Lol. I love when Junebug comes in and pretends like he didn't just google some Federalist article on the subject, all while ignoring the point. Right on cue. Even pulling out the "moreover".
I know common sense and practical realities don't matter to pretend originalists like you and the extremist hacks on the court, but the fact that you don't understand the differences between accommodating disabilities and religion is all anyone needs to know. When accommodating a disability, employers are entitled to get proof of the disability from a doctor (with frequent updates) as well as detailed information from the doctor as to what accommodations might work, and then engage in the interactive process -- which includes making counter-proposals of reasonable accommodations that would still allow the employee to perform the essential functions of the job. In other words, the employer can ultimately decide what the accommodation is. Religious accommodations are amorphous, perpetual, and cannot be updated or proven by a certified third party (a legitimate third party). Disability accommodations, by their nature and frequency, require significantly more cost, and if you applied a de minimis standard to them, no disabled people would be employed. Not apples to apples in any way, and any attempt to change that and upset 45 years of settled law (read: activist) is clearly an attempt to give religious people (read: Christians) a license to practice whatever extreme views they want in the workplace. Complete nightmare for employers.
