Saturday, April 1, 2017

"NO CROSSES ALLOWED IN WORKPLACE"

“No Crosses Allowed in Workplace” screamed the headlines.  It was the lead story on the evening news, while the cable news outlets ran special reports on this “Breaking News”.  The reports all covered the Supreme Court’s determination that employers could ban employees from wearing any religious symbols in the workplace. No jewelry in the shape of a cross; no crucifixes; no “fish” symbols; no “WWJD” wrist bands.

The case started with a group of atheists complaining to the HR department that they were offended by the HR Director’s gold cross which she wore over her clothing during Lent.  The president of the company stated his company was “neutral” in its views of religion, and therefore instructed the HR Director to remove her gold cross during work hours. The HR Director claimed religious discrimination. The case worked its way through the court system until, finally, the Supreme Court, in a landmark opinion, gave a new meaning to “religious freedom”.  The court reasoned that, so long as everyone was barred from expressing their religious preferences in the place of employment, no one could do so.

Leaders of religious organizations wondered aloud if this is the first step down the slippery slope of becoming “one nation without regard for God”. The nation’s citizens, however, were noticeably less bothered by the case’s final outcome.  Pundits speculated that, as religious practices have diminished among the population, the concern about protecting the right to express faith publicly has likewise dropped dramatically.  Among the nation’s children, less than half of those polled knew why people wore a cross in the first place.   

Meanwhile, God sighed.


(This is not an April Fool’s joke. It is fiction based on a real decision by the European Court of Justice.  Of note: the European ban on wearing crosses grew from an employer’s action banning an Islamic headscarf at work.  The court reasoned that Islamic religious garb could be banned if crosses were too. It is a legal theory coming to a court near you.)

No comments:

Post a Comment