Business
See other Business Articles
Title: Muslim flight attendant: I was suspended for not serving alcohol
Source:
CBS
URL Source: http://www.cbsnews.com/news/muslim- ... t-expressjet-airlines-alcohol/
Published: Sep 3, 2015
Author: CBS Staff
Post Date: 2015-09-06 09:37:11 by cranky
Keywords: None
Views: 56637
Comments: 251
A Muslim flight attendant filed a complaint with the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission claiming she was suspended from her job for not serving alcohol, which is against her religious beliefs, CBS Detroit station WWJ-AM reports.
Lena Masri, an attorney for the Council on American-Islamic Relations Michigan, said Charee Stanley followed management's directions, working out an arrangement with her coworkers to accommodate passenger requests for alcohol.
However, Masri said, ExpressJet Airlines put Stanley on administrative leave after another attendant filed "an Islamophobic complaint" that referenced Stanley's head scarf.
"We notified ExpressJet Airlines of its obligation under the law to reasonably accommodate Ms. Stanley's religious beliefs," Masri said at a news conference in Farmington Hills on Tuesday. "Instead, ExpressJet close to violate Ms. Stanely's constitutional rights, placed her on administrative leave for 12 months, after which her employment may be administratively terminated."
Masri said the arrangement Stanley had with other attendants to serve alcohol for her had been working out fine since Stanley converted to Islam about a month after becoming a flight attendant for ExpressJet.
"I don't think that I should have to choose between practicing my religion properly or earning a living," Stanley said. "I shouldn't have to choose between one or the other because they're both important."
Contacted by WWJ-AM for comment, airline spokesman Jarek Beem responded with the following statement:
"At ExpressJet, we embrace and respect the values of all of our team members. We are an equal opportunity employer with a long history of diversity in our workforce. As Ms. Stanley is an employee, we are not able to comment on her personnel matters."
The Islamic-relations council is America's largest Muslim civil liberties and advocacy organization with the mission "to enhance the understanding of Islam, encourage dialogue, protect civil liberties, empower American Muslims and build coalitions that promote justice and mutual understanding."
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-129) not displayed.
.
.
.
#130. To: TooConservative (#126)
I am pretty sure that if you modify your approach to see Stone's posting of "gay" or "homo" or "queer" you will find an endless tirad as though there is something meaningful.
I am bored of his comments on this subject and rarely comment.
#131. To: tomder55 (#128)
Paul taught us that governments "which exist are established by God.”
So, since Paul taught you everything you know about governments, what did Paul teach you about ISIS?
#132. To: GrandIsland, sneakypete (#129)
I don't need Pete to fag up the propaganda on LF... I get enough fag indoctrination from TV.
Look what you are personally performing. You are "FAGGIN' UP" the thread.
#133. To: buckeroo (#132) (Edited)
Look what you are personally performing. You are "FAGGIN' UP" the thread.
More agenda propaganda.... Try and de-fag the site and you're called a "fag" by the fag defenders. What an old, fruitless and obviously shitty debate tactic.
I answered a question... the question had an answer... and you stooped as low as you could to yella the answer... because you and Commie Sanders loves fags.
I'm the infidel... Allah warned you about. كافر المسلح
#134. To: A K A Stone (#127)
The search engines let people find the site. Stumble upon it if you will. I will admit that not many of those people sign up though. But they get to read it if they find it interesting.
It is far more likely that you will be personally outed as a hate site owner and/or prosecuted than that you'll ever get a single new member at LF via search engine visitors.
#135. To: GrandIsland (#133)
You can't miss an opportunity to FAG UP a thread can you? Where did your Sanders guy enter the picture?
#136. To: TooConservative (#91)
Sounds like the ultimate cuckservative ripoff by hubby #3.
I did a bit of looking and learned that hubby #2 became hubby #4 - current hubby.
Google found this link for me:
www.lgbtqnation.com/2015/...-in-this-handy-flowchart/
#137. To: Fred Mertz (#136) (Edited)
Pulling out all the closet angels, are ya Fred?
#138. To: buckeroo (#137)
Hey, Bucky, thanks for posting the flow chart!
#139. To: Fred Mertz (#138)
Ain't she a hon'? She is a real angel.
