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

Post Reply New Topic

The problem goes beyond just this situation. In the name of "equality and diversity" and to "prevent offense" we have had such odd decisions here as:

A flight attendant chastised for wearing a crucifix, whilst religious paraphernalia for other groups was deemed acceptable

Hot Cross buns being removed from a school to prevent offense.

Piggy Banks being removed from bank advertising.

A west end play being shut before it even opened by non-christian protestors, whilst thousands of complaints about the "Jerry Springer Opera" by christians who found it highly offensive were ignored.

A headmistress leaving her school after being hounded for racism, after suggesting that seperate assemblies for Muslim and non-muslim did not help integrate the children...

Christmas renamed as "Winter Festival"


I could go on, google is loaded with these events and many more. There is definitely an anti-Christian bias here, and it is not helping with integration, equality, or diversity.

The sad thing is that oft as not, the other religious groups cited as being offended really couldn't give a s**t. In the case of this nurse, the woman who reported her was not even offended in her own right, but took it upon herself to "defend" other religions rights. I have seen no report that any other member of a religious group other than Christianity was even remotely bothered by her offers. Surely if this was the case, her first non-Christian patient would have complained?

well, I am glad to see the Winter Festival has finally been wrested from the Christians and back to the Pagans from which it came!

Merle

The racist slurs totally scupper whatever point Macbeth might have been trying to make. What are you going to suggest next? Chase the wh***y into the sea? One farmer one bullet?

Christians. How nice.

we 'peasants' in the States call it a Binky, but you were standing up for yourself so well, Macbeth, I will just sit back and watch Ishmael stuff himself into the ban box by his own actions.

Merle

Pardon me if I'm getting the logic wrong, but don't I actually have to make racist slurs before I get vilified for it.

Oh.. and me? So not a Christian....

Fair point.

Variation on a theme: being offended when a Pagan says "Blessed Be" (or similar..)

And that dummy is both hideous, and inspired in equal parts.

Yeah, 'cause it's just plain ol' funny fer you lot in them thar states to ignore the complex history and demographics of Australia and the sheer offence "colonial" can cause.

Gee whiz, Mr sinsboldy, sir - can I be as ignorant as you someday...?

You Americans and good old "New Empir" Macbeth may fail, horrendously, to understand the meaning of that word - Tada! Outside of your own frigging cultures!!

Piss off and don't make jokes, you foreign s**t! It's not funny, you f****r!
If you wanna ban me; go the f**k ahead - don't try making your "funny" state jokes over a very serious issue!

Go back to watching your Crocodile Dundee and Quigley "down under", thinking the countries just all outback without a history - or, grow a f*****g pair, and don't b***h about some ignorant prick "defending" himself from simple angry retaliation of his insult!
Ignorance is no excuse, Yank! Stay the hell out if it, except as a neutral mediator by your role as a mod! Otherwise, bugger off, the lot of you!

Wow. Someone has issues.

PSI hope this thread doesn't get locked. We are having a good discussion in here, minus the other bits.

Ever the observant, you fail (as you have done before now) to notice when I tell you quite clearly that not only do I have a reasonable to good knowledge of the British Empire (which includes its colonies), I happen to be quite well informed about Antipodean matters, due in no small part to my very good friendships with several Australians. It might serve well to point out that every single one of them is adamant that Australia was a colony, none of them are offended by the term colonial. You display an astonishing ignorance towards my knowledge, motives, or in fact anything else about me, so blinded are you by your hatred of some long-dead imagined foe-race.. your progenitors I might add, the citizens of the UK. I note well you do not avoid the term "yank".. a term many in the states consider not only grave insult, but highly derogatory, for a variety of reasons. A truly provincial attitude for a misunderstood genius with a frankly piss-poor imagination when it comes to effective insult.

So, if you wouldn't mind terribly, the rest of us would like to continue our thread about small-minded bigots, without having to wade through pages of *** ****** **** and small-minded bigotry.

Oh, and due to your status as a colonial outpost and commonwealth member, might I also remind you that HRH Elizabeth II is donating her own money towards helping those of her subjects so terribly affected by the recent bushfires. So much for the Evil Empire eh?

I was interjecting a bit of lightening up in a thread you are falling to pieces in. I am sincere when I say I am sorry where a bit of language can affect you so. I can also fly into a rage when someone disregards the contributions that hippies have made to the world and with out massive self control can become upset to the point where others remember it and use it to wind me up time and time again, until now I just ignore them.

I was hoping you would get it out of your system, or take a break from this thread or WP until you could get a grip on your self. I hope you will consider that path, because I can not have you abusing other members, Ishmael.

I know you know nothing of me, nor how I moderate. There are no rules that a moderator has to be neutral, and I find it interesting you expect me to follow some unwritten rule when you are breaking the written ones. You will not "commit suicide" by moderator on my watch.

I would do this in a PM but others are involved. Either take a break from this thread or take a break from WP.

Merle
Moderator

and you might want to check my profile before you continue to denigrate my manhood.

You people are all insane. Let's just look at the situation please:

A woman offered a religious rite to a patient on NHS time. Not wanting to appear in support of a particular religion, the NHS canned her, as a matter of policy. This may have been a harsh reaction, but I have no reason to suspect they wouldn't have done the same if her religion had been different. And I'm not sure there was much of a choice anyway. They have a right and an obligation to set a certain standard for their employees and to enforce it. Still, a bunch of Christians whined about discrimination, and she was offered her job back. I think they should have taken a stronger stand, but at least you can't say they didn't try to make amends. Would it have been better if she had been given lighter consequences (like a reprimand or suspension) that was not retracted? Would it be much different? All she lost was some time. But she gained the support of a whole lot of Christians and has become a living martyr.

And now we're insulting each other and talking about religious cleansing . Good job! I see you guys really get it.

