Christians should leave their faith at home...

1. 0

   Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years ago

   http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religio … r-job.html
   
   "Landmark cases, brought by four British Christians, including two workers forced out of their jobs after visibly wearing crosses, have been heard today at the European Court of Human Rights."
   
   "He argued that that a Christian, or any other religious believer, “under difficulty” is not discriminated against if the choice of “resigning and moving to a different job” is not blocked."
   
   Well, I guess we have that reasoning again - if you don't like it, you can find yourself another job. It's very easy. It's the same reasoning that one gets from one's boss when he is paying one peanuts and making one work 12 hour days... "If you don't like, you have a choice. You can resign."

   replyreport
   1. 59

      Deborah Brooksposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      How sad and how true.. I have been in both situations.. not fun.. and resigning sometimes cannot be the answer,, especially if you really need the moeny to pay bills and buy food.. ext.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      34th Bomb Groupposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If you are fortunate to find a nice job elsewhere you're the low man on the totem pole.
      Ugly situation.

      replyreport
2. 0

   Emile Rposted 11 years ago

   Forced out of their job for visibly wearing crosses? Man, if that is what Europe considers tolerance, I'm a little worried. Openly discriminating against the religious is a dangerous first step in a free society.

   replyreport
   1. 57

      A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yet, the religious are free to openly discriminate against us. The first step was already taken.

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Brush that shoulder daily ATM. Multiple times. Make a habit of it. The chip appears to be attached with a spring.

         replyreport
         1. 57

            A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Once again, you derail the thread in order to focus on the individual. You should read the terms of service here before you get banned.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               I was replying to your post in response to mine. Please, report me if you consider my behavior warrants a ban. Or, you could simply stop attempting to discredit my posts with statements that lack honesty or credibility and then whining because I reply when you post such a comment to me.

               replyreport
               1. 61

                  W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Emile, keep on expressing your opinion.  That is what true freedom is, the right to have a different view and the ability to express it without fear.  This is vital exploring new vistas, whether it be religion, sports, politics. or any other subject one is passionate about.  Passion, though does not include the right to be rude or demeaning, so just disregard those who do so.

                  replyreport
            2. 61

               W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               A thread can provide many opportunities to spawn concurrent conversations.  That is the point of a forum, to elicit a broad and entertaining dialogue.  Threatening someone and becoming surly is more of a violation than Emile simply disagreeing with you.  Disagreement is also a product of dialogue.  Think twice before you expose vital areas of "thin skin."  It may have a lot to do with your overall rating of 53...Hmm?

               replyreport
               1. 57

                  A Troubled Manposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  This forum, like so many others have rules about focusing on the individual. Fyi.
                  
                  
                  
                  Disagreement is one thing, focusing on the individual is quite another. Try reading the rules so you become enlightened as to the actual point of forums.

                  replyreport
                  1. 84

                     kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     Okay, you and Emily R's incessant arguments have derailed more threads than I can count. I can only assume that this has been going on longer than I have been here, and will continue to do so long after I find some other site to occupy my mind. You can report Emily R for "focusing on the individual" (hell, why don't you report me, too?) but she probably has a large handful of examples of you focusing on her that she can report, too. That is apparent to me, other members of the forum, and probably the moderators.
                     
                     So, for (I think this is) the second time, could I ask you keep your arguments to each other? Some of us want to read the topic, and don't want to scroll through pages upon pages of your arguments. Thank you.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        I posted once on this thread in response to the OP. and then replied once to her reply.
                        
                        I replied to ATM's reply to my post and then responded with one other comment.
                        
                        You didn't scroll through page after page. If you have a problem; you might want to be honest about the problem and not attempt to turn a mole hill into a mountain because, quite frankly, that is a bizarre exaggeration that I can't, for the life of me, understand the point of.
                        
                        Edit; and, by the way, learn how to spell.

                        replyreport
                        1. 84

                           kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                           I was referring to another thread in which there were two whole pages of your arguments.
                           
                           Edit: No.

