|
|
Post by johnofgwent on Mar 9, 2024 8:45:15 GMT
I think our up to their arses in diversity shit eating twats in HR have blown it "Starting from Sunday March 10th through Tuesday April 9th we will be blocking out meeting room 3 for use as a prayer room, This space will be available EXCLUSIVELY to our Moslem colleagues observing Ramadan during working hours' Is this not a violation of UK Law Should they not also block out room 4 for the Christians, 5 for the Jews and 6 for me as a high priest of the First United Church Of Cthulhu (registered in the state of Nevada for tax purposes) Shouldn't it be up to an organisation and its personnel to designate pace for religious purposes, even if only temporarily?
Do we know if any Christians, Jews, or Cthulhu** followers have requested similar spaces in the same organisation and been turned down?
Aren't toilets similarly designated and segregated or unisex...?
PS — **I was surprised to see Cthulhu is the name of a fictional monster created by author H.P. Lovecraft, so it appears similar to most other cult and religions and their principal beings...
Shouldn't it be up to an organisation and it's personnel to decide if it will bake a wedding cake for two homosexuals ? If what you are saying is the law has become too invasive, I agree. But I somehow doubt that's what you mean. Although feel free to surprise me I've been registered as a priest of that church for some time I became one as a reaction to the actions of St Julian's Methodist's congregation when they basically chucked Moira out for her decision to abort Emma at 24 weeks rather than carry on with a pointless pregnancy which we knew would deliver a dead child. Our way removed a bucket load of fuss, expense and paperwork. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 12:14:46 GMT
Wasn’t the cake the subject of a contract between the customer placing the order and the cake shop employee accepting to carry it out?
You may have had more favourable expectations of St Julian’s during the sad episode you relate, but was any legal undertaking broken…?
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 9, 2024 12:58:44 GMT
Make them multifaith or not at all.
Allow Satanists to share them....
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 13:09:04 GMT
Make them multifaith or not at all. Allow Satanists to share them.... Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...? |
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 13:13:23 GMT
Make them multifaith or not at all. Allow Satanists to share them.... Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...? Who are the ones ‘ directly concerned’ who would enforce their exclusive appropriation ? |
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 9, 2024 13:14:30 GMT
Make them multifaith or not at all. Allow Satanists to share them.... Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...? I'd rather see a secular society in which people with a faith kept it to themselves and didn't bother others with it. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 13:47:06 GMT
Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...? I'd rather see a secular society in which people with a faith kept it to themselves and didn't bother others with it. I agree with that — no established church, no seats in the Lords for clerics, no enforced acts of worship in schools, etc. But I've no problem with people willingly celebrating their beliefs as long as they don't bother or interfere with others — though they sometimes run events that outsiders can also enjoy.
Personally I don't care if there's a church, mosque, synagogue, temple, etc, in my area, or if an organisation lets its employees have space and time for prayers...
|
|
|
|
Post by Vinny on Mar 9, 2024 13:49:54 GMT
So long as the people who follow a belief do not bully, I couldn't care less.
But when they preach hate, carry out terrorism, that's a problem.
|
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 13:58:59 GMT
Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...? Who are the ones ‘ directly concerned’ who would enforce their exclusive appropriation ? In the case cited in the opening post, my preference would be for the organisation to be open to suggestions from its personnel and for there to be a full dialogue with all staff and a democratic decision being arrived at. In some instances, staff associations and/or unions might be ideal channels of communication.
Would there really need to be any overt enforcement — eg, no organisation I've been at polices its toilets...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 14:30:23 GMT
Who are the ones ‘ directly concerned’ who would enforce their exclusive appropriation ? In the case cited in the opening post, my preference would be for the organisation to be open to suggestions from its personnel and for there to be a full dialogue with all staff and a democratic decision being arrived at. In some instances, staff associations and/or unions might be ideal channels of communication.
Would there really need to be any overt enforcement — eg, no organisation I've been at polices its toilets...
Define a democratic decision in this case . Define policing in this case too. There are no police outside my local church but that doesn’t mean the church welcomes anyone to perform their own religious practice within it . Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 14:57:59 GMT
In the case cited in the opening post, my preference would be for the organisation to be open to suggestions from its personnel and for there to be a full dialogue with all staff and a democratic decision being arrived at. In some instances, staff associations and/or unions might be ideal channels of communication.
Would there really need to be any overt enforcement — eg, no organisation I've been at polices its toilets...
Define a democratic decision in this case . Define policing in this case too. There are no police outside my local church but that doesn’t mean the church welcomes anyone to perform their own religious practice within it . Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? Democratic = agreement among majority — I suspect most personnel depts, staff associations and unions are familiar with the concept.
Why would anyone want to perform "their own" religious practice in another church without first getting agreement — unless they meant to cause upset?
Jewish schools and buildings in Stamford Hill do have visible uniformed security. The only church of four within walking distance that I can see into the entrance, has glass doors and appears to be staffed full-time.
