Muslim truckers

#1

SpaceCoastVol

Jacked up on moonshine and testosterone
Joined
Sep 10, 2009
Messages
57,458
Likes
71,815
#1
Mooslim truckers win $240,000 because they do not want to deliver evil alcohol. But Christian bakers must bake cakes for gay weddings. Naaaaah no double standard there at all.

What say you LG? You celebratin'?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 people
#4
#4
Not being a douche because I'd like to check this out as well but do you have a link or specific Google info?
 
#7
#7
Don't hold your breath.

Well, he publicizes his opinions on many other matters that most would not believe Executive Branch should. So I eagerly await the speech in the Rose Garden criticizing this court ruling.
 
#8
#8
Well, he publicizes his opinions on many other matters that most would not believe Executive Branch should. So I eagerly await the speech in the Rose Garden criticizing this court ruling.

Why would he criticize something he agrees with?
 
#11
#11
I don't want to spend too much space giving you the facts because they don't fit your agenda, but here you go.

2 Muslims didn't want to deliver beer. The company often changed their assignments to accommodate their religious beliefs. The company fired the 2 workers. The 2 workers sued.

The company admitted liability because it's ability to to make an accommodation was unquestioned because it had actually done so. Therefore, the jury received this case on a question of damages, only. Truckers were fired 6 years ago. 240k in back and front pay doesn't seem off the mark.

Two completely different cases. One is a business owner of an establishment that sells is goods to the public. The owner decided not to serve someone due to their sexual orientation. They weren't being forced to do something other than what they were in business to do. The business owner decided not to serve them because of their sexual orientation. The 2 truckers were being forced to deliver alcohol when the company was capable of making an accommodation.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
I don't want to spend too much space giving you the facts because they don't fit your agenda, but here you go.

2 Muslims didn't want to deliver beer. The company often changed their assignments to accommodate their religious beliefs. The company fired the 2 workers. The 2 workers sued.

The company admitted liability because it's ability to to make an accommodation was unquestioned because it had actually done so. Therefore, the jury received this case on a question of damages, only. Truckers were fired 6 years ago. 240k in back and front pay doesn't seem off the mark.

Two completely different cases. One is a business owner of an establishment that sells is goods to the public. The owner decided not to serve someone due to their sexual orientation. They weren't being forced to do something other than what they were in business to do. The business owner decided not to serve them because of their sexual orientation. The 2 truckers were being forced to deliver alcohol when the company was capable of making an accommodation.

Why should the company be held liable? Why can't the company fire them and be done with it?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#13
#13
I'd be wary of letting muslims or left wingers near any type of large storage vehicle...you know..considering they've blown sh!t up before.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#15
#15
Why should the company be held liable? Why can't the company fire them and be done with it?

Because congress has passed laws saying that you cannot discriminate based upon religion. This means that if the company, without undue hardship, can make reasonable accommodations that would allow the worker to continue to work and observe his religion, it must do so. The trucking company admitted that it could, but elected to fire the two workers anyway.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#18
#18
More akin to anarchists with a fear of technology. True conservatives wouldn't have ties to Filippino Muslim terrrorist organizations.

I understand you're just toying with him and letting him hang himself but he's shown to be your average, useless dumb****.

Carry on good sir.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#21
#21
Mohammed McKay and his best friend Bear.

Bet only 2 or 3 people get that reference.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#23
#23
I don't want to spend too much space giving you the facts because they don't fit your agenda, but here you go.

2 Muslims didn't want to deliver beer. The company often changed their assignments to accommodate their religious beliefs. The company fired the 2 workers. The 2 workers sued.

The company admitted liability because it's ability to to make an accommodation was unquestioned because it had actually done so. Therefore, the jury received this case on a question of damages, only. Truckers were fired 6 years ago. 240k in back and front pay doesn't seem off the mark.

Two completely different cases. One is a business owner of an establishment that sells is goods to the public. The owner decided not to serve someone due to their sexual orientation. They weren't being forced to do something other than what they were in business to do. The business owner decided not to serve them because of their sexual orientation. The 2 truckers were being forced to deliver alcohol when the company was capable of making an accommodation.

What if they didn't like working weekends due to Sunday being the Sabbath?
 
#25
#25
No they weren't.

Common misconception.

Please try to understand what you are talking about

It was a smartass off the cuff remark. I am not surprised you latched on to it. McVeigh was not a god fearing man, but his ideology dovetailed nicely with the various militia groups that want to overthrow the government. Those groups more closely identify with the right.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people

Advertisement



Back
Top