god bless you... what do you mean i'm fired?

Post Reply New Topic

Lets be clear here.. this is a matter of politeness. The correct response to the question "do you mind if I pray for you is: thankyou very much, thats very kind.. or no but thankyou for offering."
Thats it. Regardless of religious persuasion, all this woman is doing is offering comfort IN ADDITION to her medical skills. She is not neglecting one for the other, she is not forcing anything on anyone. She was being kind, and more so CHRISTIAN.. because at the end of the day, that's what the damn religion was based on.. being nice to people.

The woman she offered to pray for wasn't even offended. She was just a PC busybody who should have remembered her manners and kept her trap shut.

Having said that, even if she had offered to pray for a devout Muslim, the correct response is still "thank you very much that's very kind". Unless I miss my guess, politeness is usually a respected tenet of any religion.

the problem is that the woman needs to be made an example of as far as society's concerned... with the problems of 'faith healing' getting worse people are scared some might take it too far. i know it was on a ficticious program but a patient had a cancerous growth and nothing worked and so someone offered to start praying for the patient, a doctor decided to try out a steroid on the lump and the growth shrunk. afterwards the doctors got no thanks as the christian took all the credit, the family converted and decided faith was a better healer than medicine.

Does she buggery. It was a nice gesture that has been latched onto by PC leeches and is being touted as some form of religious oppression or fanatical zealotry when it is not. Its no worse than aying "i hope you get better". Where exactly is the harm done here? Did her prayers curse this woman to ill health? Is praying for her going to cause her any negative effect at all? Is it s**t. If you don't believe, and there is no god then a prayer will make exactly zero difference to you, except perhaps knowing that this nurse cares about her charges. I for one would much rather deal with this woman, an obviously caring medical professional, than some of the dubious heartless s**ts that do work in the profession.

My family has a long tradition of working with the medical services. My grandfather was a founding member of a St Johns Ambulance chapter (an organisation completely based in christianity its worth noting.) This type of BS was never an issue. I find it vastly offensive that anyone takes this sort of attitude towards those giving help. Christian medical personnel have cared for millions of people, of all colours and creeds. If this dozy cow is offended by a christian serving her medical needs, maybe she should f**k off to Azerbaijan and use their medical services instead.

The only oppression here is a christian being oppressed by do-gooding w*kers trying to appease people who generally do not give a s**t. Just imagine the furore if this cretin had moaned because a Muslim or Sikh nurse had offered the same. Instant racism and religionism, and the daft bint would be a pariah.

if you're a minority you instantly get everything, anti-racism is even more racist than racism sometimes.

as for being treated by a christian, i for one would rather be treated by a christian who cared than an athiest who didn't.

i spoke to someone once when i was suffering a grand amount of depression and he offered to channel some positive energies my way, i didn't believe the same as him but i was greatfull and accepted. i may not think the 'energies' are real but if they are itmight have helped, if anything it put me in a better mood because someone was trying to do the best they could from the other side of the world.

Good! My family was stalked by religious staff from a hospital when my dad got sick; glad to see people take an appropriate level of discipline towards their religious employees!
You can't trust religious people, after all. There's now way to really know whether their misguided convictions are more important to them than their own personality; which can make them very dangerous and unstable, often capable of unspeakable violence in their pursuit of what they believe is "good". Not all are like that, of course, but it's impossible to know who is and isn't. A no-tolerance approach is best.
Ideally, banning them from certain forms of employment - but, that may, unfortunately, not happen, for a number of years, at least. Especially in medical fields! After all, much of these peoples strongest psychological problems, or "beliefs", involve life and death.
If they happen to decide a certain treatment is "evil", that placebo-prayers are "stronger", or that "god"/"gods" say it's "your time"... You get the picture.

We could preclude them from certain employments.. perhaps cap their wages as well..then we could prevent them from running businesses or maybe we should just herd them all into big camps and gas them.

I think you need to look at reality from a more proportional level. We are talking about a woman who made a kind offer to a patient she was treating. She was not some form of psychotic zealot, hellbent on converting new followers to her "misguided convictions". She isnt a member of some apocalyptic cult, or misogynistic eastern philosophy where you must pray or die. Millions of people, billions even, are completely f*****g harmless and in no way "stalk" people or any of the other rubbish you spout. We have all met the odd ones who do s**t like that, but very few of us call for some sort of pogrom because of it.