Hackney (40% Christian, 14% Muslim, 6% Jewish) often sees regular meetings between all local leaders of the major faiths. I've no reason to suspect that's unusual for inner London boroughs...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 15:10:14 GMT
Define a democratic decision in this case . Define policing in this case too. There are no police outside my local church but that doesn’t mean the church welcomes anyone to perform their own religious practice within it . Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? Democratic = agreement among majority — I suspect most personnel depts, staff associations and unions are familiar with the concept. Why would anyone want to perform "their own" religious practice in another church without first getting agreement — unless they meant to cause upset?
Jewish schools and buildings in Stamford Hill do have visible uniformed security. The only church of four within walking distance that I can see into the entrance, has glass doors and appears to be staffed full-time.
Hackney (40% Christian, 14% Muslim, 6% Jewish) often sees regular meetings between all local leaders of the major faiths. I've no reason to suspect that's unusual for inner London boroughs...
The first sentence is obvious . I wanted to know how you would make this work . An overall majority with ‘ one man ,one vote’ ?I suspect many would cry about the tyranny of the majority but if you can’t support your own argument, that ok . I don’t think anyone would want to perform thier own religious practice in another church ,that’s why I asked about how you would make it work and how ‘ policing ‘ could or should be involved . It looks like half baked idea . So I’ll ask again ..Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 15:27:55 GMT
Democratic = agreement among majority — I suspect most personnel depts, staff associations and unions are familiar with the concept. Why would anyone want to perform "their own" religious practice in another church without first getting agreement — unless they meant to cause upset?
Jewish schools and buildings in Stamford Hill do have visible uniformed security. The only church of four within walking distance that I can see into the entrance, has glass doors and appears to be staffed full-time.
Hackney (40% Christian, 14% Muslim, 6% Jewish) often sees regular meetings between all local leaders of the major faiths. I've no reason to suspect that's unusual for inner London boroughs...
The first sentence is obvious . I wanted to know how you would make this work . An overall majority with ‘ one man ,one vote’ ?I suspect many would cry about the tyranny of the majority but if you can’t support your own argument, that ok . I don’t think anyone would want to perform thier own religious practice in another church ,that’s why I asked about how you would make it work and how ‘ policing ‘ could or should be involved . It looks like half baked idea . So I’ll ask again ..Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? So you're asking about the solution to a problem you don't think exists, and passing an opinion on something of which you've no knowledge.
Isn't this a pointless discussion?
I'm not really a churchgoer. I only attend places of worship to please or support others (eg, baptisms, funerals, weddings). So I cannot recall what notices churches may have outside. Some may have "all are welcome" or similar signs.
And none of that deals with an organisation catering for the wishes of members of its staff — sounds like a good employer to me...
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Mar 9, 2024 15:36:05 GMT
The first sentence is obvious . I wanted to know how you would make this work . An overall majority with ‘ one man ,one vote’ ?I suspect many would cry about the tyranny of the majority but if you can’t support your own argument, that ok . I don’t think anyone would want to perform thier own religious practice in another church ,that’s why I asked about how you would make it work and how ‘ policing ‘ could or should be involved . It looks like half baked idea . So I’ll ask again ..Wouldn’t just a sign saying ‘ any faith welcome ‘ be enough ? So you're asking about the solution to a problem you don't think exists, and passing an opinion on something of which you've no knowledge.
Isn't this a pointless discussion?
I'm not really a churchgoer. I only attend places of worship to please or support others (eg, baptisms, funerals, weddings). So I cannot recall what notices churches may have outside. Some may have "all are welcome" or similar signs.
And none of that deals with an organisation catering for the wishes of members of its staff — sounds like a good employer to me...
If you think your post “Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...?” Is pointless then fair enough but don’t project that at me . Im only giving you the opportunity to make a point out of your pointless post. You wanted suggested that a ‘ democrat decision being arrived at ‘ not me . I just wanted to find out if you knew what you were talking about . |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Mar 9, 2024 15:43:02 GMT
So you're asking about the solution to a problem you don't think exists, and passing an opinion on something of which you've no knowledge.
Isn't this a pointless discussion?
I'm not really a churchgoer. I only attend places of worship to please or support others (eg, baptisms, funerals, weddings). So I cannot recall what notices churches may have outside. Some may have "all are welcome" or similar signs.
And none of that deals with an organisation catering for the wishes of members of its staff — sounds like a good employer to me...
If you think your post “Is that something you'd like to see enforced — or would you allow the outcome to be a decision arrived at by all those directly concerned...?” Is pointless then fair enough but don’t project that at me . Im only giving you the opportunity to make a point out of your pointless post. You wanted suggested that a ‘ democrat decision being arrived at ‘ not me . I just wanted to find out if you knew what you were talking about . I don't see I carry responsibility for your inability to understand. Therefore, carry on wittering all you like — I've posted all the replies I want to... |
|
