A cashier at a Costco store wore facial jewelry. The company subsequently revised its dress code to prohibit all facial jewelry except earrings. Despite the change of policy, the woman continued to wear her eyebrow piercings without managerial objection. A few months later, however, managers started to actively enforce the policy. The woman was told that she would have to remove her facial jewelry. At this point, the woman mentioned for the first time that she was a member of the Church of body Modification and that her facial piercings had religious significance. Members of this Church participate in various forms of body modification, including piercing, tattooing, branding, and cutting. The Church’s mission is to promote its adherents’ personal growth so that they may become “confident role models in learning, teaching, and displaying body modification.” The Church does not strictly require that its members wear or display facial jewelry at all times, but the woman said that this is how she regarded its call to be a confident role model. The woman was eventually terminated for noncompliance with the company’s dress code. After she filed a charge with the EEOC, and during mediation, the employer offered for the first time to allow her to come back to work if she would either use clear plastic retainers or cover her facial piercings with Band-Aids. Although the woman had made the same request when she was initially confronted by her supervisors, she now took the position that only being allowed to openly wear the facial jewelry would fulfill her religious obligations. Costco refused, and the case went to court What should the court decide? Why?