The only (flimsy) reason I see that they should have been more careful in their treatment of the issue is that this is exactly how people react to this sort of thing. But if they had kept her on, then non-Christians would get upset (albeit to a lesser extent), and either would reflect FAR more poorly on the NHS than on this woman. The fact is that there was no option that looks good for them. So why not just do what makes sense? Follow through on your policy. Don't waver just because you don't want to offend the Christians. That's a form of discrimination that is far worse than what actually happened. So get over it, and get over yourselves.

Fine - I can actually see that point.

But, to finish the other matter - just because you foreigners don't realize that colonial is a bigoted and derogatory term, it doesn't mean it doesn't offend!
Sinsboldly, you do need to understand that making light of what is a very serious issue is not tolerated! You say you cannot have me "abusing" other members? Yet, when that member happens to be an ignorant bigot living in the last century, his derogatory slurs don't count as abuse? If anything you supported his bigotry.
Macbeth, just because you have a few "antipodean mates", who themselves aren't offended at being called colonial, doesn't mean we all are! For the record, my English mates get pissed off when a fellow Englishman calls people "colonials", saying it makes them all "look like absolute c***s", in the words of one of them.

You lot need to gain some perspective! You're foreign, so your not expected to understand - but, instead of saying, from your foreign and uninvolved perspective, that colonial is not offensive, accept that either it is, or I just find it so, and leave it be!

Now, I'm not keen on giving history lessons to ignorant antiantipodeans from up over, but you're ignorance is toxic.

Australia was never a British colony!
"Australia" was the convenient collective names for the no longer existing British colonies of Victoria, New South Wales, WA, SA, Queensland, etc.
These places no longer exist as colonies! They became states, and formed the sovereign nation of Australia!

There is no "status as a colony"; the donation from the queen is a drop in the ocean, but one appreciated from a foreign nation with close relations to the nation of Australia.

I have never been to a colony of Britain. Some few of my ancestors did come from a colony of Britain that no longer exists, but that makes me no more a colonial than a Briton is a roman slave.
The empire is gone, it's not coming back!

I am not a British colonial, I am an Australian national.
The only way the term colonial could possibly apply is if Australia kept colonies and I were to live in such a one! But, Australia keeps no colonies - so I cannot be a colonial.


Now, can we please lock this thread before another one of these people wants to try their high-horse foreigner act?

It's been argued out! They may possibly have over-reacted; but that's simply a necessary part of living in a world that is both increasingly secular and multicultural, and extremely volatile! End of discussion!

Anything more from this point would he yah-ha, nuh-uh back-and-forth; so, somebody, lock this thread BEFORE more circus tricks!

no, no, no, it is you that does not understand, Ishmael. This is a world wide site and no one here are foreigners. You have not even looked to see the only thing I commented on was a binky/dummy/nuk. I have asked you to take a break from this thread, and if necessary, from WP but am ignored; was hoping it would not come to this, but I see no other way.

Merle

Some issues: This assumes that allowing this woman to offer prayer is "supporting" a religion. Seems more to me that allowing her to do so is "supporting" her own right to choose. It is not the same as only operating the service under Christian values, or disallowing other religions from applying for services, or working for the service. What the NHS would be doing by allowing her this, and by extension by allowing all prayer, is actually promoting equality and diversity.

ALL races and religions, free to follow their beliefs and so forth, sufficient that it harm no other. THAT would be diverse. THAT would be equal. But it doesnt work like that here. What the NHS are actually doing here is adding to the culture of diversity which states that nobody is allowed to differ, akin to the Kurt Vonnegut jnr story Harrison Bergeron. (Where people are prevented from being exceptional because it discriminates against the unexceptional. A situation sadly too prevalent in our schools.) Or more precisely to this case they are promoting unbalance in British society by favouring one group over another. There have been comparative events where the religious needs and requirements of certain groups have taken precedence over others. I did cite some earlier. Not just religion. Other groups have been given precedence of a non-religious nature.

This case taken in isolation is at best, an overreaction of the governing body to a complaint. Given there was no danger to patients, this complaint could have been investigated without unpaid suspension. There was no need to react so brutally.

This case placed alongside other similar cases, becomes part of a larger pattern of discrimination between races and religions that exists in the UK, where the attempts to promote "equality and diversity" are being handled so badly that what it is actually promoting is inequality and fascism. Events like these fuel the unrest amongst the major demographic of the UK.. that being generally White anglo-saxons (or similar) of a generally Christian persuasion. Whether it is intentional or not, cases like this convince people that there is an institutional dislike of christianity, and by extension, of British or even English subjects. (Such cases as the NHS postcode lottery, the free parking/prescriptions etc add the anti-English aspect, as the service is not even fair, unbiased or contiguous in Britain.)

THIS is why I see it as a problem. THIS is why it IS a problem. Because it is part of the "one rule for one, one rule for another" society we seem to be stuck in.

I guarantee that if this nurse had been Muslim, or Sikh, or Hindu etc, that the complainant would have been branded a racist, religionist, and an unwelcome member of society.. obviously a BNP voting right wing a***hole who barely deserves treating.

Our society is NOT equal or diverse, and officially "promoting" these ideas is NOT HELPING to achieve them.

OH, I definitely agree. And what's infinitely worse than living in an unequal, un-diverse, un-equal society is that society foisting on us the illusion that is is equal, it is fair, it is unbiased, etc.

For whom the church bell tolls...topic

I just reread the story of nurse Carol Petrie and her reinstatement at her hospital job.

Presumably she has been warned about not mentioning religious affiliation at work from now on, and to refrain from acting upon it, or else she could be terminated. Fair enough. Rules are rules.

This should also apply to all religions at non-denominational health care facilities.

Case closed.