#140. To: sneakypete (#99)
Incest only became a crime under the Laws of God when God revealed that to Moses at Sinai. Before it was revealed, it wasn't.
Arguably, it's only a crime before God for Hebrews in Israel, but even if it isn't a crime as such, it's clear - by the fact that God gave the law to the Hebrews in order to protect them and so they would prosper - that there is something unhealthy about incest that we God wanted his people to avoid. It could be the genetic problem of inbreeding. Or it could be something more spiritual.
In any case, there was nothing at all wrong, in a spiritual/moral sense, with brothers and sisters marrying before it was revealed by God to Moses that they should not.
Cain did nothing wrong by marrying his sister.
#141. To: TooConservative (#134)
Uh oh. Now we're going to be an incest site.
#142. To: buckeroo (#139)
I still want to know if she forced hubby #1 to pay any child support for the twins that she conceived while an adulteress (giving birth to them a few months after she left her first husband). Normally, if you are married to it, you are the guy who pays even if the kid(s) were sired by another man.
Also, did hubby #3 (birth father) pay any child support at all over the years or did hubby #2/#4 (adoptive father) pay for them instead. Like while she was married to hubby #3 (birth father) for a year back in 2007 or so.
I'm thinking Little Kim is a real sleazebag but I'd like to see more info to detail it. There should be family court records and other documents to indicate what her conduct was and who paid child support for her twins.
#143. To: misterwhite (#112) (Edited)
He thinks that's relevant because he thinks citizens should be allowed to marry whomever they want. Brother-sister. Father-daughter. Three women. Four men. 8-year-olds (hey, they're citizens!)
The rest of that sounds pretty bad, but the marrying three women part is the best thing that Islam has going for it.
mouse - mice louse - lice spouse...spice?
#144. To: buckeroo (#137)
From a spiritual perspective, what happened before 2011 is irrelevant, unless she is unforgiving of other people who have sexual sins.
#145. To: Vicomte13 (#140)
Incest only became a crime under the Laws of God when God revealed that to Moses at Sinai. Before it was revealed, it wasn't.
Oh Horseshit!
Incest has been an issue since the begiining of time; the probability of children being born with inferior capabilities is well known and understood well before any Jews. In rural societies, child bearing for the strongest features have been well known and identified; so the rite of passage about marriage was bound with strong familes. It was important to identify strong traits for survival.
You act like this planet is centered on the fake Israel and its history. Its a BIG world out there ... you might want to explore it before you start wearing a skull cap.
#146. To: Vicomte13 (#143)
"but the marrying three women part is the best thing that Islam has going for it."
Forcing them to marry three women would be the best thing we can do.
Oops. Changed my mind. That would only create more suicide bombers.
#147. To: Vicomte13 (#144) (Edited)
"From a spiritual perspective, what happened before 2011 is irrelevant"
I agree. Finding God was the best thing that happened to her in her screwed up life. I'd want to hang on to my new-found spirituality, too.
#148. To: TooConservative, Fred Mertz (#142)
ROTFL!
She is an angel, ain't she? Lost her wings and can't fly anymore because of this damned Internet and FRED!
#149. To: Vicomte13 (#144)
unless she is unforgiving of other people who have sexual sins.
Does her county or state or federal governments require her imposition of sexual mores? The answer is either "YES" or "NO"; if the answer is no, why is she exercising her personal perspective or religious perspective on the matter? If the the answer is "yes" ... you shouldn't be discussing these issues as you will be mocked as "clueless."
#150. To: sneakypete Too Conservative (#99) (Edited)
Cain and Abel had sisters, and married them.So it was just "regular" incest?
Sneaky - the only difference between the scientific origin of species in which you believe and the religious record is that the religious record gives us NAMES for those early ancestors. It's the same thing either way: a small original population breeds and interbreeds and expands outward, with each expanded part becoming isolated and inbreeding. That how whites got white, or blondes got blonde, or Orientals got the slanted eyes, etc.
And anyway, with Cain, we're talking about our grandfather, because all of us are descended from him.
There were eight people on the Ark: Noah and his wife Naamah, and their three sons. Everybody descends from one of those sons, and the sons descend from Noah and Naamah. So, Noah and Naamah are our last common grandparents.
