Kenneth <kdw### [at] earthlinknet> wrote:
> (It always seems to take some unfortunate person
> or persons, who have been denied rights and freedoms, or worse, to bring such
> things to a head and force a change. It's a shame that in most cases, change
> can't be effected otherwise.)

  On the other hand, it's a fine line between freedom of religious
expression and, sometimes, safety regulations.

  For example, if in some kind of food preparation establishment there's
a rule, related to food hygiene and safety, that all workers handling the
food must not wear long-sleeved shirts (because long sleeves may touch
the food products, increasing risk of contamination), and someone has the
religious conviction that he must wear long-sleeved shirts (I suppose I
don't have to mention such religion by name), which one in this case should
be imposed, the freedom of religious expression, or the safety rule?

  Now guess if this has been a real case, and guess what the court of
law (in a western European country) ruled.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message