No cross for you!

[Sir Brian]

Ah the slippery slope is becoming slipperier and steeper. Are we in fact merely years away from the persecutions of the early Christian faith? – IMO we are already there. True Christians are being slaughtered in the undeveloped regions of the world yet petty and obscure harassment tactics such as this are some of the first steps. Those of faith pray for strength and deliverance from the coming days (years).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/9136191/Christians-have-no-right-to-wear-cross-at-work-says-Government.html

[Sir Edward]

Interesting. It'll be interesting to see if they can fight this over there in Europe. I'd expect something similar to play out over here in the US.

I don't know, I'm torn. The idea of firing people over their religious views is pretty awful, but private businesses shouldn't necessarily be forced to alter their dress code either. Where's the sensible middle ground? No idea on this one.

But you're right, whenever freedoms are trampled, it's usually little by little, starting with things that are relatively harmless. It's the "boiling frog" syndrome. No one realizes how restrictive things get when those restrictions are added gradually over many years.

[Sir William]

So who's going to take the Cross with me?  With me!

[Sir James A]

It's a touchy one in this case. If I'm reading it right, it doesn't ban wearing a cross, it bans "displaying" it. So they could still wear one under their shirt, etc. Kind of like tattoos ... some places won't let you work there if you have tattoos, but only if they're visible. Or for "covered" piercings, like belly-buttons. It's similar to the saying "Religions are like (man parts), everybody has one, but it's improper to flaunt it".

(edit to add: The big thing here is that government shouldn't be sticking it's nose into private companies for religious reasons where they should have no jurisdiction. There was a case in europe where somebody refused to wear the school uniform, and wore their religious garb. The school kicked them out, so they went to the government. The government said it's a private school, if you want to play, you play by their rules, deal with it or find another school.)

But it's also got to be standard across the board. No cross? Then no burkhas. No cross? Then no pentagrams. No cross? Then no Star of David. We've bent over backwards in the US to make everybody else so comfortable in their religions and beliefs that we've trampled the religions and beliefs of most of the people who built this country. We're no longer invaded by people at sword point (or gun point), but by people using our own laws against us as weapons.

Back when this country was built by immigrants, those people came here, they assimilated, and they earned their unalienable rights. Now people come here, don't care about the language or US culture, don't care about anything other than getting free money and services. There's exceptions to that, but in general, that's how the trend has gone. And it raises tensions, divides us, and is completely counter-productive. Don't get me started on media twisting the public opinion with select "facts" and selectively ignored information.

If things persist like this, both economically and culturally, I foresee another civil war coming; maybe not this year, maybe not this decade, but looming overhead like a tornado waiting to touch down to the ground.

[Sir William]

We've bent over backwards in the US to make everybody else so comfortable in their religions and beliefs that we've trampled the religions and beliefs of most of the people who built this country. We're no longer invaded by people at sword point (or gun point), but by people using our own laws against us as weapons.

Back when this country was built by immigrants, those people came here, they assimilated, and they earned their unalienable rights. Now people come here, don't care about the language or US culture, don't care about anything other than getting free money and services. There's exceptions to that, but in general, that's how the trend has gone. And it raises tensions, divides us, and is completely counter-productive. Don't get me started on media twisting the public opinion with select "facts" and selectively ignored information.

If things persist like this, both economically and culturally, I foresee another civil war coming; maybe not this year, maybe not this decade, but looming overhead like a tornado waiting to touch down to the ground.

The bolded part is one of the many things I see going wrong in this country.  I'm all for religious tolerance, but not at the expense of mine own.

[Thorsteinn]

Y'all should try being an Athiest, or a Jew. Truly then do you notice it, the pervasivity of religion in the everyday world, specifically the Evangelical flavor of Christianity that pervades the US.

It's like not smoking pot for years then being able to smell the joint from 3 blocks over.

BTW: there are two kinds of founders of this country- Pot smoking Theists, and people so uptight that the English kicked them out.

