Wearing a cross is a crime in England??

estebanrey said:
I'm an athiest.

I do however think that Christianity is treated less favorably than other religions. I care about equality and I don't see that at the moment.

Either employers should allow the cross to be worn and the head scarf or niether. From where I'm sitting it just looks like political correctness and 'white guilt' is informing the law which I don't like.
Click to expand...

Stop trying to compare 2 different things. There is equality in that religions which require an item of clothing are allowed, but the reason Christianity doesn't have any such items allowed is because it does not require any such items. If Christianity had strict clothing requirements than the government would make it a right for people to follow those religious requirements.

It's not an issue of the government treating different religions differently, it's all because that different religions ARE DIFFERENT!

You also go on about no consensus about the wearing of a headscarf, but can you point me to where it says there 'MUST' be a consensus? There are those who do not believe that the holocaust happened, yet it is still overwhelmingly accepted as truth, Just like although some don't wear the headscarf of believe it is a requirement, there is a HUGE portion of believers that do. Where as compared to Christianity you will struggle to find anyone who thinks that the bible says they must wear a crucifix.


Edit: It should be up to the religions to prove that they have requirements for certain items of clothing for exemptions to be made, sufficient written texts for Muslims show that the headscarf is a requirement, where as Christianity can't do the same as wearing a crucifix simply isn't a requirement in the bible.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
None of which adds to the actual debate I was having with Fenris which was about justifying the headscarf for employees whilst banning the cross.

I'm fully aware SOME Muslims think the head scarf is required so I don't know why you've bothered to essentially just write the same thing as I've already said.
Click to expand...

To begin with I was replying to you telling Fenris he was wrong according to how he explained that the justifications for the headscarf are informed....you categorically stated he was wrong, when he wasn't, you were.

Also you are missing the point that Islam, unlike Christianity, is informed not by doctrine set by a clerical hierarchy, but by an evolving and often disparate set of laws interpreted by and from rulings set by disparate interpretive ideals. This means that one Muslim may not be required to wear the hijab, whereas another is, and both are supported by their religion. Effectively the woman who states that she is required to wear the hijab is justified in doing so, equally the woman who states she is not is equally justified, only neither would necessarily agree with the other. Consensus however is not a requirement of Islam.

Christianity is predicated by their articles of the faith and doctrines and is therefore theologically different to Islam in how their adherents are informed on what the requirements of their faith are...hence the difference between the Muslim woman wearing a hijab and a Christian woman wearing a Crucifix.

You were using the fact that some Muslims do not wear the headscarf as justification for saying those that do have no justification for it...which is not true and which was the point Fenis was making.

Like someone else said, there is no easy one-fits-all solution to this, however a little common sense would largely negate many of the issues....uniform policies being flexible on things as inoffensive as a crucifix being an example.
 
Last edited:
Dist said:
Stop trying to compare 2 different things. There is equality in that religions which require an item of clothing are allowed, but the reason Christianity doesn't have any such items allowed is because it does not require any such items. If Christianity had strict clothing requirements than the government would make it a right for people to follow those religious requirements.
Click to expand...

NOR DOES ISLAM!

I'm not comparing '2 different things', I'm comparing the same thing. There is no consensus whether Christians should wear the cross or not, it is not specifically written anywhere in their holy texts but this is also true of Islam and the head scarf.

If it specifically said in the Koran or Hadith that women must wear headscarves then I wouldn't even be debating this. I get what you are saying but I just don't see this definitive requirement in Islam over the headscarf like you're making out there is.

If the argument is, well some Muslims think that what it says then why can't some Christians play the same game?

Dist said:
It's not an issue of the government treating different religions differently, it's all because that different religions ARE DIFFERENT!
Click to expand...

Well the Abrahamic religions (Judaism, Christianity, Islam etc) aren't in reality different, they're just three cans with different labels but ultimately came from the same factory.

But let's take your logic there for a second. Men and women are different too, should we scrap equality laws over gender equality then?

Dist said:
You also go on about no consensus about the wearing of a headscarf, but can you point me to where it says there 'MUST' be a consensus?
Click to expand...

Well it's contradictory if you are going to defend the rights of companies to ban the cross on the basis that there is no consensus in Christianity that it must be worn.

Dist said:
There are those who do not believe that the holocaust happened, yet it is still overwhelmingly accepted as truth, Just like although some don't wear the headscarf of believe it is a requirement, there is a HUGE portion of believers that do. Where as compared to Christianity you will struggle to find anyone who thinks that the bible says they must wear a crucifix.
Click to expand...

Finally, an argument that answers what I'm saying here.

