace   
   logo on your lunchbox.  Some of your fellow employees feel this violates   
   their right to a belief-neutral workplace.  We'd like you to remove it.   
     Do so or we have no choice but to refer you to neutral-belief   
   sensitivity training.   
      
   > Civil servants are already required to keep silent on their   
   > political beliefs and not to criticize the government they work for. And   
   > that even includes when not on the job!   
      
   A basic proposition of secularism is that people of different religions   
   and beliefs are equal before the law.  Therefore, secularism is a   
   distinct political ideology unto itself.  Why are your secular beliefs   
   more equal before the law than the beliefs of religious folk?  You seem   
   to be saying that imposing your personal beliefs on the workplace   
   somehow makes the workplace equal and fair.  If that isn't the epitome   
   of hypocrisy I don't know what is.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)