Religion in the Workplace Essay

passel around the world have a destine of beliefs whether they choose to intend in Jesus Christ or not to agnostic and gnostic, e preciseone has a set of beliefs which they employ on to. However the question arises on how seat we practice it outside our crustal plates specifically at work without imposing former(a) slews sets who may not hand to the similar views as one does. How does the view of a utilitarianism, deontology, and relativism tie into this matter, and could we find a parallelism on both sides to come to a logical conclusion on how things could be run at a work induct.People seem to start away when it comes to talk about organized religion and politics for good reason. one(a) sack upnot come out of the conversation agreeing with the early(a) side so they turn back back to relativism which is a go to for some hard to avoid confrontations, except what about our rights to religious practice at work? Where does one resume the line? We were born with the freedom of weft, this includes choosing to believe in what otherwises tell you, to find out to things etc. One can easily choose to start the message or place, exclusively where it gets troubling is if it takes place during a meeting and the other persons morals are founded strongly on their religious beliefs and they just index either operate or break a company found on their decision or bring to passance.Why though do we tactile property as if we need to have the right to express ourselves? Well as Mosser., K explains because religion is such a basic part of a persons self-conception, someone may feel his or her right to the free expression of religious beliefs is restricted by not beingness allowed to state them when and where he or she wishes. A company may cast the blessings of a group or an individual true Christian and unagitated not be biased to that person only because of the good that is approach out of it. This would result in good for the greatest nu mber of nation according to a utilitarianism view.However at that place is another side to the gold even in the same ethical theory. Rule utilitarianism states that allowing the majoritys religious views to be imposed on a minority does not create the greatest good for the greatest number. (Mosser K.,) This also brings into light that the great unwashed cannot be push upd into something that they do not want to accept. Christianity was never meant to be forced upon people, nevertheless oer the years it has been twisted to mean something other then what is true though at that place are those who still hold faithfully to what is right.Even at requisite work functions one cannot force appealingness or religious service on one without perhaps violating state equitys. Sam Grover explains most likely any petitioner or religious service that accompanies a mandatory work event or meeting would violate Title VII discrimination laws under the same reason used in Townley. (Grover, S. 2010) The next question one could anticipate themselves how much is too much, when someone continuously asks to attend church or has their bible out on their office desk?Harassment has taken place in the workplace when an employee is required or coerced to abandon, alter, or adopt a religious practice as a condition of employment (Grover, S 2010) A person by no means base their decisions on whether a person is of the same beliefs and or style of worship to restrain them the greatest good even if that particular religion is the biggest in the workplace, and leave the others hanging dry.In an article written by ACLJ it speaks about prayer in the workplace as being legal, stating In sum prayer is not illegal, unauthorized, inappropriate, nor improper and as long as employees pray forrader or after working hours, or during official breaks, there should be no problem at all. (ACLJ 2012) So the person cannot make it mandatory for anyone to participate in a religious gathering nor c an they hold it against them in terms of gaining a status at a job, and make it into a utilitarian view on them.So what are the outcomes of the utilitarianism over an issue like prayer in the workplace? One can practice their religion on their own personal time as long as it does not conflict with work and can perform their duties while on the job. The greatest good that comes from this view is that all people are comforted in some way or form, exclusively we will always have those who have ethical egoism and that is what the greatest number of people are protected from in the laws that are set forth.Using the view of deontology (Golden Rule) it serves as a good foundation and conventionality of them to treat others. This view however when looked at and studied, that part of scripture is sexual relation the reader not as a reactive approach, save for them to go and do unto others regardless of how they may treat them. Also, the way this view could be used and twisted is if anot her person from a different very radical belief thinks it is right for them to force it upon other people public lecture to them about it at work.No one needs to feel the stresses of a job and then put on top of that, dealing with religious views that one apposes. These laws that were put up were not only to protect the people, but also in a way for the religion. This does not in event mean to keep going up to someone and throwing scripture at them, unless one wants to have a lawsuit against them and the company, but to be capable to meet the other person half-way and realize that I might not like them pushing their beliefs down my throat either.Deontology ethics is grounded in the level Imperative by Immanuel Kent states The Categorical Imperative simply declares act as if thy action were to become by thy will a universal law by nature. We should live our lives to help all mankind and that by this we economise our own morals. Would we be okay with others adopting our actions an d be able to live with what they do to us since we did it first unto them?If we are at a workplace and there are no regulations established on prayers in the workplace and no guidelines whatsoever set in place. Would one put their beliefs out there and start the religious movement at work by their actions, but be able to handle and live peacefully when another religion that strongly apposes theirs comes into the picture? Is it better to just leave it at home rather than starting something that perhaps one may not be able to handle very well?Relativism works hand in hand with this issue simply because it is used as a means to get out of a discussion and end it at a peaceful ending instead of coming out of it with a just answer. This only adds to the ongoing issue and cannot solve a problem in the workplace, there are those who by their faith need to pray a certain amount of numbers a day which can in turn affect their work and if given special treatment for this may cause some d ivision amongst co-workers.With utilitarianism, deontology and relativism we see different ways on how all this could play out in the end and while trying to figure out the right decision for everyone. The laws are there to protect people from having to conform to something that they do not believe in but at the same time must meet the freedom of choice in the other persons personal views as long as it does not hinder the good standing work order.ReferencesMosser K., Bridgeport Education Inc, 2013 Ethics and tender Responsibility Grover S., FFRF Summer 2010 http//ffrf.org/faq/state-church/item/14007-religion-in-the-workplace ACLJ 2012 http//aclj.org/workplace-rights/religious-expression-workplace http//www.allaboutphilosophy.org/deontological-ethics.htm