When you say a HUGE portion are you including Islamic states because in the Western world head scarf wearing amongst Muslim is a minority activity.

Dist said:
Edit: It should be up to the religions to prove that they have requirements for certain items of clothing for exemptions to be made, sufficient written texts for Muslims show that the headscarf is a requirement, where as Christianity can't do the same as wearing a crucifix simply isn't a requirement in the bible.
Click to expand...

Please show me these "sufficient written texts" that tell Muslim women to wear a headscarf.

Is it anymore specific than say this....

Deuteronomy 6:8-9 You shall bind them [religious texts/symbols] as a sign on your hand and they shall be as frontals on your forehead. You shall write them on the doorposts of your house and on your gates
Click to expand...

Can a Catholic not claim wearing the cross falls under the above for example?

The problem with using religious texts to back up your belief is they contradict themselves so often you can quite easily justify or condone anything you want.
 
Last edited:
estebanrey said:
NOR DOES ISLAM!
If the argument is, well some Muslims think that what it says then why can't some Christians play the same game?
Click to expand...

Simply because, as I have explained, the justifications within Islam are not formed or subject to the same theological framework as those in Christianity...whereas a Muslim is supported by the way his or her religion rules on such articles of their faith, Christianity is not...for example a Muslim wearing the Hijab can point to specific rulings (fiqh) that state such requirements and all the relevant jurisprudence relating to that specific interpretation of both the Qu'ran and associated Hadith (Sunnah) as set out by their respective Islamic Scholars who have the authority to issue such rulings. The Qu'ran also allows personal interpretation under certain criteria and strictures as I explained earlier.

Christians do not have such a system, they follow the articles as set out by their denomination,it would have to be specifically set out in those articles (as set out by the respective denomination i.e Jehovah Witnesses and Blood Transfusions) and not simply ruled on either by the individual or by a single member of clergy...for example, for a Catholic to state that wearing a crucifix was a requirement of their Faith (as opposed to an expression of their faith) it would have to be specifically ruled on and added to doctrine by the Vatican with the relevant theological justification.

The religions are different, they have different rules and theologies regardless of whether they are based on the same initial premise.

The problem is determining what is an expression of faith, and what is a requirement of faith.....unfortunately for Christianity, the nature of how these things are determined means that unless it is specifically in their respective Articles of Faith then it is not something you can interpret on an individual basis.

That is not to say that Christians should not be allowed to express their religion by wearing a Cross/Crucifix, only that the legal arguments and justifications for doing so are different.
 
Last edited:
yannis76 said:
Wearing a cross is a crime in England??
Click to expand...

No.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/rel...ht-to-wear-cross-at-work-says-Government.html

Fellow Englishmen,

is the story above true??
Click to expand...

Yes, but it does not prove that wearing a cross is a crime in England. It simply proves Christians have no legal right to wear one.

estebanrey said:
Can a Catholic not claim wearing the cross falls under the above for example?
Click to expand...

No, because the Law of Moses applies to Jews, not Christians. I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who are ignorant of this fact.
 
Why does the cross need to be visible anyway? Where does it say that wearing a cross is required by the religion? :confused:
 
Glaucus said:
Surly common sense would be its upto the rider like in several american states.
Click to expand...

No, common sense as far as motorcycles go would be "Wear a helmet". Whether that common sense approach should be enshrined in law is a completely different question though.
 
Wow!! I cant believe, my initial post about this story created 3 pages of posts...
Anyway just to add to the discussion, my opinion is, it is my right to wear a cross if I want it. I would consider it the same with the Islam women wearing a burka (I dont know how to spell it, sorry) or the women from India having this small mark on their forehead.

I would take it even a bit further...What is the role of religion in anyone's life? One role is to give you some values about life (don't steal, don't kill, be honest, righteous etc). If you do decide to work in a multinational company or bank or in general an organization whose the only REAL value is profit, there is a high possibility that sometimes you might have to go against these values. So, you know who doesn't want religions, country traditions etc...
 
Evangelion said:
No, because the Law of Moses applies to Jews, not Christians. I never cease to be amazed at the number of people who are ignorant of this fact.
Click to expand...

Same ****, different label. It's from the Old Testament, are you telling me Catholics don't read or believe in the Book of Deuteronomy?

P.S. the passage I used came directly from a Catholic website.

Fully star out swear words.
 
Last edited:
majnu said:
good, because the prophet Jesus did not die on a cross nor does the silly notation he died for all our sins make sense.

Ban it!
Click to expand...

I don't believe in those fairy stories either; I'm about as atheist as they come. But I consider the right of a person to express their beliefs to be as sacrosanct as they themselves hold that belief. So long as they don't impose their beliefs on me, it's all good.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom