I think your example of a t-shirt vs a suit is a little extreme. I am a Christian and agree that if the proper attire in the work place is a suit, you can not expect to wear a t-shirt of any kind. But, if people are walking around with t-shirts of rock bands and other things in there life that are important to them, then Christians should be allowed to were a shirt that says "Jesus Saves" or other Christian sayings. I firmly feel that we should have equal rights for all. Equal, not special privlages for a few. BTW...There are plenty of things in todays workplace that offend the Christian faith, but we are told we are being too sensitive because the greater community feels it's ok. Yet when certian things that say the name Jesus or are information regarding the Christion faith are in a Christians work area, they are told to remove it. That does not reflect equal rights. 

 

 

.

 Response to Paul Rundus from Luke Visconti, Partner/Cofounder

Please, equating Jesus to a rock band is insulting in itself. 

You have no "equal rights" to proselytize in the workplace. The employer
(within the scope of the law) is permitted to determine the culture of
the workplace. The employee may either adapt to it or work elsewhere. 

.

 What if a head scarf or other head dress obscures the face? Are security issues mitigated by personal belief?

.

 Being Native American I feel that the best expression stating your Religious preference is not what you were but how you act & carry yourself.  We come from different walks of life and have our own morals & ethics which are dictated by our beliefs and the best way to show what we stand for is how we act.  If you act like an idiot then more power to you, if you act like a Christian and carry yourself in a Christian manner that speaks fpr itself louder than a t-shirt or scarf.  As they say "Actions speak louder than words"

.

 What a facinating subject.  I am reminded of the controversy in France a couple of years ago, when headscarves were banned in public schools for Islamic girls---NOT the way we would do it here in the US.

I am also reminded of a recent experience I had with a former employer, a national non-profit headquartered in San Francisco, but which has field offices across the US.  The upper management and culture of the organization was decidedly left of center and secular, and at one time, some staff in our offices in the Deep South---who were professed fundamentalist Christians and conservatives---expressed their discomfort with the organization's majority culture (the mission of the organization was environmental, so could be appealing to social conservatives as well as liberals).  

They had some valid points, that the culture and tone of the organization might sometimes be perceived as hostile to them.  It was an interesting lesson in diversity---that the importance of tolerance and inclusiveness works all ways.

.

 It really didn't appear that anyone was equating Jesus to a rock band...just an example that if it's okay to wear rock band tee shirts in the workplace, it should also be okay to wear a tee shirt referring to Jesus.

I do agree that the analogy of wearing a tee shirt in a workplace that requires business dress is a bit extreme.

I consider proselytizing as when someone tries to influence and persuade another individual toward their faith - through words. I've never thought about one's attire - such as a cross necklace, yarmulke, or hijab (the Muslim scarf) being anything more than a statement of one's faith...not as a means to influence others.

.

If a T-shirt is acceptable work attire than a Jesus Power t-shirt should also be. The only restrictions should be those that are also unacceptable in schools--shirts that promote drugs, violence or discrimination.If T-shirts are not acceptable in the workplace, then no t-shirt is acceptable not even one that involves religious expression. If jewelry is acceptable, however, the person could wear a cross or a big pin that says JESUS like an old lady at my former church did. If visible jewelry is not acceptable, tuck it in at work, take it out afterwards. Follow the rules but don't allow discrimination based on them. Religious persecution is wrong whether it is against Christians or Hindus. If we don't uphold the rights of everyone, we uphold the rights of no one. I dislike seeing Muslim women in their special clothing, I think it is a symbol of repression. But I think it is their right to wear them as long as no one is forcing them to do so. But I knew some little girls who were forced to wear clothing of another religion, which is similar to muslim garb. They did not want to wear the clothes. They did not believe in or even understand the religion. They did not want to be vegetarians as their parents' faith required. They hated their dreadlocks that were covered by their turbans. These were 5 sisters age 7-11 at an urban public school. They had to learn to fight because other children pulled off their turbans. Two things bother me about this situation. If it is not the choice of the child she should not be forced to practice the extreme dress codes. If religious dress codes cause a child to be ostracized consideration should be given to allowing modifications while still keeping the child modest. The child should have input into the clothing. After all they are the ones who suffer because of their parents' choices.The father of the little girls had dreads and always wore a t-shirt with a picture of Haile Selassie, the founder of their faith--normal human being clothing. He sometimes added a black power striped crocheted hat.The other thing that bothers me is that religious dress is always applied to girls and women only,regardless of the faith. The men and boys might wear a religiously related outfit or a little hat, but it never restricts their movement or makes them anonyomous.The only exception I have ever seen to this is the Taliban, who require that men wear beards, Sikhs, who wear turbans, and ultra orthodox Jews who have special hats and wear curls in front of their ears. Even the Fundamentalist Mormons, Amish, and United Pentecostals allow functional garments for men but have much stricter concepts of modesty for women. We have discussed this in church. My pastor was Church of God and when he was a child the church had strict dress and hair codes for men and women. They have grown out of some of them. .

What does any of this have to do with diversity? We are not asked to conceal our genetic makeup at the workplace, because we are not responsible for that. We ARE asked to conceal our religious makeup at the workplace, because we ARE responsible for THAT, and anything that can be deemed contentious by nature will usually be deemed "counterproductive" to the corporate goals and objectives and will be dealt with accordingly. However, this (USA) is a free country, and when someone asks us what we believe, we have every right to answer honestly. In Indonesia, on the other hand, where 500 Christian churches were burned down by frightened Muslims, a different approach may be prudent. What America has to ask is, "How do we keep from becoming like Indonesia?".