Imagine walking to the cashier of a store, with a basket of groceries in your hand. You start placing your bags of fruits and vegetables on the conveyor belt. It whirrs as it carries a box of tomatoes to the cashier, who picks it up and grimaces. In an instant, she fixes her posture and resumes her customer-friendly smile. “I'm sorry, I can't sell you this. I, unfortunately, dislike tomatoes,” she smiles sweetly; it begins to get frustrating. A question lingers in your head: the cashier isn't the one eating the tomato, why should her opinions impact what you can buy? For some people, this dystopian situation is rooted in reality. People of differing genders, sexualities, and more do not get service in some stores and companies due to the fact that their lifestyles may go against the employees’ beliefs. This discrimination can often be given exemptions on the basis of religion. However, religious exemptions should not be granted if they infringe upon the rights of others due to the fact that they present a double standard and are being used as excuses to discriminate against marginalized groups.

To begin, discriminatory religious exemptions should not be granted because they create a double standard. For example, according to the article “Religious Freedom Is Protected for Some More Than Others”, “In 2019, Miracle Hill Ministries in South Carolina got a waiver to participate in federally funded foster care even though it turns away Jews, Muslims, and others- working only with Christians” (Mikva 1). This presents a double standard as the religious freedom given to Christians suppresses the religions of others. This causes the purpose of the law, to provide religious freedom, to backfire, which highlights the ineptitude and harmfulness of discriminatory religious exemptions. Moreover, according to late Supreme Court member Ruth Bader Ginsburg, the court allows, “‘...the religious beliefs of some overwhelm the rights and interests of others who do not share those beliefs’” (Mikva 2). This expresses how a double standard is provided, even in law. This overrides the beliefs of others and can cause laws to become pious, which is unconstitutional. This is a double standard as others’ beliefs and interests become belittled in order to cater to a religion, even if the religion is in the minority. This is discriminatory since it overwhelms other religions in favor of another. Finally, a double standard is created when other religions are not given religious liberty. For example, a Muslim Ban was coded into law; this prevented refugees from certain countries from entering the country due to being Muslim (Timeline 1). This shows a double standard as religious freedom is only protected for some religions, while others are suppressed from even entering the country. This shows the uselessness of discriminatory religious exemptions as it often harms other groups in the process, which oftentimes does not provide religious freedom. 

Another reason religious exemptions should not be granted if they harm the rights of others is that religion can be used as an excuse to discriminate without consequences. For example, the article “Religious Liberty Isn’t Enough” states, “...we [conservatives] must avoid the trap of framing every debate as if it were about religious liberty” (Anderson 2). This sentence, written by someone who supports discriminatory religious exemptions, shows firsthand how people may often use religion as an excuse to discriminate. This is shown because the author states that religious liberty is a ‘trap’ set up in debates, which proves that religion is a second thought in the arguments; this means they simply want to discriminate without consequence. Furthermore, many religions often teach their followers to not discriminate against others. For instance, the Bible states, “...‘Truly I understand that God shows no partiality,’” (Acts 10:34), while the Qur’an writes that “Allah does not forbid you from showing kindness and dealing justly…” (Qur’an 60:8). Furthermore, the Hindu religion teaches others “...that the Divine is equally present in all” (Hindu 1). These teachings show that discrimination is unacceptable in several religions and cannot be used as an excuse in order to discriminate against others; it would disobey the religion. This emphasizes the futility of discriminatory religious exemptions since they would defy the main rules of the religions themselves, to not discriminate. 

Contrarily, others may say that religious teachings may back up scientific points of view, such as the belief that transgender people are the gender they were assigned at birth. The article “Religious Liberty Isn’t Enough” emphasizes this by clarifying, “The scientific point of view confirms the biblical teaching that humans are created male and females” (Anderson 2). This shows that some people may not believe that what they are doing is discrimination; they believe they are scientifically and religiously correct. However, the biblical teaching evidenced in the article is untrue, it actually states that “...there is no male and female, for you are all one in Jesus Christ” (Galatians 3:28). This shows that one’s perceived gender does not matter in religion and that they should not be treated differently for their chosen gender. Additionally, science defends transgender people. A study from Harvard titled “A Sex Difference in the Human Brain and its Relation to Transsexuality” discloses that, “A female-sized BSTc was found in male-to-female transsexuals” (Zhou, Hoffman, Gooren, and Swab 1). This evidences that transgender people’s brains match up to their chosen gender, not their assigned sex at birth. This refutes the scientific and religious arguments against transgender people as both religious texts and medical studies dispute the claim that transgender people are the gender they were assigned at birth.

Ultimately, religious exemptions should not be granted if they infringe upon the rights of others due to the evidence provided above. This is a crucial issue that should matter today because the rights of marginalized groups are often overlooked in favor of other groups, and these laws often emphasize it. Furthermore, it is a repeat of history; several people used religion as an excuse for continued segregation and racism. It is imperative that the future does not come to this dystopia so that we never end up in a situation where we cannot buy tomatoes because a cashier dislikes them! Do not be compliant; speak up about these issues and vote for people that advocate for equality and fairness for all.

Works Cited

Zhou, J N et al. “A sex difference in the human brain and its relation to transsexuality.” Nature

vol. 378,6552 (1995): 68-70. doi:10.1038/378068a0,

 pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/7477289/

Author Unknown, “Discrimination in Hinduism: What’s Hinduism and What’s Just Human

Nature?”, Hindu American,

hinduamerican.org/blog/discrimination-in-hinduism-what-is-hinduism-what-is-human-nature/

Anderson, Ryan T. "Religious Liberty Isn't Enough." Wall Street Journal, 01 Feb 2021. SIRS

Issues Researcher,

explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2499195227?accountid=68117.

Mikva, Rachel S., Corey D. B. Walker, and Reza Aslan. "Religious Freedom Is Protected for

Some More Than Others." Los Angeles Times, 19 Jun 2021. SIRS Issues Researcher,

explore.proquest.com/sirsissuesresearcher/document/2543542822?accountid=68117.

Author Unknown, “Timeline of the Muslim Ban”, ACLU Washington,

aclu-wa.org/pages/timeline-muslim-ban

Author Unknown, “What Does Islam Say About Prejudice and Discrimination?”, BBC,

bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/ztgrpbk/revision/6

Author Unknown, “What Does the Bible Say About Discrimination?”, OpenBible,

openbible.info/topics/discrimination