Is There a Right to Post Condemnation of Homosexual Practices?
Peterson alleged that he had a religious duty to “expose evil when confronted with sin” and therefore to provide moral guidance to his co-workers so that they would turn away from homosexuality. Though the court expresses some skepticism about this claim of religious obligation, it nonetheless accepts its truth for purposes of ruling. In this column too, we will accordingly accept its truth. On this assumption, as long as the tolerance posters remained in place, the plaintiff would have been violating his religion if he had not posted his “rebuttal” to the message that homosexuality is okay. Nevertheless, the Ninth Circuit found that compelling HP to tolerate the cubicle poster would impose an undue hardship on the employer. The court was quick to note, however, that fostering tolerance will inevitably generate some ruffled feathers, and that not every expression of disapproval for the diversity posters could legitimately qualify as an undue hardship. The poster in question nonetheless
Related Questions
- Why does the practice schedule come out right before the beginning of the month? And why aren’t practices at the same time all season?
- What if I have debt collectors calling me right now who are breaking the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act?
- Do practices still have the right to balance their books over a three-year period?
