A Kosher Deli, A Modern Bakery, and Religious Accommodation

side-images-deli-platterMany years ago I was planning a party at my home for a large crowd. I planned to serve sandwiches, so I called a local deli that had been recommended to me. I discussed the kinds of meat the deli offered, and ordered several pounds of pastrami and corned beef and turkey.

“What about ham?” I asked.

“No ham. We’re kosher,” the proprietor responded.

I hadn’t realized the deli was kosher, but I could do without ham, and I added another pound of pastrami to my order. “And I’d like a cheese platter also,” I said.

“We don’t serve cheese with meat.” Now the proprietor’s tone was curt.

OK Kosher CertifiedI was embarrassed. I knew that keeping kosher meant keeping meat and milk products separate—”thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother’s milk” being one of the dietary commandments in Exodus and Deuteronomy. But I had forgotten. I knew the deli offered both meats and cheeses for sale, but apparently they did not sell them together.

I was a member of the public placing an order with this deli. But it never once occurred to me to insist that I be sold both meat and cheese in violation of the proprietor’s religious beliefs. In fact, I felt I had been insensitive to his desire to operate his business in accordance with his religion. It was my faux pas, not his, I thought, though I did think he could have been a little more gentle in his response to me.

If I did not get indignant at my desire for cheese being refused, why do homosexual couples think that the owner of a bakery who believes gay marriage is not acceptable must sell them a wedding cake?

And why do people wanting birth control medications or devices think that a pharmacist must sell such goods when the pharmacist believes birth control is immoral?

Should I have insisted on getting my cheese at the same place as my meat? I don’t think so. Or canceled my meat order because I couldn’t get the cheese? That was my perogative, but it wasn’t worth bothering. There were plenty of other places to get my cheese.

I recognize that our nation’s history is full of examples of people being refused service because of their race, their gender, their national origin, their religion. I believe that in most of those situations, the business owners were wrong.

But let us also recognize that our nation was founded by people seeking the freedom to practice their religion as they saw fit. Religious freedom is one of our bedrock principles.

In most situations, we should permit business owners to set their own terms for what they will and will not offer for sale and when they will sell certain products. We should accommodate people’s attempts to make their livelihood in a manner that is consistent with their consciences. In a society as pluralistic as ours, there should be room to accommodate our differences.

Why can’t we just give each other some space to live and let live?



Filed under Diversity, Law, Philosophy

4 responses to “A Kosher Deli, A Modern Bakery, and Religious Accommodation

  1. Pingback: Who Must Raise the Topic of Religious Accommodation in the Workplace? | Sara Rickover, Behind the Corporate Veil

  2. Rural Mom AR

    But if a homosexual couple came in, would the proprietor have sold them the same pastrami available to every other customer?

    Your analogy works only marginally works for the birth control debate – it would work better if you were an employee of the deli and they told you that you couldn’t use your earned dollars to purchase ham elsewhere. Because the government allowed separate riders so that employees could pick up birth control coverage with their own dollars, separate of what employees pay for the rest of the health coverage, because the government was going to fund that portion for employers who raised a religious exception. And some employers said that still wasn’t good enough, that it was still enabling the employees access to birth control. Which is ridiculous, because to believe it means paying an employee a paycheck enables the employees access to birth control. Why does the employer care whether the employee selects a health care rider that the government pays for or uses their own after tax funds o purchase health care? Either way, it has been funded by someone other than the employer.

    Your analogy does not work at all in the case of bakeries refusing same sex couples. Would the deli refuse to sell to a same sex couples the same pastrami available to all of its other customers?

    • The argument for the bakery and florist turns in part on whether wedding cakes and wedding arrangements require more artistic license than pastrami sandwiches and the off-the-shelf floral bouquets. You argue not, while the defendants in these cases disagreed with you.
      In the florist’s case, the Washington State Supreme Court has recently agreed with you. See http://www.adfmedia.org/files/ArlenesFlowersWSCopinion.pdf. It will be interesting to see if the case is appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court, and if the Court takes the case, how it is decided.
      Thanks for the comment.

  3. There’s a huge difference between a deli not selling you a cheese platter and a pharmacist refusing to dispense birth control. The consequences of not getting a cheese platter are that you don’t have cheese or you have to buy it somewhere else. In some communities there is limited access to health care and so the consequence of not getting Plan B may be an unwanted child. Hardly the same thing.

Please leave a comment

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.