Police Assignments vs. Religious Beliefs
The South Bend Tribune reports:
Endres, who joined the state police in 1991, was fired in 2000 for refusing a full-time assignment as an agent at Blue Chip Casino in Michigan City. Working at the casino would violate his religious beliefs, he explained. He was fired for insubordination. ... Endres, who worships at Community Baptist Church in South Bend, believes as do fellow congregants that games of chance are sinful. He told his superiors he could not work at a casino because doing so would help facilitate gambling.
He filed suit in federal court after his firing, claiming Indiana discriminated against him on account of religion. The state's attorney argued that while discrimination against any religious faith is unlawful, it need not accommodate religiously inspired practices that run counter to rules that are neutral with respect to religion.
It would have been nice if the state could have accommodated Endres, but I don't think that they had an obligation to do so. Police officers are there to serve the entire community - they cannot claim that certain businesses are "sinful" and, hence, that they cannot "serve and protect" those businesses (or individuals). Imagine, if you will, a fundamentalist officer who wants to refuse to patrol near a mosque because Islam is "evil" - should the state accommodate that? Of course not.
This has important implications for other cases - for example, the desire of Catholic hospitals not to provide certain services, like advice about contraception. Granted, such a hospital is private rather than public and that changes a lot - but at the same time, hospitals provide a vital public service akin to that of police. Once you get involved with providing something like policing, fire protection, or medical care, I'm not so sure that you can pick and choose how you do it.
Read More:


Comments
No comments yet. Leave a Comment