• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

And they shall persecute you for MY name's sake. [W:20]

In this case, Christians are the ones suffering on account of their expression of their beliefs.

Verthaine said:
Couldn't you have easily have said the next sentence you are about to read?

"Personally I dislike the persecution of any religion and their followers."
(Unless,of course,that is not something you believe in)
I believe in prosecuting criminals of crimes they commit regardless of their religious beliefs in fair trials of their peers.
Click to expand...
 
Peter Grimm said:
In this case, Christians are the ones suffering on account of their expression of their beliefs.
Click to expand...

There are humans all around this planet who have suffered,are suffering,and will probably will suffer for expression of their beliefs.
Why single out a handful of christians as deserving special attention?
All suffering sucks one way or another.
Please tell me you are not implying that only christians suffering is the only thing that matters to you.
(If it is,that of course is your right to do,which you don't need me telling you.)
 
Yes there are many who have suffered due to their religion or the expression of their beliefs in general. In this particular thread, we are talking about Christians who are suffering for expressing their beliefs in a responsible manner.

Verthaine said:
There are humans all around this planet who have suffered,are suffering,and will probably will suffer for expression of their beliefs.
Why single out a handful of christians as deserving special attention?
All suffering sucks one way or another.
Please tell me you are not implying that only christians suffering is the only thing that matters to you.
(If it is,that of course is your right to do,which you don't need me telling you.)
Click to expand...
 
rathi said:
The first two case in the OP are based on dress codes. The hospital dress code is justified for health and sanitation reasons, I'm having a hard time seeing the reasoning for air-line check in.
Click to expand...
The point is that they're not dress codes banning crosses, they're dress codes banning jewellery. Even if the dress code is deemed irrational, it wouldn't be discriminating against Christians. Claiming there was any ban on crosses in either case is simply false - both claimants were actually offered alternatives of wearing the cross differently.
 
HonestJoe said:
The point is that they're not dress codes banning crosses, they're dress codes banning jewellery. Even if the dress code is deemed irrational, it wouldn't be discriminating against Christians. Claiming there was any ban on crosses in either case is simply false - both claimants were actually offered alternatives of wearing the cross differently.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Employers have the right to set dress codes, including the requirement that one wear a white button-down shirt every single day. And in the case of healthcare professionals, the prohibitions against jewelry make good sense.

Now, if a cross is a problem whereas a pentagram is not (although the reverse is far more often true), then there really is an issue.
 
If you're Christian and don't feel persecuted, you're not doing it right.
 
The only question that matters is; "are other religions and ideologies (i.e. political et al) held to the same standard?" If not, it is religious persecution. If so, there is no case.
 
HonestJoe said:
The point is that they're not dress codes banning crosses, they're dress codes banning jewellery. Even if the dress code is deemed irrational, it wouldn't be discriminating against Christians. Claiming there was any ban on crosses in either case is simply false - both claimants were actually offered alternatives of wearing the cross differently.
Click to expand...

I agree that the policy was not intended to specifically persecute Christians, but banning all jewelry is still a ban on crosses. My primary opposition to the policy is because employers shouldn't be dictating policies beyond what it needed to perform a job, not the idea that there is a conspiracy of widespread discrimination against Christianity.
 
Peter Grimm said:
People are unique creatures, not monotonous robots.
Click to expand...

Everybody is unique, just like everyone else. A jewellery ban applies whatever the shape of the jewellery. Cross, candlestick or crescent, dice, dog or diamond, none of them are special.
 
Religious faith is more meaningful than a dice or a candlestick.

Also, is a jewelry ban really appropriate? Do wedding rings count?

Manc Skipper said:
Everybody is unique, just like everyone else. A jewellery ban applies whatever the shape of the jewellery. Cross, candlestick or crescent, dice, dog or diamond, none of them are special.
Click to expand...
 
Manc Skipper said:
Everybody is unique, just like everyone else. A jewellery ban applies whatever the shape of the jewellery. Cross, candlestick or crescent, dice, dog or diamond, none of them are special.
Click to expand...

If the usa is a Christian country ,if in culture alone, should any minority dictate what religious symbols can or cannot be worn?
 
USA law does not apply in the examples under discussion The question is, can jewellery, whatever the shape, or significance to the wearer, be worn over or under a uniform. The policy was "not on top", and the law supported the employers. Nobody was prevented from wearing their baubles.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Religious faith is more meaningful than a dice or a candlestick.

Also, is a jewelry ban really appropriate? Do wedding rings count?
Click to expand...

A Menorah is a candlestick symbolic of Judaism, of which your religion is a cult.

Should a nurse wear a wedding band during surgery? ... No, there are times when vanity is overridden by practicality.
 
How did we get on nurses?

Manc Skipper said:
A Menorah is a candlestick symbolic of Judaism, of which your religion is a cult.

Should a nurse wear a wedding band during surgery? ... No, there are times when vanity is overridden by practicality.
Click to expand...
 
rathi said:
I agree that the policy was not intended to specifically persecute Christians, but banning all jewelry is still a ban on crosses.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be a ban on crosses that aren't jewellery and regardless, neither case involving jewellery were flat bans and both women were offered compromises (wearing the necklace under a layer of clothing or wearing a broach rather than a necklace) which they turned down.

rathi said:
My primary opposition to the policy is because employers shouldn't be dictating policies beyond what it needed to perform a job, not the idea that there is a conspiracy of widespread discrimination against Christianity.
Click to expand...
Well in three of the four cases in question, the policies were directly about performing the job. The fourth was just uniform policy but I don't see why a company can't implement a uniform policy, especially for customer-facing staff.
 
in turkey ,a supposed democracy,you are not allowed to build a church. and you could be severely beaten if you do or attend one.. but you must pay to maintain all the mosques and for the building of new ones. so i guess we shouldn't complain.
 
Peter Grimm said:
Religious faith is more meaningful than a dice or a candlestick.
Click to expand...

To some people. But not to everyone. That's kind of the point of religious freedom. That includes the freedom from religion, as well as the freedom to religion.
 
The Christian persecution complex gets old. They should walk a day in my shoes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom