Shoe on the Other Foot?

I started my new job today at Chik-Fil-A, working the cash register, taking orders and delivering food.  Sadly, I’m not sure I’m going to last.

When I went to deliver food to my first customer I asked him, “Do you support equal civil benefits for all married people, regardless of the gender balance in the marriage?  In other words, do you believe gay married couples should be treated equally, with the same civil rights for gay marriages as are granted to heterosexual marriages?”

Dumbfounded, Bubba snapped back at me. “Hell no!  What the fuck kinda question is that! Gimme my chicken!”

I tossed the tray backwards over my head and said, “I’m sorry.  My religious beliefs prevent me from feeding a person who is as bigoted as you.  It is against my conscience to  provide sustenance to the living, walking vessel of such prejudices and blatant discrimination.”

You should have seen the look on my manager’s face!!  He yelled “You’re fired!” and I yelled back, “You can’t remove me from a position that I cannot do because of my religious beliefs.  You’re trampling on my religious expression!!” 

So I intend to go back tomorrow and hold down that job, and not deliver any chicken to anyone who disagrees with my position.  And there ain’t a damn thing the manager can do.


Question time:  Why would my assertion of religious belief be any less protected than, say, a pharmacist who refuses to dispense birth control for religious reasons?  Is it because one’s a private business and one’s a government regulated, licensed job?

If it is legitimate to ask for a law to protect your religious beliefs, even if they interrupt the normal delivery of services, what distinguishes Chik-Fil-A from a pharmacy?

Is it only okay to have such rules apply to places where government money is being spent, or where government regulation/licensure is involved?

That seems absolutely Jabberwocky to me.  Why would religious expressions only be protected if GOVERNMENT money is involved? That seems to invert Separation of Church and State, and impose on government a religious restriction that is not imposed on private employers.  The only result I can see from that is government must effectively become an enforcer of each individual’s religious whims.

So why, Mr. Private Business Owner, would you advocate for a conscientious objection clause to be included in government work or government funded work, but not allow the same to your own employees?


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s