We know the males of Noah's lineage all the way back to Adam. They are all our common ancestors, along with Eve.
Zilch's father was Lamech, and her mother was Zillah. Lamech is the first recorded case of polygamy in the Bible. So we're all descended from polygamy. Lamech was the several-times-great-grandson of Cain, so we're all descended from Cain as well.
Obviously Cain had to be incestuous: the only breeding pair were his mother and father. Other than his sister, who else was there to marry?
So yes, we are all of us descended of incest, polygamy and at least one murderer. We've all got some of the image of Adam in us, and Eve, but also Cain. Sometimes around here our descent from Cain is on full display.
#151. To: buckeroo (#131)
So, since Paul taught you everything you know about governments, what did Paul teach you about ISIS?
interesting question . Not sure of it's relevance to this topic ... but ... Paul was Saul ,a terrorist who persecuted early Christians . He thought he was doing God's work. He thought these followers of Christ were heretics . But he had his conversion moment on the road to Damascus where Jesus confronted him and asked Saul :Why are you persecuting me?
ISIS should know that as they persecute ,they are persecuting the Lord. They should know that Gods justice will ultimately be served .Saul converted that day and became one of the strongest proclaimers of Jesus the Lord.
Who knows ? Maybe there is a Saul in the ranks of the Islamic State too .
http://www.christianpost.com/news/report-isis-fighter-who-enjoyed-killing- christians-wants-to-follow-jesus-after-dreaming-of-man-in-white-who-told-him- you-are-killing-my-people-139880/
Stranger things have happened .
Meanwhile it is the job of the government to protect us from the nations enemies .That is a legitimate use of force.
Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?
#152. To: buckeroo (#145)
Incest was required at the beginning of the species. Always is for all species. It's the nature of things.
Animals don't care about incest. They do it without notice. That's how we get special dog breeds.
People care about it, because after a certain point we were told not to do it.
#153. To: Vicomte13 (#150)
the only difference between the scientific origin of species in which you believe and the religious record is that the religious record gives us NAMES for those early ancestors.
You are clueless. I will not say anymore.
#154. To: Sneakypete, Too Conservative (#150)
No comma meant that neither of you probably got the original ping. Therefore, reposted.
Sneaky - the only difference between the scientific origin of species in which you believe and the religious record is that the religious record gives us NAMES for those early ancestors. It's the same thing either way: a small original population breeds and interbreeds and expands outward, with each expanded part becoming isolated and inbreeding. That how whites got white, or blondes got blonde, or Orientals got the slanted eyes, etc.
And anyway, with Cain, we're talking about our grandfather, because all of us are descended from him.
There were eight people on the Ark: Noah and his wife Naamah, and their three sons. Everybody descends from one of those sons, and the sons descend from Noah and Naamah. So, Noah and Naamah are our last common grandparents.
We know the males of Noah's lineage all the way back to Adam. They are all our common ancestors, along with Eve.
Zilch's father was Lamech, and her mother was Zillah. Lamech is the first recorded case of polygamy in the Bible. So we're all descended from polygamy. Lamech was the several-times-great-grandson of Cain, so we're all descended from Cain as well.
Obviously Cain had to be incestuous: the only breeding pair were his mother and father. Other than his sister, who else was there to marry?
So yes, we are all of us descended of incest, polygamy and at least one murderer. We've all got some of the image of Adam in us, and Eve, but also Cain. Sometimes around here our descent from Cain is on full display.
#155. To: buckeroo (#153)
You are clueless. I will not say anymore.
Ok, then, I'll take the last word on the matter.
#156. To: Vicomte13 (#152)
Incest was required at the beginning of the species. Always is for all species. It's the nature of things.
I have realized, you don't no much of anything. You act as though ALL things originated from a unique location on the planet and in tyme. You are so full of SHIT, you stink up the discussion.
#157. To: buckeroo (#156)
I have realized, you don't no much of anything.
And I just realized that you don't check your spelling when you get worked up.
#158. To: sneakypete (#77)
What right does she have to impose the burden of her work on the other stewardesses? How fair is that to the other stewardesses?She HAD to have known serving alcohol was a part of the job when she took it.
It's a trade off pete. The non-Muslim attendants serve the alcohol and she serves the smelly Muslims on the flight. Everyone wins.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#159. To: SOSO (#79)
Then she should resign.
