Professor Won’t Wear Device to Accommodate Deaf Student Because It Violates Her Faith

[KamaAina]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/friendlyatheist/2015/09/17/professor-wont-wear-device-to-accommodate-deaf-student-because-it-violates-her-faith/

You would think professors would go out of their way to help out students in their classes. Every now and then, though, you hear about some who pull a Kim Davis. They’ll find a religious excuse to avoid doing something ridiculously simple even when it would make another person’s life so much better.

William Sears, a student with a hearing disability at Memorial University (Newfoundland), has a simple request. He needs his teachers to wear a sound-transmitting device so he can hear them more clearly.

But one professor, Dr. Ranee Panjabi, refuses to do it because it violates her religious beliefs:...

I’m not sure what Panjabi’s religion is. But I can’t recall any holy book saying adherents should always screw over people with disabilities.

[louis-t]

1. Disturbing.

Organized religion, in general, is disturbing.

[randys1]

27. Between organized religion in America and guns in America, I am amazed there is any of us left

[yeoman6987]

63. Newfoundland is in America? Who knew.

[Thor_MN]

74. I did. Lots of people do. Mexico is also.

[yeoman6987]

78. You know that the story is foreign and not the United States?

Newfoundland has never been part of our country.....ever!

[PersonNumber503602]

87. Oh come on now. Next you're going to try telling us that Europe isn't a state in the US.

[Yo_Mama]

98. It must be, because there are Georgians over there, and everyone knows GA is in the US.

Deeply enjoying this subthread.

[Thor_MN]

93. No one said it was part of the UNITED STATES.

Newfoundland is, and has been part of America since it was named Newfoundland....

[Hortensis]

33. Yes, me too, but freedom of religion is glorious. You know, we have NO idea

what her religious prohibition is. So how can we speak to that, or be so quick to condemn her religious rights? BTW, I was unable to find her on googling, didn't keep trying.

Seemingly her religion does not keep her from performing the routine duties everyone in her position should be able to perform. Very, very unlike an airline hostess who won't serve alcohol; if it doesn't burden the airline, I bet it can burden her coworkers.

[awoke_in_2003]

58. It is a glorious club

that some love to beat people in the head with and not do there job. We give far too much creedence to fairy tales in this country

[Hortensis]

82. Agree they're frightening - always, but their successes are in direct

proportion to our negligence. We can stop them cold any time we get serious about it. Assuming that's before a coup, of course. I never forget all the people in Iran who thought it couldn't happen there.

[Recursion]

79. She's not following an organised religion

She says it is contrary to her personal spirituality.

[nichomachus]

2. Then she should find another job nt

[cstanleytech]

11. Why? Didnt the student have other options like tape recording class for later review?

I mean surely that could be done unless tape recorders are banned as well.

[nichomachus]

14. The student shouldn't have to

How do you ask questions of a tape recording?

The teacher nees to do her damn job. Fuck her bizarre religious beliefs.

[cstanleytech]

23. Surely there are other options than forcing the teacher to wear an FM transmitter though?

For example what about setting up 2 or 3 parabolic microphones in the class? That should work just as well shouldnt it?

[nichomachus]

32. Yeah, she can get a new job

Screw her religious beliefs

[cstanleytech]

49. Yes I am sure you sway many with that kind of attitude. nt

[nichomachus]

60. If you can't fulfill the requirements of a job, get a new job.

This "religious beliefs" crap is getting out of hand. Most of it is just made-up stuff.

If you are Amish, don't apply for a job as a bus driver. See, that wasn't hard.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

84. I'm willing to guess 'wear a transmitter' was nowhere in her job description.

And probably still isn't.

[smirkymonkey]

89. +1000

[snagglepuss]

42. It is a tiny device that has to be worn close to the body because

what it does is cancel out background noise. It is the reduction of background noise that is essential. Microphones placed away from the body pick up background noise.

[cstanleytech]

48. Thank you, that makes sense then. nt

[Glassunion]

3. Don't forget that flight attendant who refused to serve booze on her flights.

Doesn't she realize without booze, I will not get on a plane?

