Date: 2012-01-14 01:58 am (UTC)
slave2tehtink: Tink, a fawn female Doberman, and I (a redhead) gaze meaningfully and dare I say impishly into each other's eyes. (Default)
I'm not sure what right you're referring to as being expressly granted? The ministerial exception has existed since the establishment clause was ratified as part of the first amendment. Religious organizations have always been exempt from the Civil Rights Act as employers, from the ADA's public access provisions under Title III.

This decision does not break any new ground, it just affirms the right of religious organizations to engage in retaliatory and hostile employment actions as long as they can convincingly claim that the employee in question is covered by the ministerial exception.

I'm not sure, either, why you would be grateful that your religious organization continues to have the right to engage in retaliatory and discriminatory employment practices. I suggest you look over the case documentation more closely to see what was actually being argued here.
From:
Anonymous( )Anonymous This account has disabled anonymous posting.
OpenID( )OpenID You can comment on this post while signed in with an account from many other sites, once you have confirmed your email address. Sign in using OpenID.
User
Account name:
Password:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
Subject:
HTML doesn't work in the subject.

Message:

 
Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of everyone who comments.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.

January 2013

S M T W T F S
  12345
6 789101112
13141516171819
20212223242526
2728293031  

Most Popular Tags

Style Credit

Base style:
[personal profile] timeasmymeasure
Theme:
[personal profile] forthwritten

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags
Page generated May. 24th, 2013 03:27 am
Powered by Dreamwidth Studios