# Woman fired for eating pork **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [August 4, 2004, 5:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323 "2004-08-04T17:50:23Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/161 "2004-08-06T19:08:37Z")
Her freedom to eat what she wanted was limited on the basis of religion. Her employer did not make reasonable accomodations for their non-Muslim employees. She was simply told she could not bring pork onto the premises because it violated Muslim practices. There was no written policy. We’re not talking about cooking stinky fish in the microwave. We’re talking about banning something for religious purposes, which is illegal. I think it’s the religious angle here, people. If I start a business and I ban eggs from the building, no one’s religious rights are being violated. Unless someone must consume eggs as part of their religion, I can fire someone for eating an omelet in the lunchroom. Although Catholics are not instructed they must eat pork, there’s no prohibition of it. So although her religious rights were not violated, her employer attempted to force her to follow _his_ religious practices. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/162 "2004-08-06T19:14:19Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > If it’s in your cubical (which is a private area), I’ve got no problem with it. People decorate their cubes with all sorts of personal expression. I think it will offend the religious folks (but hell…what doesn’t?). I don’t think you should get fired for it. I happen to work for a gigantic retailer who INSISTS on the religious choir belting out baby jesus tunes in the common area of our campus. I’m annoyed by the assumption that all 5,000 of us want to hear someone else’s religious beliefs blaring through the atrium during our noon meal. _Infinitely_ more intrusive than a ham sandwich. Yet, I continue to get the fuck over it. Maybe we’re arguing different things. Whether you’ve got a problem with it or whether you think you should get fired for it isn’t what I’m talking about; people get fired all the time for what I think are stupid reasons. I’m arguing over whether the firing was illegal, not over whether it was stupid. One article mentioned that her last firing was for microwaving bacon; given the previous requests not to eat pork in the facility, that seems like a deliberate provocation to me. Nuking bacon is, how shall I put it, quite pungent. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/163 "2004-08-06T19:16:33Z")
> [@ivylass](#): > > We’re not talking about cooking stinky fish in the microwave. We’re talking about banning something for religious purposes, which is illegal. Are you sure this is the case _in this specific instance_? Can you please provide some sort of proof that \*this \* is in fact illegal? Because if it is in fact illegal I will shut up posthaste, I may disagree with that law but it has to be complied with. ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/164 "2004-08-06T19:17:20Z")
> [@ivylass](#): > > Her freedom to eat what she wanted was limited on the basis of religion. Her employer did not make reasonable accomodations for their non-Muslim employees. She was simply told she could not bring pork onto the premises because it violated Muslim practices. There was no written policy. > > We’re not talking about cooking stinky fish in the microwave. We’re talking about banning something for religious purposes, which is illegal. Even if you’re right as to the purpose, you’re wrong as to the legality. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![peri](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/67e7ee/32.png) [@peri](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/peri)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/165 "2004-08-06T19:19:11Z")
According to the link provided by **nyctea scandiaca** , the employee did more than bring pork products onto work premises. She cooked or reheated her bacon in the company microwave. This goes beyond sitting in the corner eating a sandwich. > [@](#): > > It wasn’t until 10 months later that Morales ran afoul of Rising Star’s no-pork policy, when she brought into the lunchroom a pizza with meat. > > Morales was warned, Kweli said, that she was violating a policy verbally announced to employees during their orientation. However, she then brought pork products into the building another two times. The last instance, she prepared bacon in a company microwave for a BLT sandwich. > > “I think she was trying to make a statement,” Kweli said. ---
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/166 "2004-08-06T19:19:57Z")
Okay, I’m willing to admit I’m wrong. Tell me where I steered off course. You cannot hire and fire someone on the basis of religion. So how can you ban a product or practice in the workplace on the basis or religion? (I’m not talking about the practice of sacrificing goats in the middle of the hallway, here. Let’s be reasonable.) ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/167 "2004-08-06T19:48:53Z")
> [@ivylass](#): > > Okay, I’m willing to admit I’m wrong. Tell me where I steered off course. You cannot hire and fire someone on the basis of religion. Not quite: you cannot hire and fire someone on the basis of **their** religion. Crucial difference. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![ivylass](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/9de053/32.png) [@ivylass](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivylass)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 7:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/168 "2004-08-06T19:56:53Z")