[KamaAina]

6. That one is a little bit easier to understand.

The flight attendant is Muslim. Muslims aren't supposed to drink alcohol. (Actually, the Qu'ran warns against drunkenness, so a liberal interpretation might allow drinking in moderation. ) But there are plenty of Muslims who work as waitstaff who serve drinks to their customers. And there are lots of Muslims who run neighborhood markets that sell liquor.

[Warpy]

7. She's not allowed to drink it.

She's not allowed to push that proscription off on people who don't share her religion.

And yes, it's a proscription against drunkenness, not alcohol itself. After all, it's only recently the water everywhere has been safer to drink, if you're lucky enough to be in an area with a potable water delivery system. People relied on alcohol in wine and ale to kill the bugs.

[Glassunion]

13. Well then... To her point, I do need to be a bit tipsy before I get on a plane...

It terrifies me.

[Warpy]

16. There's a world of difference between tipsy and blotto

and the Quran is against the latter.

Funny, flying doesn't bother me and I was in a crash landing when I was seven. If anything happens, it will be quick and there won't be enough left for your nearest and dearest to have to pay for an elaborate funeral.

[Glassunion]

25. For me it qualifies as a phobia.

It's completely irrational. I consider myself a logical fella, and I'm well aware that I'm exponentially more likely to be harmed riding my motorcycle to the airport, than I am on the flight, but for some reason I can't shake it. Exposure does not help much. I fly rather frequently. So... 4 lagers and I'm good to go.

[Warpy]

46. I suppose it involves the complete loss of control

plus never actually buying into the aerodynamics that hold the plane up. It sucks if you have to do a lot of flying for work.

[Travis_0004]

31. The good news for her is I'm not muslim

So I can drink all I want. If she doesn't want to do her job, get a new job.

[Warpy]

47. That's rather my point

She shouldn't be trying to control the behavior of non Muslims.

Like most extremely pious people, she's abandoned all personal boundaries.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

53. A flight attendant won't server you ...

... until you are already on the plane.

If only there were bars on the concourse ...

[markpkessinger]

21. Here is what the EEOC's website says about this . . .

From the EEOC's Religious Discrimination web page:

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

On any given flight, there are typically at least two flight attendants. The EEOC likely concluded that scheduling the Muslim flight attendant on flights with a second, non-Muslim flight attendant who could serve those who desired alcoholic beverages would not constitute "more than a minimal burden" on the airline.

[joeybee12]

40. Not necessarily...

Sounds to me this is a small airline with short connections...sometimes there's only one attendant, which means this Muslim lady gets to pick and choose her schedule...and the airline also has to put a second attendant on with her...I don't call that reasonable. Also, I don't recall this woman asking to be transferred to a different position in the company..smacks of Kim Davis-type oppotunistic and lazy.

[markpkessinger]

57. You may well be right about that . . .

. . . I was under the impression -- I now realize I was wrong -- that the EEOC had already ruled on the matter. In fact, the flight attendant only filed her EEOC complaint a few days ago. So we'll have to see how the EEOC rules on the matter. And one of the determinations they will have to make is whether or not a reasonable accommodation can be made for this flight attendant that is not more than minimally burdensome for the airline.

[NutmegYankee]

64. I think the accommodation was revoked because co-workers complained.

And they have a fair point - if their workload increases because of someone's refusing to do a job, that is no longer a minimal burden. From the articles I read, it appears the other attendant had to supply the drinks entirely (rolling cart and pouring into cups), which is one of the largest chores on a flight.

[Bluenorthwest]

88. It's easy to find out that they use 5 types of aircraft all short flights. 3 aircraft types use just

one flight attendant, the other two have two classes of service, one attendant for each class. So to accommodate an attendant who won't serve alcohol would require that she be assigned only to the 2 craft that use 2 attendants, then the other attendant has to serve alcohol to the entire plane, which on such a short flight is a major portion of the job as well as being the worst and most labor intensive part of the job.
She can give the safety announcement. Nice work if you can get it.

[snagglepuss]

45. WHere is the Koran does it say not to touch a bottle containing alcohol?

It doesn't. This is the same bullshit with with Somali cab drivers who refused to pick up passengers at an airport who were carrying duty free alcohol.

