Supreme Court Hands Religious Freedom Win To Postal Worker Who Refused To Work On Sunday
In ruling for the government worker, the high court overturned its 1977 precedent that said employers had to “reasonably accommodate” an employee’s religious beliefs and practices, so long as it did not create an “undue hardship” on the business. The new decision tightens the “undue hardship” standard, and could make it easier for some individual employees to secure a religious accommodation in the workplace.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled unanimously for a postal worker in Pennsylvania in an important religious liberty dispute, over now far employers should go to accommodate faith-based requests in the workplace.
Gerald Groff, a Christian mail carrier, from Pennsylvania, asked the court to decide if U.S. Postal Service could require him to deliver Amazon packages on Sundays, which he observes as the Sabbath. His attorney, Aaron Streett, argued in April that the court should revisit a 50-year-old precedent that established a test to determine when employers should make accommodations for their employees’ religious practices.
In ruling for the government worker, the high court overturned its 1977 precedent that said employers had to “reasonably accommodate” an employee’s religious beliefs and practices, so long as it did not create an “undue hardship” on the business.
The new decision tightens the “undue hardship” standard, and could make it easier for some individual employees to secure a religious accommodation in the workplace.
Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 requires employers to accommodate employees’ religious practices unless doing so would be an “undue hardship” for the business. A Supreme Court case from 1977, Trans World Airlines v. Hardison, said employers could deny religious accommodations to employees when they impose “more than a de minimis cost” on the business.
Streett argued that the court should scrap the “de minimus” test, which he suggested has been abused by lower courts to deny religious accommodations, in favor of the plain language of Title VII, which would define “undue burden” in the same way it is defined in other federal laws, such as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).
-
Covid Added to the Childhood Vaccine Schedule: No Science, No Rationality, No Morality
The addition of Covid vaccines to the childhood immunization schedule legalizes mandates imposed by left-wing school districts at the local level, while shielding companies like Pfizer from liability, ensuring that no amount of harm caused by the vaccines will cut into their profits.
In a ghastly new crime against America’s children, particularly those in Democratic states and cities, the CDC today voted to add Covid mRNA vaccines to the childhood immunization schedule, paving the way for mandates by left-wing school districts.
The CDC and media fact-checkers were quick to point out that the CDC cannot impose a national child vaccine mandate—but this is a galling straw-man argument, likely betraying the CDC’s insecurity about what they’ve just done. As the CDC knows, judges have routinely cited deference to the childhood immunization schedule as an adequate basis to uphold vaccine mandates by school districts.
The addition of Covid vaccines to the childhood immunization schedule therefore legalizes mandates imposed by left-wing school districts at the local level, while shielding companies like Pfizer from liability, ensuring that no amount of harm caused by the vaccines will cut into their profits.
According to a recent study in JAMA, Pfizer’s Covid mRNA vaccine resulted in hospitalization in one out of every 500 children under the age of five. While this is in line with the rate of hospitalization from other vaccines, the difference is that those vaccines confer benefits against diseases that are actually harmful to children.
By contrast, it has long been known that Covid presents virtually no risk to healthy children. According to CDC data, Covid’s total mortality rate for all children 0-17 years is approximately 0.002%, and just 0.0001% for those children 0-17 years without comorbities.
Read More
Related Posts: -
Brighter Days Await God’s People
Suffering is the result of sin. All the heartache in our world is because sin is running wild. It’s like a plague or disease. I’m not sure if or when things will get better, but I do know heaven is going to be amazing. Nothing in this life can compare to what’s ahead.
The conflict in Ukraine has me longing for heaven, yearning for that peaceful country—a land with no tears, a place with no war. It also has me lamenting the state of our world. Things are getting worse. It appears a sort of bleakness has covered the earth. I’ve been waking up these days with an underlying angst which manifests itself as cynicism. I’m beginning to wonder if things will ever get better.
Yet, despite my concerns, regardless of the fear I hear whispered at the grocery store, proclaimed on the television, promoted in the break room, or shared on social media, I know brighter days await God’s people. His word promises it.