But she was fired on the basis of her religion…namely, that her religion did not prohibit the consumption of pork at work. Am I missing something? ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/169 "2004-08-06T20:01:20Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Not quite: you cannot hire and fire someone on the basis of **their** religion. Crucial difference. It’s exactly the same thing. An employer who is a Christian zealot may choose NOT to hire an employee because they ARE Muslim or because they ARE NOT Christian. Muslim = not Christian. In the pork-eating case, it was her status as a non-Muslim, or her status as a Catholic (Catholic = non-Muslim) that was the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/170 "2004-08-06T20:05:59Z")
> [@Mighty\_Girl](#): > > Are you sure this is the case _in this specific instance_? Can you please provide some sort of proof that \*this \* is in fact illegal? Because if it is in fact illegal I will shut up posthaste, I may disagree with that law but it has to be complied with. The actualy leagality or illegality of this case is going to be decided by the courts…she has filed a lawsuit. We can make guesses and assumptions here about whether it is legal or not, but personally I don’t know for sure. But regardless, I think it should be illegal and I think it is wrong and unfair. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/171 "2004-08-06T20:14:55Z")
> [@peri](#): > > According to the link provided by **nyctea scandiaca** , the employee did more than bring pork products onto work premises. She cooked or reheated her bacon in the company microwave. This goes beyond sitting in the corner eating a sandwich. OK, maybe she was being insensitive, or being an asshole. But, the employer should have made accomodations for the employee instead of mandating that all employees follow Muslim law. Then the situation would have never happened. So, looks like they were both being assholes. But the employer was an asshole first. And, sometimes asshole behavior spawns more asshole behavior. Like I said in a previous post, to which no one responded: > [@](#): > > The company operates in a country where the vast majority of people are non-Muslim. The owner should have made accommodations for his non-Muslim employees. > > If a non-Muslim business owner has a business in a Muslim country, don’t you think he should make accommodations for his Muslim employees, such as a halal kitchen, or accommodating for daily prayers, even if his employees were majority non-Muslim? It’s simply a courtesy. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/172 "2004-08-06T20:20:11Z")
> [@nyctea scandiaca](#): > > It’s exactly the same thing. An employer who is a Christian zealot may choose NOT to hire an employee because they ARE Muslim or because they ARE NOT Christian. Some Christians do not eat pork. Catholics do, so it is not as clear-cut as you want to put it. I suppose that she’ll have to argue in court that her religion mandates she eats pork for lunch in the company’s ground. Did they have a legal obligation to provide for accomdation so she could eat pork on the premises? Is that a fact? ---
**Author:** ![Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/left_hand_of_dorkness/32/7156_2.png) [@Left\_Hand\_of\_Dorkness](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Left_Hand_of_Dorkness)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/173 "2004-08-06T20:21:26Z")
> [@nyctea scandiaca](#): > > It’s exactly the same thing. An employer who is a Christian zealot may choose NOT to hire an employee because they ARE Muslim or because they ARE NOT Christian. > > Muslim = not Christian. > > In the pork-eating case, it was her status as a non-Muslim, or her status as a Catholic (Catholic = non-Muslim) that was the issue. That’s not right. Suppose her religion didn’t prohibit her from going to work with a mohawk, and so she did so. Could they have fired her for that? She was behaving in a way **allowed** by her religion, not **required** by her religion. She could have complied with their requirement without violating her religion. Someone whose religion does not prohibit the consumption of pork at work may still choose not to consume pork at work, and in so doing, not run afoul of this policy or of their religion. Therefore, it wasn’t her religion that got her fired; it was her choices that were irrelevant to her religion that got her fired. Daniel ---
**Author:** ![Kalhoun](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/3bc359/32.png) [@Kalhoun](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Kalhoun)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/174 "2004-08-06T20:24:33Z")
> [@nyctea scandiaca](#): > > OK, maybe she was being insensitive, or being an asshole. But, the employer should have made accomodations for the employee instead of mandating that all employees follow Muslim law. Then the situation would have never happened. So, looks like they were both being assholes. But the employer was an asshole first. And, sometimes asshole behavior spawns more asshole behavior. > > Like I said in a previous post, to which no one responded: I agree. A reasonable person would have either a) created an area where non-muslim could practice non-religion in peace, or b) put up with the single employee who occasionally eats pork at work. The same way everyone else would accommodate a muslim co-worker who stopped work a couple times a day to pray. The company instigated the animosity. ---
