This HAS to STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Double Standards or just a militant trouble maker ?

  • double standards

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • trouble maker

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • just plain ugly

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
#4
I agree with you 100% mate, it has to stop, but the fact is that it won't!
As mentioned before on previous threads, there is one rule for one group of people, and another for a different group of people. It's sh1te, I agree, but it's the way that this government and their policies of appeasement are taknig this country. It is a totally unfair decision, and she's got every right to appeal, I hope that she wins but I sadly doubt it. Maybe the sight of a Christian Cross would awaken unpleasant reminders of the crusades for some passing muslim, and cause them offence. God Forbid that be allowed to happen. For some reason, this government is terrified of offending the Muslim community in the UK, maybe because they don't want another 7/7 I don't know, but I do know that policies of appeasement just don't work.
This government stinks.
 
#5
Problem is nobody is scared of Christians. we should get the militant wing of the sally army to get out there and threaten a jihad of their own. the sight of the SA band driving through muslim enclaves , playing "Rock of ages, Cleft for me" might cause people to reconsider. or maybe not.
 
#6
This is a Christian country , lets us make it compulsory for all to wear a cross , those who are unwill to be forced to leave . this would solve a lot of problems
 
#7
we live in strange and confusing times in this country,which don't reflect the thinking or feelings of the majority of the people. All religions have been tolerated in this country for centuries, including islam, yet the moment anyone expresses any opinion about islam, some muslims get hysterical!! We can't have victory parades, our wounded are abused in hospital, we have to tread on egg shells. Yet our hypocritical primeminister talks of the fantastic job our troops are doing to help muslims, indeed all people while in the same breath making our troops keep low profile for fear of upsetting the muslim community. If any person of any religious denomination disagrees with our democratic way of life they forget they are free people, who've obtianed that freedom because our forces personnel have laid down their lives for them or carry injuries through service for a lifetime on their behalf. If that can't accept that gift, they have the right to move on and live their way of life elsewhere in another country which may not neccessarily offer the same level of freedoms we so take for granted in this country! Having had 29 years of being a war pensioner on 50% disability since 19 with virtually yearly hospital treatment, i'd still risk being injured again for this wonderful country we still call Great Britain
 
#8
I dunno, when I wore a uniform the dress regs forbade me from displaying a religious symbol. Even my dog tags, which were *issue*, had to be kept under my t-shirt and blouse. When I worked on my LAV, my command had a rule that any wedding rings had to come off. The only authorized "jewelry" I could display was a watch, and a POW-MIA band I wore on the wrist (yes, at least at the time, POW-MIA bracelets were specifically authorized wear for US forces). Any organization which has uniforms, has uniform regulations. If I'd chosen to wear a cross, I'd have had to put it on my dog tag chain, to be concealed beneath my clothes. Seems reasonable that BA require same of her.
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#9
"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."
Key quote as far as I can see. She breached their policy and was sent home. Can't see the drama to be honest.
 
#10
Sixtyfootdoll said:
"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."
Key quote as far as I can see. She breached their policy and was sent home. Can't see the drama to be honest.
Exactly what I said aswell, Get her back to work or sack her!.
 
#11
Mad_Moriarty said:
Sixtyfootdoll said:
"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."
Key quote as far as I can see. She breached their policy and was sent home. Can't see the drama to be honest.
Exactly what I said aswell, Get her back to work or sack her!.
She's too fat for an air hostess anyway!
 
#12
OldTimer said:
This is a Christian country , lets us make it compulsory for all to wear a cross , those who are unwill to be forced to leave . this would solve a lot of problems
This story won't make you happy then:

Non-Muslims must wear hijab
 
#14
This HAS to STOP!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Oh I agree, these non stories published by those fish and chip wrappers really do have to stop.

This women broke the rules of her employment, was asked to stop breaking the rules and then she claimed disrimination.

Had this story been about a face veil wearing teacher breaking the rules and then claiming discrimination a lot of posters on here would be calling her all kinds of nasty names.

Can you say hypocrisy? Or how about double standards?


hypocrisy
1. a pretense of having a virtuous character, moral or religious beliefs or principles, etc., that one does not really possess.
2. a pretense of having some desirable or publicly approved attitude.

double standard 

1. any code or set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another,
 
#15
Bossdog said:
She's too fat for an air hostess anyway!
She'd be fine on American Airlines, they're all old and craggy! :D Just a fact....

For most Christians wearing of crosses is an irrelevance as it serves little purpose to their faith.
 
#16
A country full of double standards and loop holes which means the wrong people are effectivly getting shafted!!
 
#17
On the charge of breaking the dress regs - guilty.
BUT - how the hell did this ever get into dress regs on the grounds of liable to offend? Whilst we may not all get down on our knees on a Sunday, that does not mean that absentees are not Christain. Even Terry Waite has said that Anglican ceremony is not attractive. If I were asked my religion I would reply C of E and would support anything relevant to their beliefs. The same 'likely to offend' does not apparently extend to those who choose to wear the veil or those who wear turbans or have kaja bracelets. Come to think of it, I believe a Sikh carrying a knife is part of an article of faith. What price Sikh trolley dollies? Maybe even wrong to quote the Bible but I think it says something about evil being in the eye of the beholder. If they cannot face a small cross, how can they walk past a Christian church? Are these to be demolished/covered up?
It seems we are fighting a war on terror overseas. In our own country, those whose agenda is almost identical to the terrorists are winning the battle in getting more and more of their 'rules' and culture made mandatory for those not of the Islamic faith.
 
#18
Isnt the problem that "adornments" such as turbans, Jijabs, Iron bangles are allowed for other staff, but a crucifix isnt?

The fundamental symbol of our nationally identiying religion cannot be shown!
 

Sixty

ADC
Moderator
Book Reviewer
#19
Did you actually read the report?
"Other items such as turbans, hijabs and bangles can be worn as it is not practical for staff to conceal them beneath their uniforms."
Not awfully difficult to comprehend, surely? Wear what you wish, just not overtly.
 
#20
"You were asked to cover up or remove your cross and chain which you refused to do.

"British Airways uniform standards stipulate that adornments of any kind are not to be worn with the uniform."
Hmm, sounds fair enough to me.

Personally I couldn't care less what symbols someone is wearing. That however is neither here nor there.

Mr OldTimer, do you still believe that the world is flat?
 

Similar threads


New Posts

Latest Threads

Top