[Sir Matthew]

Tis a slippery sloap indeed and common sense seems to be anything but. One of my guiding principles, which I think alot of people in the US could benefit from using, is if it doesn't directly affect me in a negative way, then leave it be. Does someone wearing (insert whatever religious item/dress) really hurt me? No, so what does it matter. On the other hand, sometimes religious freedom or tolerance is used as an excuse to be exempted from doing something that everyone else in a selected category is made to do. The uproar of the Catholic church over being forced to provide contraception in the healthcare for their workers (not people working directly for the Church itself, but for Church affliated charities, business, etc) is one example. They claim it is forcing them to provide something they don't believe in, in violation of their religous rights, however, especially in the case of hospitals, by exempting them they are granted an unfair advantage over their non-Catholic competition. It also opens the door to other religious and what I call "Psuedo-religious" groups to deny granted rights to their workers. The slippery sloap becomes if a business is operated by a radical religious person who does not believe in medicine, but rather prayer to cure illness, should he be forced to provide healthcare to his workers even though he believes this is a sin? As Ed has said, I don't know where the common sense middle ground really is either.

[Sir William]

Make churches into their own privately owned and run businesses, make them pay taxes, then they can do whatever they like w/regard to their healthcare programs (or lack thereof).

[SirNathanQ]

Well, from the resident Catholic here, I can tell you that our protests to being forced to provide contraception had nothing to do with advantages against other hospitals. It was because they would be forced to provide abortion-inducing forms of birth control, such as pills that directly terminate the fetus.

The Catholic Church beleives that abortion is an intrinsic evil and a sin. The Church shouldn't be forced to provide those things to it's own employees. We're not asking anyone to change their views and beleifs here, we'd just like that ours would be respected.

Here in the US, we have the separation of church and state. That's why we're not ran by a theocracy. It's a pretty darn good thing IMO too. However, both sides need to understand, that separation works both ways. Abortion is also considered an intrinsic evil by Islam, Judiasm, Orthodox Christianity, and several denominations of Protestantism. The Catholic Faith is only the most well-known because we have the largest presence in the US (we also have by far the largest amount of charities, schools, orphanages and hospitals that would have been affected by this legislation).

The Government has already set a precedent by allowing Quakers in the military "Consiencious Objection" (their faith beleives that all forms of killing is inherently wrong and sinful) to allow them to have a non-combat role because of their Faith. The Government has already done this to the Quakers, why not another Religion, or several? Are they somehow better than other religions?

Really, I don't see why Respect for one culture or religion has to come at the detriment of another. I like that other races and cultures have rights, I like that the US doesn't persecute peoples of other faiths, and in fact bends over backwards to try and accomidate them. However, fairness means equality, and that means equality for all, not simply a minority.

[Sir James A]

I'll point back to my previous story I posted (or think I posted), in which a middle eastern guy in europe demanded to be able to do something outrageous ... stone his wife, I think? Anyway, the locals said no, and he said you have to respect my customs and traditions, and the locals said in that case, we have a tradition too - we hang murderers. I forget the details, but that's the gist of it. It becomes an issue when one person's rights or beliefs get trampled at the expense of upholding someone elses.

Sir Nathan, I don't watch news and only catch wind of whatever people post on facebook or talk about at work, so I'm out of the loop on this. If the catholic church has employees, but catholics don't believe in abortion, why would anyone who works at the catholic church ask for it? I'm going to take a guess that not everybody who works at the catholic church is a catholic?

[Sir Patrick]

It stems more from institutions like Catholic hospitals and charities being forced to offer the products/services.  Like Sir Nathan, I'm a Catholic too, and I'm really torn on this issue.  On the one hand, I don't want the government forcing my religion to go against its conscience, but on the other I don't want want a scenario like Sir Matthew pointed out.  Of course there are certain things one agrees to when one takes just about any job (no long hair, visible tattoos, etc.), so maybe people should consider that when applying for work at a religious institution.

[SirNathanQ]

No, we don't exclusively hire Catholics. Also, even if we did, the legislation would have forced us to provide it anyway, since our charitable organizations and institutions care for non-Catholics.