That seems to be an option. Or the sodomites could have went to another county.
Why is everyone making special accommodations for sodomites?
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#160. To: sneakypete (#80)
Correct me if I am wrong,but wasn't a part of her job requirement to follow and obey Ky law?It is obviously legal in Ky for homosexual couples to marry,or this wouldn't be an issue.
It was illegal in KY for sodomite marriage prior to the SCOTUS ruling. She was elected prior to that.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#161. To: buckeroo (#156)
If you trace back your human origins through chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA, you will discover that geneticists speak of chromosomal "Adam" and mitochondrial "Eve". The dominant view of anthropologists in a long-running debate about origins is that humans did indeed originate from one specimen, not all over the place. There was always the alternative view, that humans originated in many places, but DNA studies have come down decisively on the side of chromosomal Adam and mitochondrial Eve.
So, while it may well be that there is a great big world out there, our human entry into it was in one small space and time, through a breeding pair. Traditionally, we have called them Adam and Eve. You may redeem them whatever you like. The biology remains the same. And the fact of originating with a breeding pair perforce means incest to perpetuate the species. As the population grew and spread, isolation caused specific races and local traits to grow more prominent - through inbreeding. Then as expansion continued further, inbred local populations re-encountered humans expanding from their own isolated centers, and the miscegenation that is seen all around the world today occurred.
Nevertheless at our origins we were in one place, alongside a body of water, eating shellfish.
#162. To: redleghunter (#159)
Why is everyone making special accommodations for sodomites?
Do you REALLY want the answer to that question?
#163. To: Vicomte13 (#83)
I suppose that a general rule of conscientious objection based on religious principles is not a bad way to go. The key will be to be sure to apply that where it counts: on things like the draft, or release from military service once one has had a crisis of conscience.
Good point. While in the Army I never saw someone forced into combat situations when claiming conscientious objection. Once someone claims CO, an investigation is started to determine if the claim is of merit. For example, someone who knowingly signed up for the Infantry was fully aware of what the Infantry will do in combat.
The majority of CO cases turn into an MOS reclassification or chapter discharge from the service.
There are some young soldiers who struggle with this. The Army solution is to look at CO on a case by case basis and see what can be done for the best of the unit, soldier and the force.
So good example Vic.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#164. To: TooConservative (#95)
She makes her living off a saloon whose customers are drawn there to drink alcohol to which she objects.
I knew that was going to be your response.
Is Applebees a saloon? NO, Applebees primary purpose is to serve food. But yes, maybe she should be working at Cracker Barrel.
"The grass withers, the flower fades, But the word of our God stands forever.”"---Isaiah 40:8
#165. To: TooConservative (#91)
Sounds like the ultimate cuckservative ripoff by hubby #3.
That would be using the cuckoo bird version of the term.
#166. To: (#0)
Fresh today on HotGas, with more details on this case.
Muslim flight attendant suspended for not serving boozeI watched an interview on CNN this weekend with Lena Masri, the attorney for Charee Stanley, which had me ready to shut off the television by the time it was over. Stanley is the recently converted Muslim flight attendant who was suspended from her job because she refused to serve alcoholic beverages to passengers. Now she’s bringing suit to demand her job back and the restoration of the “reasonable religious accommodation” she feels she is owed. (CNN)
Reviewing the history of this case, it quickly becomes clear that ExpressJet has bent over backward in trying to accommodate her but she clearly wants to turn this into a politicized battle. At first her supervisors simply asked her to work with other flight attendants and have them take care of the alcohol sales, but not everyone wants to work a shift where their colleague dumps off part of their workload on them. Plus, many smaller flights only have one flight attendant, so someone else would have to take those flights. That clearly wasn’t going to work. ExpressJet also offered to move her into some other type of work where she wouldn’t be involved in serving food and beverages. She refused that as well. In the end it apparently became too much to deal with. I can’t wait to see how this one works out because there are clearly limits on how far employers have to go in terms of making religious accommodations for their employees where their practices are in direct conflict with the normal functions of the job. And let’s face it… Christians these days are regularly being informed that matters of conscience where their religious beliefs collide with their job functions are no excuse for not doing their jobs. Why would a court allow Stanley to gum up the operation in this fashion when so many others are not? Besides, there’s an element of common sense here which any judge should be willing to take into account. If you work in the meat department at the grocery store and decide to convert to Islam will you be allowed to tell any customer ordering pork sausage that they need to go stand in line for the next available butcher? Should a devout Christian judge be allowed to stone any women who come before him in a divorce case if they admit to adultery because Leviticus says he must? To take the question to its illogical extreme, if you are a stripper who works bachelor parties and you join the Amish, your boss isn’t going to allow you to do all your dances wearing a cape dress, apron and prayer cap. You need to find a new job. In a more real world example, a bartender who converts to Islam can’t expect the boss to allow her to stay on the job and only serve soda and water. And in a sense, that’s what Stanley is… part of her job is working as a bartender. Flying is stressful enough, what with worrying about whether or not the plane is going to fall out of the sky or if the guy in the next seat is sizing himself up for an eternity with 72 virgins in the next few minutes. I need a stiff drink, lady, so get on the stick or go find a new line of work. |
#167. To: Vicomte13 (#161)
If you trace back your human origins through chromosomal and mitochondrial DNA, you will discover that geneticists speak of chromosomal "Adam" and mitochondrial "Eve".
