> It does not matter what religion the discriminator is, it is the act of discrimination based on a protected characteristic (in this case religion) which is illegal
There is a nuance here. Sunni-shia is a sect rather than a religion.
There is a difference between:
1. A Muslim manager rejecting a Muslim candidate (without knowing or paying attention to their sect)
2. A Sunni manager rejecting Shia candidates while hiring Sunni candidates
1 is covered by current law while 2 is not (this is why Seattle passed this ban but for castes)
Your example won't apply here as the candidate won't be rejected due to being Muslim but rather being Sunni or Shia. If there were sects in play in the Judaism case, then that is an accurate parallel.
This is out of topic: Also, shouldn't laws go beyond just discrimination? Shouldn't we legislate towards prevent violence given the past and present of Sunni-shia violence? Discrimination in jobs seem tame compared to outright violence.
There is a nuance here. Sunni-shia is a sect rather than a religion.
There is a difference between:
1. A Muslim manager rejecting a Muslim candidate (without knowing or paying attention to their sect)
2. A Sunni manager rejecting Shia candidates while hiring Sunni candidates
1 is covered by current law while 2 is not (this is why Seattle passed this ban but for castes)
Your example won't apply here as the candidate won't be rejected due to being Muslim but rather being Sunni or Shia. If there were sects in play in the Judaism case, then that is an accurate parallel.
This is similar to caste discrimination that applies within religions (caste is complex as multiple religions have them https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Caste_system_among_South_Asian...).
This is out of topic: Also, shouldn't laws go beyond just discrimination? Shouldn't we legislate towards prevent violence given the past and present of Sunni-shia violence? Discrimination in jobs seem tame compared to outright violence.