Does one federal court ruling make it the law of the land?
( http://www.scribd.com/doc/245271872/American-Humansits-v-US )
If not, could a Religious Freedom Restoration Act protect discrimination against nonbelievers?
All the recent controversy seems centered on the GLBT community.
Not so much, but it is better than one case saying they aren’t ;)t. If they are a religion they can get protection from federal and/or state RFRAs.
Atheism may not be a religion, but discrimination against an atheist in hiring, renting, selling, etc. would still be forbidden, as it is “religious discrimination.”
You can’t fire an employee, for instance, solely because he isn’t Catholic. You can’t fire him solely because he isn’t Christian. And you can’t fire him solely because he isn’t religious.
I need a cite on that. I can’t think of any protections the law gives atheism.
Questions and Answers: Religious Discrimination in the Workplace
Title VII’s protections also extend to those who are discriminated against or need accommodation because they profess no religious beliefs.
…
Similarly, requests for accommodation of a “religious” belief or practice could include, for example: … an atheist asking to be excused from the religious invocation offered at the beginning of staff meetings
Thanks for the link.
Sure thing.
One could argue all day as to whether atheism is “really” a religion or not, philosophically speaking. But it has nothing to do with whether atheism is considered a “religious belief” for the purposes of Title VII. The latter is legal jargon, and while it bears some relation to the English word, the meanings are distinct.
It makes perfect sense, though. A workplace can’t discriminate against someone for not being a Christian, or not being Muslim, and so on. An atheist just happens to fit all these categories instead of all-but-one.
:dubious:try certain religions in jail dee troitd, I advise against post in general to that. Also its a little trollish question that’s fuckin lame because you want an answer, make up your own mind. Your religion gives no fucks to anyone on this board. find a place to post your lame question.
Reported.
Not fully understood, perhaps, but reported.
This post by Cole33 may cast a bit of illumination. 
But not being religious isn’t the same thing being an atheist.
Eh, I think he’s just blowing smoke.
MODERATOR WARNING
Cole33, while you new here you just broke about 3-4 rules.
Don’t accuse another poster of being a troll or of trollish posting except in the BBQ Pit.
Don’t tell another poster where they can or cannot post.
There is a “report this post” button you can use if you disagree with a post. It’s the little red triangle in the upper right corner of the offendin post. A moderator will get the report and decide if you have a valid point.
samclem, moderator.
(1) No. Federal district court rulings are binding only on that district court, until/unless upheld on appeal (and then only within the circuit unless the appeal reaches the Supreme Court.) They are likely to be followed by other district courts (particularly within the same circuit) under the principle of comity but they are not binding on any other court. It’s worth noting that freedom of religion includes the freedom to profess no religion.
I should note that secular humanism is not the same thing as atheism.
(2) No.
Pure atheism, i.e., that which says “there is no God, no souls” is most definitely a religion. Anything else is really agnosticism, and is NOT a religion. In my humble opinion
for what its worth, Atheism is a protected class in Madison, WI as of last week
and Fox’s take on it
Did you just post a clip from Fox News in GQ? LOL
Thank you for the reference. I’m adding that to the personal archives. I don’t see there being any way to get around this from a discrimination standpoint. They site Atheism as an example of a covered group ”an atheist asking to be excused from the religious invocation offered at the beginning of staff meetings” (Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 - Section 1; paragraph 5)
So from an employment discrimination standpoint it is completely covered.
Going beyond employment we get into the Madison WI law which I think gets more to the real issue of protection in all aspects of life where one could claim religious protection. I suspect this will have to be handled in the US Supreme Court before we have a definitive ruling but its good to see even places traditionally viewed as predominantly religious are moving forward.
The Fox report is truly painful to watch.
**Personal Note: **
I would much rather the pilot believe strongly in science, particularly the principles of aerodynamic flight and the operation and mechanics of the mechanisms that are used to control that flight on the plane.
What he/she believes from a spiritual standpoint is only a concern it his/her beliefs involve ignoring that science or some sort of political/religious or yes anti religious statement by crashing the plane.
Good point. A lot of words are considered special terms of art in different disciplines. The definition of “religion” in a philosophy class might be a bit different than the definition of “religion” in County Court. Likewise, the medical definition of “drug” (substance that affects the way the body works) includes caffeine, which is not typically considered a “drug” under laws regulating the sale of pharmaceutical products, but rather considered a type of food subject to the laws on food. Another term of art is “cause of action” - in law it refers to the right to engage in a specific legal action to enforce a right. Saying “He done insulted me!” might constitute a valid claim against someone in a bar, but in a court it generally doesn’t.
Theism/Atheism is about belief. A theist believes there is a god, an atheist lacks this belief.
Gnosticism/Agnosticism is about knowledge. A gnostic believes they can know for sure that god exists, an agnostic lacks this belief.
You can believe that god exists, but not be absolutely certain, and be an agnostic theist.
You can not believe that exists, but not be absolutely certain, and be an agnostic atheist.
Your ‘pure atheism’ is gnostic atheism. And it’s still not a religion.