Perhaps you live in a part of the world where things seem stable. Maybe your life is going well. If you had to take a survey which assessed the state of your life, you would answer with five stars. You’re thriving. If that’s you, praise God for his provision and favor. Will you join me in praying for those around the globe in less fortunate conditions?
Many people are not thriving. Some are in real danger. Their relatives are hiding in bomb shelters or fleeing their homes. The state of their lives is anything but awesome. In fact, if they took the same survey they would likely claim to be living in hell. Zero stars.
To my despairing brothers and sisters across the world, I am praying. I’m praying for God’s peace and protection. I’m pleading to the Father that your family will be richly provided for and protected from harm. I’m praying you will experience peace that surpasses understanding. I want you to know brighter days await.
Suffering is the result of sin. All the heartache in our world is because sin is running wild. It’s like a plague or disease.
Read More -
Comforting Lies about Suffering
Peter had to learn these lessons about suffering, and so do we. For the believer, suffering is not a curse, not an indication of weak faith or a lack of blessing, but rather an integral part of the Christian life. God may discipline us to awaken and refine us, but his discipline is a loving mercy. He uses suffering to shape us into the image of Christ, which the prosperity gospel, in its obsession with physical health and earthly wealth, overlooks.
I’ve been told that suffering cannot be God’s will for me. I’ve been advised not even to speak about suffering. I’ve been promised unconditional healing and wholeness if I have enough faith.
These statements came from proponents of the prosperity gospel, people who were convinced I could avoid suffering. I remember telling a fellow believer about my post-polio diagnosis twenty years ago, explaining how eventually I could become a quadriplegic. As I related the various implications, the man interrupted me, saying, “You need to stop talking about this right now. Just speaking of this diagnosis is agreeing with Satan, which might bring it into being. Suffering is never part of God’s will. I know God just wants healing and wholeness for you.”
His words took me aback. While I’d heard the claims before, this conversation triggered a flood of painful memories: being told by a faith healer in a crowded auditorium that I didn’t have enough faith to be healed. Being prayed over by strangers, in places ranging from grocery stores to sporting events, who were convinced they could heal me. Telling a friend about my unborn son’s serious heart condition and being told simply to claim our baby’s healing.
All these people asserted that if we “agreed in prayer” and “bound Satan,” I would be healed, my baby would be healed, the pain would end. They said I needed to believe in faith, warning me never to speak of suffering, fear, or loss.
Even Apostles Misunderstand Suffering
The apostle Peter didn’t want Jesus to speak of his coming crucifixion either. When Jesus told the disciples about his future suffering, death, and resurrection on the third day, Peter rebuked him, saying, “Far be it from you, Lord! This shall never happen to you” (Matthew 16:22). To Peter, it was inconceivable that Jesus would suffer and be killed. That couldn’t be part of God’s plan.
Perhaps Peter instinctively rebuked Jesus because Jesus’s words about his suffering and death went against Peter’s understanding of the kingdom of God. Just before, Jesus had told Peter that whatever Peter bound on earth would be bound in heaven, and whatever he loosed on earth would be loosed in heaven (Matthew 16:19). Maybe Peter thought he could override the predictions by speaking against them.
Whatever the reason for Peter’s outburst, Jesus responded with a stinging rebuke: “Get behind me, Satan! You are a hindrance to me. For you are not setting your mind on the things of God, but on the things of man” (Matthew 16:23).
Jesus’s reaction applies to the false teaching of the prosperity gospel, a doctrine that asserts suffering has no place in the life of a Christian. Proponents of the prosperity gospel often claim that we need to bind suffering on earth and not even speak of it, because affliction can never be God’s will for those who know Christ. They choose isolated verses to undergird their position, stressing a right to perfect health, ignoring the Scriptures that highlight God’s goodness and sovereignty in and through our suffering.
Based on Jesus’s exchange with Peter, I see three ways the prosperity gospel gets suffering wrong.
1. ‘Suffering Hinders Faith.’
While Peter’s words may seem like a loving reaction, born out of care for Jesus, Jesus saw them as the work of Satan, distracting Jesus from his purpose. Jesus came to suffer and die, and Peter tried to dissuade him from what was God’s will. At the time, Peter didn’t know that Christ’s suffering would save not only Peter, but all who trust in Jesus.
Read More
Related Posts:
