Is Orthodox Christianity Privileged?
Last night on my flight from DFW to Abilene, the flight attendant had a big badge proclaiming, “He is risen!”
Before I go on, let me say this: if anyone is going to wear that message, this is the woman I’d choose. She was kind, patient, and skilled. She struck me as the kind of person that gives Christianity a better reputation.
However, I got to wondering, should American Eagle permit a flight attendant to wear something so overtly religious? Of course, as a Christ-follower, that’s a message that’s central to what I believe.
But, if a flight attendant can wear that, couldn’t others wear buttons that say:
“He is not risen!”
“Jesus isn’t God’s Son!”
“Joseph Smith is God’s prophet!”
“Islam rules!”
“I believe in Wicca!”
“There is no God. Quit worrying about it!”
I can imagine that several of these buttons would cause a bit of a stir. I’m guessing American Eagle wouldn’t permit them to be worn. So, in all fairness, should they permit “He is risen”? Is orthodox Christianity privileged at this point? What do you think? Can and should an employer limit the messages that are communicated while representing the company and on company time?
By the way, this is the same kind of dilemma public school administrators have when asked about teachers who wear religious messages (like the button you mentioned).
At first you think: What’s wrong with a teacher wearing a predominantly religious message in a community where most people agree? But then you have to ask: Can you fairly allow that but then not allow another vantage point?
If you allow a teacher to wear a pro-life button in January (anniversary of Roe v. Wade), don’t you also have to allow a pro-choice button?
How do you know it was about Christ? Maybe it was a comment on the take off.
I can readily imagine American Eagle allowing other “positive message” religious buttons. The star of David. The crescent moon and star of Islam. Ying and yang. The coexist symbol. Some of them would cause more stir than others. But I imagine the farther you got from the Dallas-Abilene corridor, the less stir they would cause.
Faith might best be “worn” in how one lives rather than with some campaign button. There is something about assuming the role of missionary that doesn’t work so well these days. As a matter of fact, it iss highly presumptive.
Christianity is a marketable property because many adherents choose to purchase items which represent their faith. In communities with a larger Jewish population, the same is becoming true. Neither positive nor negative, just marketable.
As to the wearing of the button on a commercial flight, while the people on the flight are in a sense a “captive” audience, they are there by choice. The flight attendant carries First Amendment rights with him/her. A public school has a coerced audience and therefore while First Amendment rights are not completely abandoned at the door, professional and contractual practice makes it incumbent upon persons in authority in an educational system to practice restraint.
Freda – Let me make sure I understand. Since the people fly American Eagle by choice, First Amendment rights allow her to wear the button. Could the button say, “Vote Pro-Choice”? Or “Palin 2012″? Or “The resurrection never happened”? How about “Boycott American Eagle”? or “Check out Wicca”?
I’m guessing that managers at Dillard’s, for example, don’t permit their employees to wear “missionary buttons” like this — just to protect First Amendment rights.
The question doesn’t seem to be about whether a passenger should be allowed to wear such a button. The question raised here is whether Eagle should permit that by an employee. Right?
Of course Larry has raised an altogether different question: Is that kind of statement effective in this religious climate? Will someone at the end of the flight be convinced who wasn’t before?
To put it another way, Freda: If you were the manager of the local Starbucks, would you permit one of your baristas to wear a pro-Islam button?
STOP THE PRESSES! qb agrees with LJ! Story at 10.
qb
I posted this quote on my blog a few weeks ago:
“The primary confession of the Christian before the world is the deed which interprets itself.”
–Dietrich Bonhoeffer
Ducking the question entirely: It sounds like your flight attendant didn’t need to wear a button explaining her faith ….
Ok, QB. Pausing before class starts to say: That’s funny. It’s a place to begin!
And Keith — you’re right. This woman struck me as one who definitely lives out her faith.
GRH – The question I’m raising is whether an employer should/would allow this (or Wicca, Mormonism, Islam, etc.) no matter where they are.
Forgetting my faith-based reaction of “PTL! and thank you, flight attendent,” but answering from a strictly cultural stance, Christianity has been the culturally accepted ‘religion’ of the USofA since the 17th century. As such, I have no problem with Christianity’s presumed and probable privileged place in today’s culture. Ergo, I’ve no problem with a Christian message being proclaimed on American Eagle, but would hesitate if a Wicca, Islam, Atheist message were worn on their uniforms.
I agree with LJ to a point. If she had worn her “He Is Risen” button and had not expressed her belief in actions to the passengers, then her badge would mean nothing. However, if her faith is expressed in actions and then made known through a public statement of religious identity, I’d say it’s much like “love and marriage”. The song says, “You can’t have one without the other.”
He is risen, indeed.
I’d agree, however, that wearing a button like that means that others should be able to wear one expressing their beliefs.
If I was wanting people to know what fueled my kindness, patience, etc, I’d be more likely to go with a small cross or holy spirit necklace. Something recognizable but not quite so “in your face”. But that’s just me.
What Larry & reJoyce said…..
If there’s to be a lapel-pin war with the “He Is Not Risen” crowd, qb thinks he might choose to pin a copy of N. T. Wright’s _The Resurrection of the Son of God_ on his own lapel. It would be a sight to behold!
qb
Uniform restrictions are the choice of the company. Apparently, American Eagle has less strict guidelines than Dillards. No judgment of right or wrong, just observation. If the company guideline has no restriction, then “Wicca Wins” is a valid 1st Amendment button opinion.
Let everybody wear the badges they want. We shouldn’t try to eliminate religion from public places. If a gal wears a star of David I might engage her in a word about Messiah, etc.
qb – I’ll wear my NTW tome if you’ll wear yours.
Paul – Let me push back just a bit. What if the badges border on poor taste? What if it is obscene or suggestive? What if I as a parent don’t want my children to see something like that? What if it promoted the KKK or Jihad?
The question isn’t, I don’t think, whether we should eliminate religion from public places. I’m on board with avoiding the naked square. Nor is it whether a company should be forced by government to disallow such. The question is: Doesn’t an employer have the right to restrict what an employee is wearing when they’re representing the company? And in this case, wouldn’t it be wise for American Eagle not to allow such buttons?
Can a company . . . and should a company . . . put limits on what their employees wear? What I’m suggesting is that our answer here needs some consistency. If I manage a United supermarket in Abilene, is it appropriate for me to tell an employee that a “pro-choice” button can’t be worn? or “pro-life”? or “Support Obama”? or “Palin 2012″? or “www.wiccarules.com”?
Again — this isn’t about the effectiveness of wearing such a button. I’m quite convinced that it isn’t missionally effective; if anything it is off-putting. (Her life, it seemed in that short time, was just the opposite!)
Nor is it about whether a person traveling on the plane — not employed by the company or on company time (and therefore leaving an impression for the company) — could wear such a pin.
Here’s a story from Dan Kimball. I don’t like the t-shirt, but I’d support the man’s right to wear it. I would not, however, want such a message worn (by large button) by a flight attendant or pilot.
“Recently I was in the airport in Dallas waiting to board a plane when I spotted a young man in his twenties wearing a black T-shirt with the word intolerant in large capital letters on the front. Below the word, the shirt says, ‘Jesus says,’ which made it look like Jesus was being quoted as saying ‘Intolerant.’ It also said, ‘He is the way, the truth, and the life.’ When I spotted this shirt, I thought, ‘Uh oh.’ I was afraid to look at the back of it, but I didn’t have a choice. As the young man got ready to board the plane, he turned and I saw that the entire back of his shirt listed in big bold letters: ‘Islam is a lie! Homosexuality is sin! Abortion is murder!’ Everyone nearby noticed the shirt. While we were standing in line to board the plane, I watched people’s faces as they read the shirt, and I kept wondering, What if a Muslim is reading this? What if someone was wearing a ‘Christianity is a lie!’ shirt? Imagine the emotions we would feel about that.”
Lots of people want to “speak the truth”. Not so many want to do it “in love”.
DU
Amen to what DU said!!!
Count qb as one of the “city set on a hill cannot be hid” and “they will know you are my disciples if you have love for one another” crowd, those who see a deep and tragic irony in the apparent need to resort to bumper stickers, marquees, T-shirts and all the rest in order to be seen as a disciple of Jesus. Kenneson’s arguments in his _Selling Out the Church_ apply here in principle, though the book itself is a critique of marketing the church.
qb
Only problem is, Mike, how would we protect our rather prodigious “lapel pins” from the fresh guac slithering off our Van Dykes as we nosh at the new A28 Mecca of DFW? I hadn’t thought that one through far enuff. qb
if i ever own or manage a company, i shall not allow my employees to wear buttons, t-shirts, visible tattoos, marijuana cigarettes, ice sculptures, and/or sandwich boards that speak in favor of a particular religion, political party, beer, condom, or economic system.
i would prefer for my customers to be comfortable with my employees and not to be offended in any way by them. i also want my employees to sell our products / services, and not their own ideas and principles. what’s the point in allowing extra barriers between employee and client?
Kathy, a little correction to what you said, about Christianity being the accepted religion of the USofA since the 17th century: Of course, there wasn’t a USofA until 3/4 or the way through the 18th century, but I think you probably meant in “America” Christianity has been the dominant religion since the 17th century. But that wouldn’t be true either because 90% of “America” was then still inhabited by Indians, who of course, had a totally different set of religious beliefs.
My point is really not to correct you, but to show that societies change. Likely, religion will soon be as limp in the USofA as it presently is in western Europe. And as the resident agnostic here, I am glad. I would feel awkward around a flight attendant with “He is Risen!” on her lapel. But, I celebrate that she has a right under the law to do that (though I would prefer American Eagle ask her to keep her superstitions to herself).
Wow! Why do we always run from pole to pole in the name of political correctness, missional affectiveness and cultural sensitivity to talk about something in the middle! In context (Easter time, America, an airline with the American name, a modest button) this is but individual expression that probably was little thought of and would be quite a surprise to this person that people were engaged in debate over it. The biblical mandate to live quiet lives is not about living invisible lives. Relax and let faith shine… save the debate for the in your face passenger who brings a 7 ft cross on board and wants help putting it in the overhead bin.
dan,
but what if it were just a button for drinking guinness on st. patrick’s day? or for voting for obama on election day? i have no problem at all with those pins. but i wouldn’t want my employees to wear them. not while they’re on my clock, dealing with my customers…
Not going from pole to pole.
It’s a relatively small thing, yes. But it relates to some larger issues. Sometimes it is easier for me to think through the smaller, specific thing.
Okay… a facet of a jewel is in relationship to the jewel as a whole and often the details of an issue are vital to the meta-narrative or bigger picture… I humbly concede. What wisdom do we employ however to determine if we are straining at the gnat? If the issue is what can we exhibit other than behavior to give testimony to faith my gnat is that it can’t be culturally driven yet culturally sensitive. It IS a good question to ask oneself, “Is this going to be received as ‘in your face’?” The point being –how do we become Christ to the world (the real meta-narrative). That said, I’ve seen people respond to jewelry, bumper stickers, T-Shirts, volunteer service, unexpected service and kindness and the list goes on. So maybe I can be bold enough to say, “Happy Easter!”
The question was, does she have the right to wear it at work, or, does AA have the right to prevent her from wearing it.
The answer is that AA has the right to prevent her if they choose. The First Amendment applies to states and the federal government (No state shall…). It does not normally apply to private entities (setting aside for a moment the whole commerce clause reasoning that was used to expand such rights/restrictions to private entities i.e. segregated lunch counters, etc).
So yes, an employer can limit what an emplyee does or does not wear. (within reason) Should they? I guess that depends on what business they are in and whether they are worried about offending clients/customers. However, it is not a First Amendment issue.
This is NOT intended to be legal advice and you are instructed NOT to rely upon same!
I worked with a company in which the owner decided to put “second chance” and the symbol of the fish on all materials and advertising related to his work. I suggested that it might be better if he left that off. He then began to tell me how this was important for people to know who and what he represents. I responded with, “if you have to show them with a symbol, then maybe you should rethink the ethics and actions of your business.” I have strong feelings about this, and I believe in a wide separation between church and businesses, schools, and government.
Good for her! She had the guts to let people know that she was most likely a Christian.
Sorry Mike, I guess I missed the point. I thought the question was whether or not orthodox Christianity was priveleged, to which I answer (mostly) no. Several religions could do the same thing with few ripples.
If the question, however, is whether or not an employer should allow such buttons, it has everything to do with the employer and his clientele. If I owned a business seeking a broad base of customers, I would not allow potentially offensive buttons. If I owned a Christian bookstore I would only allow Christian buttons. If I owned a small construction company (very little customer interaction) I would probably allow almost anything that was not intentionally inflammatory.
Orthodox is as orthodox does. In a (our) pluralistic society, everyone “believes” that they are orthodox…but only those who live with respect to what their belief system really stands for should be considered orthodox. So, good people of all belief systems…including Christianity…should wear their badge, but it’s the badge on the inside that will be believed by onlookers.
I think there is a bigger question that we are missing. By Christians, in some regions, making full use of their priviledged right in society to ‘advertise’ our faith, is this not having the adverse reaction in the larger culture/society?
And this question seems all the more pointed when we find, unlike this woman in Mike’s story, Christian’s who advertise their faith through t-shirts, bracelets, bumper-stickers, blairing Christian radio for all to hear, etc… and yet exhibit an attitude and behavior much like the rest of the world.
Grace and peace,
Rex
It’s interesting to see what generates the most comments on your blog, Mike.
However, it’s a well established legal principle, that an employer may establish reasonable dress codes for their employees. And may, at their option, prohibit the wearing of pins such as the one you describe. This is base upon the idea that the employee is representing the employer while the employee is on the job.
Conversely, the employee may be free to wear such pins in the absence of a policy prohibiting it.
As you would expect, the permission or prohibition of such pins must apply equally and uniformly, regardless of the point of view expressed on the pin.
A bit of levity for y’all …. a pastor I know once said in response to this question of do we exhibit our faith only by the way we live …. responded, “How successful would a shoe salesman be if he merely pointed to beautifully crafted and well maintained shoes he’s attempting to sell, but uttering not a word about their worth?”
As mentioned previously, we really can’t – shouldn’t have one without the other – both open expression of our faith, as well as quiet, serene, ‘good’ lives.
I love this discussion as to acts versus advertising your faith. It reminds me of a scene I witnessed Sunday.
I was late to church (as usual!) and I dropped my wife off at the front and went to park. As I was walking to the building, a car approached the stop sign and without even slowing down ran right through it. The car then proceeded to park in the same lot as I had. I watched as a man, woman, and two small children exited the vehicle and proceeded into church. It made me laugh to think that here was a man breaking the law on his way to church. Too funny!
there are people in china that break the law on the way to church every sunday…
and many of them are also quite talented at sharing the gospel without wearing pins and t-shirts — or having assemblies in large buildings with family life centers, for that matter.
(they wear t-shirts, and sometimes even pins there — just not advertising Christianity. and here all you guys were thinking there were no t-shirts in china…)
Really? They run stop signs too? Or do they speed? Or just park illegally?
In China, they may have to. In Abilene, Texas, they don’t!
Nice try. Not the same!
only a joke, charlie… only a joke.
As was my reply. Not all get my humor. No offense intended. Hope none taken.
Not trying to hijack this post, but how is Tanzania? I have a good friend who (I think. Those countries confuse me sometimes!) has spent some time there and he swears it is just beautiful.
Keep up your good work there and I will keep praying for you and your family.
CS
I’m wearing my Star of David!
NO, employees should not wear any kind of “religious” attire. I’ve decided against doing business with certain companies based on bumper stickers I’ve seen on some of their vehicles.
not a First Amendment issue, because as pointed out above by others, this State/Goverment is not involved. However, many employers wisely choose to prohibit the wearing of any such buttons. It can be seen as discriminatory under Title VII (the federal legislitation that prohibits discrimination based on race, sex, gender, and RELIGION), if you allow Christians to wear a faith-based pin but not other religions.
charlie, i figured you were joking, but didn’t know what to write in response…
tanzania is a good place; i’ve only been here a year now, and it’s honestly not where i would’ve chosen to be, but i’m happy to serve God where he calls me. who is your friend that spends some time here? if you are indeed from abilene, i just spent much of last week with someone you may know: one wimon walker. he runs acu’s study abroad program in uruguay, and was in town for just a quick week. also, in keeping with our continued subject of breaking laws, my uncle is a policeman in abilene.
i guess i should apologize to mr. cope, as well, for conspiring with you to hijack his post. if you want to talk further, charlie, shoot me an email. you can find it on my blog under ‘partners.’
It’s interesting to see what generates the most comments on your blog, Mike.
However, it’s a well established legal principle, that an employer may establish reasonable dress codes for their employees. And may, at their option, prohibit the wearing of pins such as the one you describe. This is base upon the idea that the employee is representing the employer while the employee is on the job.
Conversely, the employee may be free to wear such pins in the absence of a policy prohibiting it.
As you would expect, the permission or prohibition of such pins must apply equally and uniformly, regardless of the point of view expressed on the pin.