And similarly one can disagree with the properness of homosexual conduct and homosexual advocates and not be a homophobic person. I do not need to accept to tolerate. I do not need to accept another's values to value the person as a person. I think wording can make a big difference here. An employer, it seems to me, ought to be able to require all employees to affirm that they will not act in a particular way against any other particular group (religious, sexual orientation, or otherwise); and even it seems to me, that they will affirm that they will value every person as a person regardless of beliefs. But it does seem to me to be a bit problematic to require employees to affirmatively state that they value another person's values.
Some of us may indeed value all manner of diverse views. But most of us, I suspect, have difficulty valuing all other sets of values, especially in the face of some of those values that posit a lock on the truth whether secular (liberalism, conservatism, communitarianism, libertarian, etc.) or religious (many (not all) Christians, some (not all) Jews, and some(not all) Muslims each claim to have the one and only and final religious truth).
And yet that is what we are called upon to do.
Steve -- Prof. Steven D. Jamar vox: 202-806-8017 Howard University School of Law fax: 202-806-8567 2900 Van Ness Street NW mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Washington, DC 20008 http://www.law.howard.edu/faculty/pages/jamar/
"It is by education I learn to do by choice, what other men do by the constraint of fear."
Aristotle
_______________________________________________ To post, send message to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To subscribe, unsubscribe, change options, or get password, see http://lists.ucla.edu/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/religionlaw