                           replyreport
                           1. 0

                              Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                              Maybe you should simply let it go. I read your comment in the other thread, agreed, and walked away from the exchange. That was one thread. Not multiple threads as was implied in your post. Going on about it with fabricated facts is a symptom of a problem.
                              
                              And since you have made it clear  in your edit that you misspelled my name on purpose, this is our last exchange. I have little respect for those with little respect; or those who make up things in order to complain.

                              replyreport
               2. 0

                  Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                  Um, I don't think the overall rating has anything to do with being impolite on the forum. I'm impolite many times. My overall score has varied between about 91 and 99 more or less since I've been here. I think it has more to do with the quality of one's hubs...

                  replyreport
                  1. 61

                     W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

                     I agree, Sophia, about the quality of one's Hubs.  I guess others enjoy mine, whether agree or disagree.  I keep a score in the 90"s when I publish regularly, but my health lately has hampered that somewhat.  Your Hubs are well written and evocative.  Keep it up.

                     replyreport
                     1. 0

                        Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

                        Thank you W. Joe B. I think participating may add a small bit but mine didn't drop that much when I focused on writing in other areas for about six months. Hope your healthy improves soon.

                        replyreport
   2. 0

      Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Oh, the Muslims aren't allowed to wear their special form of dress in France either. I think the essence is that in a free society one is allowed to believe what one wants to believe. One just isn't allowed to try and influence others with one's belief or state them where they might be offensive to others...

      replyreport
      1. 60

         34th Bomb Groupposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         As to the situation in France with the women's dress (forgot the name - jihab?) I understand the concern. Being in Law Enforcement most of my adult life, and knowing the Jihadists are willing to die to kill us, I'd be very concerned were I to encounter a body in the jihab. You don't know their sex (really doesn't matter) and whether or not they're wearing a suicide vest or a machine gun under the thing.
         Locally, a new bank building was built about 20 years ago. The ground floor was the "banking floor," tellers, vault, etc. The idiots put in sheets of mirrored glass which allowed a person to look out - but prevented a person outside to look in. When notified that the Police Department would not be answering calls to their location due to the mirrors, they were switched out to plain glass. It was purely a situation to help keep the responders safe.
         I strongly agree with you that one can choose what religion, if any, they choose to follow - just don't bother me and tell me I'm doomed if I don't switch to their choice.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            "I strongly agree with you that one can choose what religion, if any, they choose to follow - just don't bother me and tell me I'm doomed if I don't switch to their choice."
            
            Yup, freedom of religion was never meant to mean that one had the right to go out and convert others to what one believed or to take one's religion where it wasn't wanted.
            
            It meant that one wouldn't be put to death for believing what one did or congregating with others who believed the same as oneself.
            
            Religion is something that one practices in private or with the people who believe the same.

            replyreport
         2. 87

            MizBejabbersposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Remember the Muslim woman who filed a religious discrimination suite because her state wouldn't issue her a driver's license unless she uncovered her face for the photo. She lost or the suite was dropped. I forget which. That would have been scary if she had won.

            replyreport
            1. 60

               34th Bomb Groupposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               She lost. Don't know if the ACLU is appealing the matter.

               replyreport
      2. 0

         Emile Rposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         I get that, but a cross isn't an attempt to evangelize. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I get the sneaking suspicion that Christians might be suffering some discrimination in some quarters because people are afraid to openly complain about Islam. I don't mean any disrespect by the observation, but the case you've brought up seems completely out of bounds of our standard of freedom here in the US.

         replyreport
3. 89

   Paragliderposted 11 years ago

   On the other hand, what's so special about religious symbolism? Would an ardent Manchester United supporter expect to be allowed to wear a Man U badge on top of his police uniform? Probably not, yet sport is as valid a personal passion as religion if looked at from a naturalist perspective (i.e. one that doesn't give credence to the supernatural).