**Author:** ![Telemark](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/telemark/32/372_2.png) [@Telemark](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Telemark)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/175 "2004-08-06T20:26:26Z")
> [@ivylass](#): > > But she was fired on the basis of her religion…namely, that her religion did not prohibit the consumption of pork at work. I disagree. She was fired based on her actions. Since her religion doesn’t require her to eat pork, it’s not really part of the issue. Companies seem to be able to issue various food rulings (no Pepsi in Coke facilities) for reasons of their own choosing. Unless you show how she was prevented from practicing her religion which would require some accomodation, I think this is a question of her actions, not her faith. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/176 "2004-08-06T20:28:43Z")
> [@Mighty\_Girl](#): > > Some Christians do not eat pork. Catholics do, so it is not as clear-cut as you want to put it. I suppose that she’ll have to argue in court that her religion mandates she eats pork for lunch in the company’s ground. > > Did they have a legal obligation to provide for accomdation so she could eat pork on the premises? Is that a fact? I was reponding to **Left Hand of Dorkness** who said: > [@](#): > > Not quite: you cannot hire and fire someone on the basis of their religion. Crucial difference . So I pointed out that “firing someone on the basis of religion” is the same as “firing someone on the basis of their religion (or non-religion).” No one ever implied that her religion mandated eating pork. Look, it’s really simple: \*Employer mandated all employees follow a certain tenet of his religion on company property or be fired. \* I think that is wrong, if not illegal. It would be the same if the employer mandated that female employees may not come to work uncovered. Shit would hit the fan if that took place. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/177 "2004-08-06T20:30:21Z")
> [@Kalhoun](#): > > The same way everyone else would accommodate a muslim co-worker who stopped work a couple times a day to pray… But praying is OBLIGATORY for Muslims whereas eating pork is not for Catholics. Your reasoning requires some contortionism of the kind only seen in the circus. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![alice\_in\_wonderland](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alice_in_wonderland/32/176_2.png) [@alice\_in\_wonderland](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alice_in_wonderland)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/178 "2004-08-06T20:32:37Z")
This thread is getting really ugly, IMO. In some of the posts I’m detecting a rather strong anti-muslim tone, which I find very dismissive and offensive, so I think I’ll bow out. I do want to clairfy one thing, however - my understanding of a halal kitchen comes from speaking to one of my good friends - a practicing muslim - about what it entials, and things that can mess it up. I would be interested to know which defintion you, **Kalhoun** , are using for a halal kitchen. ---
**Author:** ![Green\_Cymbeline](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/green_cymbeline/32/9244_2.png) [@Green\_Cymbeline](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Green_Cymbeline)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/179 "2004-08-06T20:34:57Z")
> [@Left Hand of Dorkness](#): > > Therefore, it wasn’t her religion that got her fired; it was her choices that were irrelevant to her religion that got her fired. No, it was her reluctance to be forced to follow the tenats of another’s religion that got her fired. This has nothing to do with her religion or non-religion. It has to do with a policy that was religiously based that required people who are not of that religion (the pork eater) to abide by its rules while on company property. It is unreasonable for employers to expect their employees to follow the tenats of the employer’s religion while on company property or be fired. ---
**Author:** ![Mighty\_Girl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/7bcc69/32.png) [@Mighty\_Girl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mighty_Girl)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2004, 8:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323/180 "2004-08-06T20:38:21Z")
But people, a ban on something that is not expressly forbidden by her religion does not prevent her from following her religious tenets. She could as well jump into a bathtub full of bacon \*outside \* the company’s premises. I am a born-again atheist. My religion - or lack thereof -does not prohibit a lot of things that would have gotten me fired for violating my employer’s rules if I did. Unless they tell me that I have to pray (or some other action that goes against my freedom of - or from - religion I don’t have a reason to protest. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/woman-fired-for-eating-pork/258323.md?page=10)