[markpkessinger]

56. That is probably correct, but . . .

. . . The government isn't in the business of determining whether or not a person's claim to a particular religious belief is valid under that person's claimed religion. Nor is a person asserting a particular religious belief requiring accommodation under any legal burden of proving that the a claimed religious belief is spelled out anywhere at all. If that were required, it would put the government (the courts specifically) in a position of having to rule on matters of religious belief -- something that they are barred from doing under the First Amendment.

[snagglepuss]

68. Point taken. Religious accomodation

is therefore more a slippery slope than I thought it was. DOes this mean if a male teacher doesn;t want to teach girls with bare arms, he wont have to teach them?

[markpkessinger]

69. You'd have to put that question to the EEOC!

[markpkessinger]

70. Your question, of course, points precisely to the problem inherent in the Hobby Lobby ruling n/t

[christx30]

37. What about the Christian pharmacist that refuses

to fill prescriptions for birth control or Plan B? "I can't do it. But Mike will. He's at lunch right now. Should be back in an hour." How far down the rabbit hole you want to go in other peoples' religious beliefs determining how we live our lives?

[appalachiablue]

43. Scotch, we know quite a few male Muslims and Sikhs who imbibe daily, heavily and with pleasure.

Not to be judgmental, but there are exceptions everywhere.

[MADem]

67. Doesn't say a thing about SERVING alcohol. That's a fundy invention.

Alcohol is an ARABIC word--Persians invented beer, fachrissake.

That flight attendant (who doesn't understand the full history or flavor of her new religion) was appropriately suspended. She worked for four years doing the job, at an airline that mostly flew one-flight attendant aircraft, where no 'reasonable accommodation' would be possible without adding an unnecessary attendant (and losing a customer seat) to her a/c, then she decided she couldn't do it anymore.

If she suddenly decides she can't do the job, she needs to move on.

I have no sympathy for her--no one is telling her she has to do shots with the customers. Just hand them their purchase and swipe their card.

It's like that idiot clerk in KY--no one is telling her she has to attend the gay weddings or even conduct the ceremony--just sign the paper, hand it over to the happy couple, and file a record of the transaction. She's not "approving" or "disapproving"--she's just recording.

[Mosby]

92. what about a clerk or cashier touching a package of pork?

Is that covered in the Koran or hadiths?

I wonder if these prohibitions about touching alcohol or pork come from hadiths. The one about dogs does and according to Dr. Abou El Fadl the hadith is false.

[MADem]

94. They aren't "touching the pork" though--that's another stupidity.

They are touching a piece of cardboard, containing shrink wrapped plastic, in which is contained cured bacon. They aren't even "serving" it--they're simply recording a transaction between the store and the customer.

You can be damn sure if Daddy needed a pig valve to keep his heart beating, they'd find a way to get over their objections to these foolish 'prohibitions.'

http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-the-scholar/health-and-science/169197-heart-valve-transplant-from-a-pig.html?Science=


I know many of Muslims (Jews, too) who, well...fucking LOVE bacon. Turkey or soy bacon will not do--they like the real stuff.

Years ago, in the awful heat of Mesopotamia, Persia, Arabia, North Africa, and environs, the swine prohibition made sense...but nowadays, we have refrigeration. It's just silly.


And the guidance is kinda this--if that's all there is to eat, well, eat it, but not too much, and don't LIKE IT too much, either.....

http://quran.com/2/173

[Mosby]

95. I read somewhere recently that the one food

That can make a vegetarian "fall off the wagon" is bacon.

I found a link:

http://www.npr.org/sections/health-shots/2011/02/02/133304206/why-bacon-is-a-gateway-to-meat-for-vegetarians

I have to admit I love bacon, but I try not to eat pork for ethical reasons.

[MADem]

97. Bacon is delicious. Not good for us, so we should eat it just occasionally...but it IS goooooood!!!

[randys1]

29. Oh no you didnt

I remember when they banned smoking.

I am like "are you fucking kidding me, if I cant chain smoke while flying, the plane is CERTAIN to crash"

[Quackers]

62. Neither will most pilots.

[Rex]

4. Mythbusters #101 - not all teachers are Dems or liberal or secular.

Some of the most backwards -religion stuck way up their asses- people I've met, are teachers in public schools. Some will push their religious views onto their students without an ounce of shame.