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Nicely put... When there are 7 billion people on a plant, and when great diversity exists, one man's passion is another man's war.

      replyreport
   2. 60

      34th Bomb Groupposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Any cop wearing a Manchester United, or any other football team logo for that matter, would incite bad behavior in some crowds. A private citizen can do whatever he wants.

      replyreport
      1. 89

         Paragliderposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, in private time. But not necessarily in the workplace.

         replyreport
4. 61

   W. Joe B.posted 11 years ago

   Not knowing British Law, I, of course, cannot comment directly to that issue.  In the United States, though, the 1st  Amendment to the Constitution guarantees the right to exercise one's faith openly and anywhere/time.  As many Christians (sadly, not as many as profess to be) are just as fervent about their faith as Muslims, buddists, and several others are about theirs, why is it that only Christians are told that their faith is not welcome in the open?  This has, and still does, smack of the highest form of bigotry imaginable.

   replyreport
   1. 94

      peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I went to a festival this past weekend. At it there were groups of Christians holding signs. Some said "Homosexuals are an abomination" "Queers go to hell" and "If you aren't Christian you don't belong to God" On the corner of one of the streets their leader screamed at the top of his lungs a mixture of scripture and hate. I have never seen any other religion do this. I had to explain to my children that this was just an ignorant group of people and not to read the signs or listen to this man. I also had to explain to my son that he should be thankful we live in the USA where even the most ignorant of people are free to say whatever they want.
      By the way not many people seemed bothered by this. However if there would have been atheist on the corner screaming there is no God it would have made national news. Christians are by far not the only group of people not welcome in the open. Pagans, atheist, free thinkers, muslims, the list could go on. It seems Christians are the ONLY faith that do get to go make fools out of themselves on street corners. (no offense to those of you Christians who don't spout hate from street corners)

      replyreport
      1. 84

         kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, but did you know that other religions do more serious things, like suicide bombing in the name of their god? Signs are fine by me, as long as it's safe. "Sticks and stones can break my bones, but words will never hurt me." (It seems like too many people forget this by adulthood, and end up butt-hurt by things people write/say).

         replyreport
         1. 94

            peeplesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            While they may do more they usually don't do it in my country where freedom of religion and speech is protected. Not to sound like I don't care about other places because I do, but the signs against homosexuals were being exposed to children as well. These children are not capable of understanding fully the whole sticks and stones motto. Anytime a religion does anything they may harm another group of people physically or mentally I have an issue with it. Wearing crosses is one thing protesting funerals is another.

            replyreport
         2. 59

            MelissaBarrettposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            In the last 30 or so years there have been 17 attempted murders, 383 death threats, 153 incidents of assault or battery, and 3 kidnappings committed against abortion providers by Christian groups.  There have also been 41 bombings, 173 arsons, 91 attempted bombings or arsons, 619 bomb threats, 1630 incidents of trespassing, 1264 incidents of vandalism, and 100 attacks with butyric acid ("stink bombs").
            
            *wiki
            
            The KKK is a Christian Group as well as The Army of God(one of the main anti-abortion violence perpetrators) Concerned Christians is a great group too... they were just going to blow up a mosque in Israel so that Jesus could return.  Around 80 or so of them took the trip to pull this off.  Looking up groups like The Covenant, The Sword, and the Arm of the Lord, Defensive Action, The Freemen Community and Hutaree will give you some more examples of "sticks and stones" breaking some bones. These are groups in North America that are currently active.  Lets not get into the atrocities committed by Christian terrorists in other countries like India and Uganda.
            
            Like it or not Christians are just as bad about violence as any other religion... except you know Buddhism and Janism- the religions that really ARE peaceful.

            replyreport
            1. 0

               Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Let's not forget the Dominionists.
               
               http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dominionism
               
               These Christians, to whom many congressmen and senators belong, would take the world back to Old Testament times in order to trigger the second coming.

               replyreport
            2. 60

               34th Bomb Groupposted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Dr. Bart Slepian of Buffalo was a friend of mine.
               Shot down by a cowardly sniper in the woods behind his house.
               He died while his wife and four sons looked on.

               replyreport
      2. 0

         Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yup... like this...
         
         http://www.sandiegoreader.com/news/2012 … comic-con/
         
         Christians make these enormously offensive signs and they think they are doing 'the Lord's work.'  As far as I know, they are the only religious group on earth that constantly takes their religion and smashes it into other people's faces. And then they have the audacity to wonder why it is that people are beginning to take more and more overt action against them...
         
