If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
shes allowed to wear it, shes just not allowed to wear it on top of her clothing
her fault, not BAs, if they didnt let ehr wear a neckalce yeh it'd be outters, but it isn't so her fault
The CoE will have a large investment portfolio in the company, and if that was withdrawn the share price would be clobbered.
I'm glad that they've finally had the sense to realise that they were in the wrong about this religious discrimination.
Blair had the right attitude- there are some fights worth fighting, and some fights not worth fighting. This wasn't worth fighting, especially as anyone with half a brain can see it was blatant religious discrimination which would never have happened had the woman been a Muslim, a Sikh, or a Pastafarian.
Front page of today's Daily Mail is about an alliance of Christians and Muslims who are fighting against attempts to strip Christmas of its Christian meaning. Sounds fair enough, I have never heard of a Muslim offended by a nativity scene or a poster for a carol concert; yet there does seem to be the odd white middle class liberal who tries to ban these things for fear of 'offending Muslims.'
Thats a widespread misconception, which is indeed propagated by the Daily Hate, Express, etc (which I suspect you do not just read the front page of).
In most cases these restrictions/bans are requested by a member of staff/members of staff/member of the public, then implemented by the "white middle class liberals" you refer to. Whether thats right or wrong is a different matter. But they don't just pluck the idea that muslims/hindus etc take offence out of the air.
Er I actually read the Times and Telegraph, might pick up the Mail on the train if someone's left it...but only caught the front page of today's Mail so I'm afraid your assumption is a misconception.
Actually, they do a lot of the time. The example I know best was in my local area last year, the Council (which is actually Conservative) decided that a carol concert poster might 'provoke tensions.'
Anyway the BA instance seemed a pretty classic example of doing something against Christians for fear of causing offence to others. Banning the religious paraphernalia of one group but allowing it for another was quite clearly discriminatory.
*I think you mean suspicion. Which you have just confirmed.
I meant what I said.
WAS
NO
RELIGIOUS
DISCRIMINATION
Let's be perfectly clear about that.
Shame on BA for caving in. Money talks, obviously...
Can we expect that all those for whom football is a religion will be allow to wear pendants with their club's crest on it as well?
i want a be able to carry around a balloon of a flying spagetti monster, or maybe a lightsaber
I want to be left alone.
Then you could worship me!
Bollocks.