[LiberalArkie]

12. I high school I had a trig teacher and an electronic teacher that would always

write on the black board, covering up the writing and then ask me a question with there backs turned so I could not see them talk. For ever I thought something was wrong with me until I found out I had a pretty bad hearing loss. (Kept me out of the draft though). The would ask e a question, I could not hear them or see them talk. Then they would yell "MR. JOHNSON ARE YOU ASLEEP OR JUST STUPID". I always loved math and electronics despite those two, but I flunked both of the classes for "Intentionally not paying attention".
This was in 1965, so it has been going on for a long time. I never thought about why most of all my other teachers had me sit up front after the first or second week. But I know now why. My trig and electronics teacher moved me to back after the second week or so. Power trips. A lot of teachers are like cops, then enjoy having authority over others.

[appalachiablue]

44. +1

[Person 2713]

30. And I will add their political views also ....

and not because a student asked them to

[underpants]

5. That is messed up

[Ilsa]

8. What is she? Jehovahs Witness?

Can't be Amish, right, because don't they stay in their own communities?

These so-called religious freedom laws certainly are helping us sort out the assholes.

[KamaAina]

15. Hindu

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/professor-citing-religious-grounds-refuses-to-wear-sound-device-for-hard-of-hearing-student

Panjabi, whose research interests include global history, terrorism and human rights, could not be reached for comment. The CBC reported that Panjabi had said in a previous interview that her Hindu beliefs prevented her from wearing the device.

Mandakrant Bose, a professor emerita at the UBC Institute of Asian research, said in an email that she was not aware of any tenets of the Hindu faith that prohibit someone from wearing an electronic device.

Unless the microphone is made of beef , her interpretation of Hinduism is pretty bizarre.

[madinmaryland]

26. *snort*

BTW, I am have a burger for dinner tonight. Will the Hindu Mafia be after me???

[tblue37]

28. Apparently she is not ALL that interested in human rights after all. nt

[snagglepuss]

50. "Panjabi's reason..based on...her personal spirituality and commitments."

snip

Panjabi's reason for not physically wearing the device "based not on a universal precept of a particular tradition, but on her personal spirituality and commitments."



http://www.vocm.com/mobile/newsarticle.asp?mn=2&id=57378

[Ms. Toad]

75. Interesting.

Other reports suggested the University had agreed that she would never have to wear the transmitter - but the 1996 document linked to indicates that if (ultimately) other accommodations proved ineffective, her religious beliefs could not be accommodated.

[Ms. Toad]

19. Yeah, those dang Canadians and their "so-called religious freedom laws"

Not to mention that the denial is based on an agreement worked out in 1996 in a prior incident with that same faculty member who is Hindu.

(Under US law, unless the University can offer an equivalent course - and perhaps even if they can - it would have to find a way to accommodate him.)

[Ilsa]

20. Sorry, my brain dropped the foreign reference.

[markpkessinger]

22. Under U.S. law . . .

. . . the university would also be required to accommodate the professor. According to the EEOC:

Religious Discrimination & Reasonable Accommodation

The law requires an employer or other covered entity to reasonably accommodate an employee's religious beliefs or practices, unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business. This means an employer may be required to make reasonable adjustments to the work environment that will allow an employee to practice his or her religion.

Examples of some common religious accommodations include flexible scheduling, voluntary shift substitutions or swaps, job reassignments, and modifications to workplace policies or practices.

[kcr]

24. Right there in your post

unless doing so would cause more than a minimal burden on the operations of the employer's business.

So, looks like here in the US, she'd be out of luck.

[Ms. Toad]

39. I didn't say it wasn't required to.

You misunderstood my assertion about the student's rights to be a rejection of the faculty member's rights. They are not mutually exclusive.

Ultimately, the University cannot deny the young man an accommodation he needs because of a disability. Alternate accommodations might be to tape and transcribe the lectures, hire a note taker, hire a tutor, hire a live transcriptionist, require the instructor to create Panopto or other video lectures, to present via a live link that would permit him to participate removely, or run a second class with an equivalent instructor.

Depending on the nature of the class, he is entitled to the same benefit the other students receive. If it is a large lecture hall in which no one has the opportunity to be interactive either the taped and transcribed lectures, notetakers or Panopto solution works. If the class is interactive, he is entitled to participate in that. A live transcriptionist (near-simultaneous transcription used frequently for depositions), or a livelink would meet that need.