         Here's another one...
         
         
         http://ireport.cnn.com/docs/DOC-814720
         
         This year at the Gay Pride Parade in San Diego, the Christians pitched up with their bull horns as usual. They shouted out that homosexuality was sinful, that everybody at the parade would land in hell, and that they should repent because they were an eyesore to god... and so it went.
         
         I've watched this fiasco for the past 8 years. This year - my 9th - it was awesome. That gays finally got their own bull horn and broadcast as follows, "this bullhorn is ten times as loud as yours. We will continue to broadcast every time you open your mouth until you go away. We don't want you. You are full of hate. Shame on you. And this year, we only have one bullhorn. Next year, there will be 200 of us and each one of us will have a bull horn and we will blast you out of existence. Go home. We do not want you."
         
         About half an hour after they started, the atheist coalition arrived and they had banners and posted as well, and they stood next to the Christians the entire time.
         
         You want to know why people are beginning to take actions against Christians? Because it's highly offensive to be insulted and degraded by Christians. This is NOT a religion of love. It is a religion of the self righteous spewing their hatred and condemnation against everybody who is not a Christian.

         replyreport
      3. 61

         W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         As I said in another answer, the fringes seem to call the whole group into judgment, whether Christians, Muslims, etc.  Read some of my work and you'll find out that I am certainly not the Christian you saw.  That type of behavior is an abomination to the loving and tolerant God I'm acquainted with.  God hates no one, and those who proclaim Him to be that hateful one are not His children.
         
         I recall a passage in the Gospels where those before the seat of Judgment are crying out for Jesus to remember all the things they did "in His name."  His answer was, and I take the liberty of modernizing the rhetoric somewhat, "Get out of My sight, you Bigot.  I never knew you or condoned your iniquity."  That about covers my view of these "militant Christians."
         
         I said in 2002, at a seminar where I was a speaker, that the Church as we know is would lose all of its credibility with the world before the true Believers who professed and DEMONSTRATED the love of the Christ could be revealed.  I get the impression that the church is well on the way to fulfilling that prophecy.

         replyreport
   2. 0

      Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I have never yet been approached by a Muslim or Jew wanting to 'share their faith' with me, or asking me to a shul or a Mosque. However, it is a daily occurrence that Christians approach one wanting to 'invite' one to their church and wanting to share 'what the Lord has done in their lives.'
      
      Maybe it's because the people from other religions don't have to be told to keep their faith to themselves? They do it automatically...

      replyreport
      1. 61

         W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Please don't confuse the ignorance of "militant Christians" that follow in lock-step with the likes of Dr, James Dobson or the American Family group as being the true Biblical example of Christianity.  Few really walk the walk, so to speak.  The faith and example of Christ is one of tolerance and love.  If one truly has a changed life, it will show without having to bombard others with senseless rhetoric.
         
         Notice, I said "exercise their faith", not harass others.  As to that happening in other religions, no, Muslims don't necessarily promote the faith as Christians do, but tolerance is low if you consider that the belief is to convert or die at their hand.  And until 9/11 I was accosted regularly at airports by the robed followers of Eastern faiths.

         replyreport
         1. 77

            DoubleScorpionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            
            
            Please don't confuse the ignorance of "militant Muslims" for those that actually correctly follow the faith.
            
            And their belief is not one of convert or die...But if you do convert..it is considered a deadly sin to revert back to another religion.
            