It is a metaphor.
Your argument starts right off stinkin' to high heaven.
#168. To: buckeroo (#167)
The NAMES are a metaphor - the REALITY of genetic origins in single individuals is the point. The names are metaphorically given to the original individuals.
That you don't understand that is surprising.
#169. To: Vicomte13 (#168)
The names are metaphorically given to the original individuals.
Science s-t-r-e-t-c-h-e-s metaphors to within the local culture, it serves. And why not? You think the Jewish culture came before the Swahili?
#170. To: redleghunter (#163)
But that's the thing. If I knowingly sign up for the Army, and take the benefits, knowing full well what the Army does in combat, but THEN God touches me, perhaps once I've SEEN combat, and I realize that what I am doing is evil and that I am serving Satan - THAT is the very situation where conscientious objection matters the most.
The individual has already gotten the benefits, and sees and knows what it is, and he has changed his mind. He believes that it is wrong to do what he has been doing, what he was trained and paid to do, and what he used to support.
MAYBE he is gaming the system. MAYBE he is telling the truth. Let's suppose he IS telling the truth (let's say the person is you, so you KNOW you're telling the truth). You're not dealing with men of faith who understand your objection. You're dealing with men for whom your "defection" is a giant pain in the ass. Indeed, your departure increases the danger to them, because now somebody who is less skilled has to come in. And why should YOU be able to save YOUR ass from getting killed, and go home and get to use that education, while THEY have to stay far from home and maybe die?
That's the mentality of everybody doing the judging, which is why conscientious objectors historically had a very bad time. During World War II. Oh, so you're an objector, eh? Well then, we're going to put you right in the FRONT LINE of the MOST DANGEROUS stuff of all, a field medic. Nobody can object to that on moral grounds. So now you're MORE LIKELY to get killed than if you just took your chances. We're going to make you conscientious objectors BLEED more than regular people, to PROVE your objection by having a greater chance of getting killed than the soldiers. (THAT'll teach ya!)
It does indeed teach SOMETHING.
There's a lot of bad faith in the judgment process of conscientious objection. The default position is that the objector is a weasel trying to get out of something.
So, how does he prove his status? Historically this has been tough. For example, Catholics cannot be conscientious objectors, because the Catholic Church does not as a doctrinal matter recognize the status, saying that there's a duty to serve lawful orders. Tough luck if you're a Catholic. Effectively, you have to have joined a pacifist religion.
Now, perhaps things are at times relaxed, but often not.
Truth is, the solution is very simple: permit resignation for reasons of conscience. If there is still an obligation period, require a pro-rata payback of whatever benefits were obtained.
But such an approach is not morally satisfying to those in dominance, and it is very important psychologically for them to put any alleged conscientious objector through hell.
The easier way to avoid combat in past times was to smoke a joint or suck a dick. Those things, which military pagans consider dirty or dangerous, will get you booted. But want to leave for RELIGIOUS reasons. Professional killers are not fans of excessive religious sentiment. You know what I mean.
.
.
.
Comments (171 - 251) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]