None of these solutions require the instructor to wear a transmitter, thus accommodating her religious beliefs.

That said, religious accommodations are not required if it places more than a minimal burden on the employer's business - this contrasts relatively sharply with the position regarding disabilities and education - in which case even relatively significant cost is not an excuse not to accommodate. I have not reviewed enough religious accommodation cases to know where the "minimal burden" line falls - but from what I know about educational accommodations, if the two meet head to head (e.g. there are no accommodations that can be implemented to meet both needs), I'm pretty sure it is religion that will lose. The language is much stronger in laws governing disability accommodations in education than those governing religious accommodations by employers.

[brooklynite]

9. Clearly god made her student hearing disabled....

....so it would be unfair to force the teacher to challenge god's will.

[csziggy]

10. Does she use a telephone, listen to radio or watch television?

If she does any of those, especially the first, she doesn't have a leg to stand on. Every one of those technologies uses a microphone and broadcasts a signal, just like the device the university has asked her to to do to accommodate the student.

She has a history of this nonsense:

In 1996, CBC News reported that MUN sided with a student who filed a similar complaint against Panjabi for refusing to wear one based on religious reasons.

Panjabi was also reprimanded in 1985 for a similar complaint.

While in each of those cases Memorial University sided with the students, so far the Sears family has been given no clear solution.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/hearing-memorial-university-1.3230439

[olddots]

17. I don't get it

In the picture a person is speaking into a mic and facing a computer screen ( is this not the professor? ) was the device in question a wireless lavaleir mic operating on VHS or UHV frequency ?????? fire the moronic professor and give them a fucking clue about living in reality .

[SomeGuyInEagan]

55. Not her. Image is a stock photo from Shutterstock.

Photo credit is at the end of the story.

[frazzled]

18. That happened with my daughter's first-grade teacher

Not on religious grounds, but still. My daughter has a moderate to severe bilateral (both ears) sensorineural hearing loss. The district's audiologist met with her first-grade teacher to request she wear the transmitting device, and to specify that my daughter should always be sitting at the front of the class, and that the teacher should avoid talking with her back to the class while writing on the board. Not all that difficult.

The teacher refused to wear the device, claiming she had 20 other students and had no time for that (it took no time). The audiologist was shocked, and told me she never had had a teacher who refused to cooperate that vehemently. She finally acceded to wear the device (I don't know who intervened), but she was truly mean to my daughter the entire year. We took it on the chin and told our daughter to buck up, but with many years' retrospect, I wish we hadn't.

[elleng]

52. :sad:

[Skittles]

77. hard to believe someone like that would even want to be a teacher

I think it would be cool to assist in helping a child learn in such a unique way

[BlueStreak]

34. It was God's will that the student not be able to hear

[GummyBearz]

51. Hindu's believe in many gods

So which one made this decision? I ask you as you seem to have knowledge of such things

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

54. Some kind of "cat" god

No, wait, cats CAN hear. They just don't LISTEN!

[BlueStreak]

65. Whichever god was on duty during that class period.

I am guessing it was probably Dhatr. He can be a jerk about these things.

[starroute]

35. It "interfered with her personal karma"

According to a Montreal paper, "during the last incident, Panjabi said something to the effect that the electronic signal interfered with her personal karma."

[sarge43]

38. Does she carrying a cell phone or use a computer or any kind of electronic device?

Any of them could screw with personal karma.

Sounds like she just wants to be "special" or bully someone.

[KamaAina]

73. Personal karma's gonna get you...

[6chars]

36. what bullsh*t.

this is just being a jerk. whatever convoluted reason she has connecting Hinduism with not helping this student, she should recognize that her slight discomfort is outweighed by the student's. Being a professor who is paid to share knowledge with students is a privilege. She is crapping on that privilege.

[snagglepuss]

41. What is ludicrous is that it is her own brand of spirituality

that the professor is using to ask for accommodation. imo religious accommodation should never trump other the rights of others. If one can't make any adjustments to fit into a job due to rigid beliefs than one should work for him or herself.