            And it seems to me that Christianity once followed a convert or die mentality as well...And seeing as the Muslim religion is about 600 years younger than Christianity...it seems they are right on schedule for how Abrahamic Religions grow and adapt. the OT had the Israelites (extremists) doing the same thing, then the Christian (extremists) movement and now the Muslim (extremists)movement.

            replyreport
            1. 61

               W. Joe B.posted 11 years agoin reply to this

               Understood, Scorpion.  And you are absolutely right.  As an extra-Biblical writer, I've researched the various manifestations of "Inquisitions" that the church went through during the Middle-Ages, and they are nothing to be proud of.  Sadly, though, most groups, religious or otherwise, are judged by the radical fringes, as they are usually the most vocal, causing the "rank-and-file" to suffer for their ignorance.

               replyreport
5. 59

   SpanStarposted 11 years ago

   These attacks on Christianity have been going on even before Jesus arrived. The crying from these so-called adults you would think that they were more helpless than a child-Oh don't let me see you cross because that means you're trying to convert me-boo-hoo.
   
   I'm hoping one day people can actually think for themselves and give some semblance of a mature adult.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      DoubleScorpionposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      
      
      Christianity was around before Jesus arrived?

      replyreport
      1. 0

         Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Yes, that one got me as well... To quote the Roman statesman, Cicero, "Where ignorance is bliss, tis folly to be wise..." 

         replyreport
6. 90

   peoplepower73posted 11 years ago

   Might is always right, until it has been proven wrong by a greater might!

   replyreport
7. 84

   kathleenkatposted 11 years ago

   How could they get into trouble for wearing crosses? They could just say that they are lower-case T's. Then the employer has no case.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Um, and you think the employer will believe this?

      replyreport
      1. 84

         kathleenkatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

         Pointing to a necklace and saying it's a cross isn't really different than saying it's a lower-case T. They can't prove either way. In other words, it's left to interpretation. Now, if they were wearing a necklace like this, there really isn't room for other interpretations...
         
         
         
         What I'm saying is if you don't go around talking about what your necklace means, then there really isn't a problem wearing it (unless your necklace speaks for itself, like Rihanna's). Likely there is more than we are seeing to this story; they didn't just get fired because they were wearing a cross, they may have gotten fired because they started talking about it.

         replyreport
         1. 0

            Sophia Angeliqueposted 11 years agoin reply to this

            Oh, come off it. Even if someone said it was a t, no court of law would accept that.

            replyreport
8. 65

   aka-djposted 11 years ago

   In response to the title > "Christians should leave their faith at home..."
   NO. Christians should live their faith daily!
   
   Christ lived His faith daily. He both offended some(or many) and blessed some (or many).
   We will be no different. I find many things offensive in society, but don't get all bent out of shape, threaten to sue, etc over it.
   I think people should either grow up, or develop some "thicker skin". Life is offensive at some point, for every one.
   
   And no, I don't stand on corners with placards or megaphones!
   
   In response to wearing of jewelry, "you've got to be kidding, right"?
   As if we can take off "who" we are, like taking off a necklace, (with a cross on it).

   replyreport
9. 75

   jenniferrpoveyposted 11 years ago

   Meh. I completely missed the link. Complete repost here.
   
   Here's how I feel on the matter (bearing in mind I'm not a Christian).
   
   If the person is being told that they should not 'express their religion' by a simple means of jewelry, then that is discrimination.
   
   If there is a rule against wearing ANY kind of necklace outside your clothes, then that is probably not discrimination. Most of these 'waah, my boss won't let me wear my cross' cases are actually situations where there is a good reason not to wear a necklace. Nurses, for example, may have a necklace grabbed by a violent or confused patient, which could result in injury. Airline stewards sometimes have to deal with confrontational, often drunk passengers, so I *could* see a no necklace rule there, but it could also be a uniform code, which I have rather more mixed feelings about. I do think people should be allowed to wear a discreet piece of religious jewelry IF there are no safety concerns.
   
   If there are, then have these people considered an alternative? Cross stud earrings, for example, would not have the safety concerns of a necklace, but would still serve the purpose of expressing one's faith.
   
   There are situations in my own life when I don't wear any jewelry, including religious jewelry, for safety reasons...I don't wear a necklace when I ride because I've heard about horrific injuries and if I needed a medalert, I'd get the bracelet kind...much safer.
   
   Really, religious jewelry is for people, anyway, not God(s).

   replyreport