Okay, since you've made that stupid Nazi reference, I don't think I can take you seriously.
Look, pay attention! I SAID most AREN'T cultists or zealots - but, given their idealogical perspective, how can you safely differentiate between them, especially in critical fields where one is likely to encounter an enourmous range of conflicting philosophies?
Would you trust a person who, with no proof, said that there is plenty of air in space, so artificial atmospherics in shuttles are unnecessary - would you trust him to build a craft, then?
If a persons philosophies could potentially endanger a workplace, they should not be employed there. Just because it seems innocent, doesn't mean it can't turn nasty.
Why is religion supposed to be "untouchable"?

Because I live in a broadly Christian nation that was built on Christian values, and I know and am related to many Christians. You suggest deliberately discriminating against a vast group of people based on the oddities of a select few. Some people become unbalanced psychotic murderers and set fire to children. Should we then all be imprisoned in case one of us is a lunatic? Your desire to preclude these people from certain jobs based wholly on their choice of religion is the worst kind of Nazi-replicating fascism. If you cannot see the obvious parallel then you frighten me with your obtuseness. If a persons philosophy is a danger to others then YES they should be precluded from certain areas in much the same way as if their physical inabilities oir mental state preclude it. On an individual basis. Not as a sweeping damnation of a good chunk of the population of earth. And I re-iterate, this poor woman was IN NO WAY a danger to herself and others.. almost the complete opposite, ands thus to compare her case to some religious nutjob is fallacious in the extreme.

i wouldn't trust them but then again would someone with those beliefs make it into that field? you need to know quite a bit about science to be allowed to build a craft the same as a christian in the medical field would/should know what they're doing and do the right thing.

Macbeth; you still fail to understand! Your disgusting use of the name Nazi to slander me, and your evident bias - as claimed by yourself, no less - makes it increasingly difficult to take your arguments seriously. Observe logically, NOT emotionally! THAT is fallacy, fool!
Religion OUGHT NOT be considered in the vein of ethnicity; which you, while not stating as such, seem to consider.
As individuals they opt to maintain their views; those views are PROVEN to be faulty, frequently conflict with other views, and MAY CAUSE harm.
Your perverse analogy of "imprisoning everyone" because some of us may "set children on fire" is nonsense! We "all" don't ascribe to a set of philosophies, and opt to place ourselves in a position where those philosophies MAY be tested, likely at the expense of another!

Incidentally, I challenge you to define ORIGINAL positive "Christian ideals", or whatever it is you said. Name ONE that isn't, in the real world, a universal human trait!

That is your bias. Highly illogical.

You claim that Christians should be denied jobs based wholly on the fact they are Christian. THAT is nonsense, based apparently on your own bad experience and prejudices. Since when was "having a conflicting point of view" wrong, or worthy of such punishment? Should you then be punished because your beliefs conflict with mine? Or perhaps I should be kept away from jobs because I disagree with you?

And since when was it proven wrong exactly? I don't recall seeing empirical proof of the non-existence of God. Or proof for that matter.

Where was it written that this woman's faith would be tested? Why is it even an issue? It shouldn't be. I have seen nothing anywhere that suggests she was anything other than a competent medical professional going about her business. I have seen her interviewed, and far from being some frothing god-botherer, she struck me as a nice, polite, kind woman, who genuinely cares about her patients. No ranting. No preaching, and certainly no stone-throwing, or abusiveness towards the cretins who are causing her such strife. All in all, someone I would gladly allow to treat me, medically. Maybe YOU ran into some psychotic medical Christian cult, but this woman certainly isnt one of them.

Christian ideals are universally human traits? Yet someone displaying those traits as part of their beliefs is wrong and should be punished? Make your mind up. End of the day, this woman was being nothing but nice, and got it thrown back in her face. I get the impression that you would do much the same thing, were you offered prayer by a nurse. I can almost picture you having a seething shitfit at the possibility you might catch Christianity off someone.

Asking someone if they want them to pray for them is as straightforward as asking them if they want a cup of tea made for them. It requires a 'yes please' or 'no thank you' answer.

Caroline Petrie's (the nurse involved) first warning involved a patient who gladly accepted her offer of prayer (it was actually the patient's carer who complained) and the patient in this instance also claimed not to be offended. The nurse did the job she was paid to do and simply asked the patient if she wanted praying for as she was leaving.

This is still officially a Christian country and unless it is established otherwise, any non-Christian should be prepared to encounter Christian attitudes in any walk of life. It is up to others to make their beliefs fit into this framework and not for the Christian to adapt otherwise. Simply asking if someone would like to be prayed for is one of these basic Christian attitudes and is in no way confrontational.

The nurse was also within her rights to offer prayer under Article 10 of the Human Rights Act governing the freedom of expression, which states...

