Yeah, obviously.
What's so obvious about it? The initial example here is facetious and absurd, but what's to say that I don't take my "beard honour" just as seriously as someone else does their religion?
Because I've certainly met people who take their religion very lightly, yet absolutely will use it as an excuse for special treatment at every opportunity.
A less absurd example might be somebody with the delusion (a.k.a strongly held personal belief) that their value as a man depends entirely on their beard, that they might as well kill themselves if they were unable to have one. Or someone with a facial scar tied to incredible emotional trauma that they use their beard to cover up.
The simple fact is that special treatment of religious adherents is discriminatory, not against them, but against everyone else. The root of the problem is that laws that were intended to prevent special maltreatment of religious adherents have instead become leveraged as a basis to grant privileges. When they don't get the job after refusing to follow hygiene protocol, shake hands with certain demographic groups or perform job duties, they sue their employer for discrimination. They demand the job, and demand that the job description be changed to fit their personal preferences.
I agree, it should be as simple as "can you do the job or not". If being clean shaven is part of the job description (which I certainly could find good reasons for, such as gas masks or hygiene) and you refuse to be clean shaven, then you're out.
I do think we agree on the practical implication for jobs - just that laws don't align with that where I'm at. (If you can't/refuse to do the job, you shouldn't be working it)
It's central to the problem. Individuals from religious groups sue employers (often successfully) citing that not hiring them or firing them for refusing to fulfill the job description would be discrimination. (This is not unique to any one group btw)
No. What I'm saying is that they should be solely responsible for the consequences of their faith. Other people should not be forced to give them special treatment due to their religion.
I wasn't. I was creating a hypothetical of somebody non-religous (or at least not an adherent to a major religion) placing greater or equal value on not shaving as a religious person might. The point being that major religions are given preferential treatment as compared to other beliefs and preferences.
There are certainly different ways for religious folks to be faithful. However, in the modern day, literal adherence to many modern religions essentially amount to centering your life around a myth. At best, it is a sign of being misguided and ignorant with regard to scientific fact (which is incompatible with those myths) and at worst it amounts to a delusion (yes, I will use that word). Willfully rejecting overwhelming evidence.
Somebody can be respectable in spite of that, but in my book, it is a clear negative.