[markpkessinger]

66. There's a slight Constitutional problem with that . . .

As I mentioned above, if an individual were required to make a showing of institutional validity to his or her claimed religious belief, that would put the courts in a position of having to rule on the validity of that person's religious beliefs -- something the courts really cannot do under the First Amendment. If there is, indeed, freedom of religion, then there are an infinite variety of religious beliefs. As soon as the courts begin to rule one belief to be a genuinely religious belief, and another not so, they would be crossing the line into religious doctrinal interpretation. What the law does instead is to place certain parameters on the circumstances in which a religious belief must be accommodated (i.e., it must be a reasonable accommodation that does not place more than a minimal burden on the employer's conduct of its business). That way, courts can treat everybody's religious beliefs equally without opening the can of worms of ruling on matters of religious doctrine.

[Bluenorthwest]

90. This thread is about Canada, and in terms of your US theory, ask the Rastas and the Church of

Cannabis about the government not judging which religious beliefs count and which do not. There is case law.

[narnian60]

59. Retired, Texas public school teacher here.

Wore a device around my neck one year for a hearing-impaired 5th grade student. Biggest problem was remembering to turn it off when I went to the restroom.

[snagglepuss]

72. lol. thanks for the laugh.

[Deadshot]

61. This is why religious beliefs deserve to be mocked.

[Aerows]

76. Which religion

has "Thou shalt be an asshole" as one of the commandments? Because it seems like a lot of folks follow a religion that says "Go forth and be as awful as possible to as many people as possible."

[Skittles]

81. pretty much all of them

[Scootaloo]

80. This claim appears to be CYA bullshit from Panjabi

According to the student, Panjabi's initial reason for refusal to accomodate was her belief that mcDonald "would be unable to keep up woth the fast-paced class."

That is to say, because the "teacher" didn't feel like it and wanted to blame the student.

When brought to the administration, then Panjabi came up with this religious belief thing,m where she practices some form of Hindu mysticism and that

"The microphone would interfere in the harmony I must always feel between my inner self and my outer person," Panjabi told the Muse at the time.

"Nothing must mar the soul's identification with the person."

And...

In 1985, Panjabi refused to wear a microphone to assist hearing-impaired student Jeanie Bavis.

Bavis alleges that Panjabi did not cite religious reasons that time.

"[Panjabi] said she wasn't going to wear it because she didn't have to and it wasn't in her contract," Bavis told the Muse.

"There was certainly no religious excuse."

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/memorial-university-hearing-disability-complaint-1.3233886

Ranee Panjabi is just being a big douchebag.

[smirkymonkey]

91. She's just using the religious excuse because she's a total

a**hole. Figures. That's usually how it is with these types. Underneath it all, they are just a**holes trying to make things difficult for other people or to call attention to their puny, narcissistic little selves.

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

83. Well, you know, the words are 'reasonable accommodation'.

A 'reasonable' accommodation for BOTH is not for her to 'wear' anything, but simply to have some sort of microphone setup elsewhere in the room that catches what she says and transmits it to him.

I don't think it's reasonable to make other people 'wear' things to accommodate you, nor is it reasonable to flat out deny the student the chance to hear the lectures for which he's presumably paid.

Now some people might say 'oh, but it won't work as well if she turns away'. Well guess what. Neither do our regular ears. The rest of the class isn't hearing her as well when she turns away either, which is why professors sometimes get asked to repeat something they said. So he wouldn't be getting singled out there, either.

[KamaAina]

85. Does this university have an engineering department?

Get the engineering students to work on a parabolic mike or something.

[Xithras]

86. Interesting. One of the colleges I taught at had a similar prob with a Muslim prof years ago.

It was an almost identical problem, too. The school had microphones that hung on lanyards around the professors necks that tied into our RF systems for hearing impaired students. Eventually a student complained because one of our Muslim teachers refused to wear it. He explained that many electronics contain trace amounts of gold (which is true) and that Islam explicitly prohibits men from wearing gold on their bodies. Unless the school could certify, in writing, that the microphones contained no gold, he refused to wear it.

The solution? The schools disability services department parked a student worker in the front row of his class with a handheld boom mic for the semester. The hearing impaired student got to hear the lecture, and the teacher didn't have to violate the tenets of his faith. Oh, and a student worker got paid to sit there holding a mic for hours. Everyone involved walked away happy.

[WinkyDink]

96. The problem began when "faith" and "conscience" were added to the "Must Be Accommodated" list.