Let us not forget that Florence Nightingale was moved by God to go into nursing. Is it any wonder that in this godless society we now have record complaints being made against NHS nursing staff? If there weren't so many shameful people going out of their way to suppress Christian attitudes we'd have a more caring society with a more caring nursing staff who'd be more like Florence Nightingale or Caroline Petrie, instead of just turning up for work prepared to do only the minimum required and without showing any true Christian loving care.

I wonder what the outcome would be if a nurse was handing out pro-homosexual literature and a patient complained. No doubt the nurse would be hailed as a heroine of modern-day liberalism and the patient would be in a police cell accused of a homophobic hate crime before they knew it.

Incidentally, if a nurse is to be reprimanded for offering prayer in case it offends a patient, then surely they should also be reprimanded for offering a patient a cup of tea as they could be a Jehovah's Witness and take offence (JWs aren't allowed caffeine). It's all politically correct nonsense!

Christianity is about misinterpreting the words of a virgin-born zombie and weaponizing the beliefs of his forbears.

But hey, let's not argue about religion if it's not the point. The problem here is that a nurse, who was fully aware that she was supposed to separate her beliefs from her work, could not focus on her job enough to just do it without offering her religion to a complete stranger who never asked for it.

If your nurse came to you and said, "I'd pray to you, but God isn't real," you'd piss all over yourself.

Christian ideals are universal traits? When did I say that?! Cease twisting my words about!
"catch Christianity off someone"?! It is enourmously difficult to take you seriously!
Cease singling out Christianity, save as example, and don't take the fools approach of assuming that only a bias and hatred of Christians form my entire argument, fool!
Not JUST Christians ought to be banned; ALL religious persons! Have you even made efforts to observe my arguments - or are you to busy playing wounded dog, and posting deliberately inflammatory, misleading comments?
Would you care to try to use whatever brain-cells of yours may actually function to cease misreading my points? Could you stop dismissing this as a Christian witch hunt?
When did I single out Christianity? You have done that; you have made your entire string of arguments questionable.
Take the debate seriously, or piss off!
A forum is to argue and exchange ideas! NOT simply for your culturally-sensitive religious sympathy!
Note, fool, my nation is a SECULAR one! Yours is NOT - by your OWN claim! Already, you are biased towards seeing religion as a positive. Do NOT, however, assume that secular, by nature, automatically regards religion as a negative!

Oh, and, as a sidenote; religion has been thoroughly disproven, many times.
Whether evidence contradicting mythological claims, proof against supposed miracles by various gods or prophets, etc. You hail from a non-secular nation, so, invariably, you dust off that fool rhetoric that, somehow, magically, proof against every occurance within religious doctrine does not equate to proof of no god/gods because...? What? Because nobody had given you a photo of the empty halls of Valhalla?
Because we can't show you a returned-to-sender postcard to heaven?
That there is NO god/ are no gods is a neutral position. That there is a god/gods is a positive-value assertion. Hence; the burden of proof is upon the party making the assertion.

Now, please - take it seriously, or don't bother.
I do not care to have you simply quip rhetoric in intellectual guise.

Ummm, if someone offered me a prayer I wouldn't care in fact I'd look at it as a kind gesture as long as they didn't try to convert me.

I don't really think persecuting people for their own beliefs is right. It kind of reminds me of how slowly the jews were being persecuted in Germany. I don't care about religion as long as each can respect eachother's differences without conflict.

Not sure why one would be fired for offering or asking as long as they weren't preaching. I really don't like fear tactics used against people of a certain group whether religious or not. To me something as trivial as this might as well be like the holocaust. If one cannot respect another's difference or belief system...then we might as well not have the freedom to think for ourselves.

Could everybody stop likening this to the holocaust? It's disgusting! Not only does it make light of the events of the holocaust, it isn't even remotely accurate!
The holocaust is no trivial example! Please, have some respect.
Now; for the last time - it is NOT discrimination against a set of beliefs, but rather against the application or, in this case, suggestion if application of those beliefs in an INAPPROPRIATE environment!
The fact is, these people, whether they will act upon it or not, may believe that magic/prayer is "better" than medicine. They also have the potential to change the mind of another religious person into not accepting medication.
These people are liabilities in this environment! Forget about anywhere else; this is NOT comparable to closing down their stores and confiscating property!
Within this ONE environment, their views are unacceptable for the smooth operation of the facility. Hell, is it "the holocaust" to say that blind people cannot be bus drivers?
That people without limbs cannot be a ski instructor?
People who ascribe themselves to a philosophy with immense potential for conflict within a CERTAIN environment ought not be employed there!

This is NOT comparable to "measuring noses" - do not even joke about that!