This post of mine is not a political statement of any sort. (See that period there?)
So, please, no political blah-blah-blah in the comments.
Thanks!
Now I repeat the question to go with the above news clip: How perceptive are you?
Religion
Both Sides Say, ‘Gross!’
There is widespread shock following the news that Duke Amachree has lost his case, having been sacked for mentioning God in the workplace. An employment tribunal has ruled that it was reasonable for Wandsworth Council to dismiss Duke. Duke was initially suspended for telling a client with an incurable illness not to give up hope and suggesting that she try putting her faith in God. He was later sacked for gross misconduct for his comments to her and for taking the story to the press. The decision has come as a huge surprise to Duke and to his legal team.
Duke, a father of two and committed Christian, had worked for Wandsworth Council for 18 years and had an unblemished record. Yet, as a result of the comments he made in one 45 minute housing interview, he was subject to 6 months of investigations and three interviews with the Council. His solicitor was even told by the Council that saying “God bless” to a client would require an investigation if the client complained.
Gross misconduct usually covers such behaviour as violence in the workplace, theft or other such serious conduct. Yet the client herself expressly stated that she did not want Duke to be dismissed for what he had said and Duke had never been told that such small talk in a housing interview was prohibited. The Council have always accepted that Duke’s motivation in speaking to the client was purely one of compassion.
Duke, backed by the Christian Legal Centre, took his case to the tribunal where it was argued that the Council’s decision to dismiss him was grossly disproportionate and unfair, and that they had discriminated against him on the basis of his religion.
For the rest of the story: Shock decision against Council worker sacked for mentioning God
Meanwhile, an observation: If this had happened in the States, the issue raised may well have been racial discrimination.
Offending Pages
Amidst the less-than-fresh email I read this morning, I came across this from The Berean Call (An Invented Tale):
According to Moorthy Muthuswamy, an expert on political Islam, “61 percent of the Koran talks ill of unbelievers or calls for their violent conquest and subjugation, but only 2.6 percent talks about the overall good of humanity.” Hmmm. Seems as though that would amount to an awful lot of offending pages.
Frankly, I have no idea if that’s accurate.
But it would have to be hugely inaccurate for it not to be an eye-opening perspective.
What do you think?
And do you know of any experts on political Christianity who have come up with this type of statistic regarding the Bible?
They Were Taught That?!
Check out these two excerpts from the 1691 New England Primer:
In Adam’s Fall
We Sinned all.Thy Life to Mend
This Book Attend.
Where were the protesters and objectors and suers?
And the parents — didn’t they care?!
Where were the legislatures and the courts and the governors and the city counselors and the district attorneys and the meter maids?
What about equality and equal time and fairness doctrines for other religions and non-religions?
Didn’t they care separation of church and state?
And the poor children with such dreadful thoughts poked in their heads!
🙄
Ah, those were the days. No wonder the country then was in such poor shape. 😯
(And I suppose next we’ll hear parents spanked their children and made them be quiet at the table and didn’t let them play all rowdy-like on Sundays.)
Mennonite Baptist?
That’s what I wondered when Google Alerts pointed me to this story this morning:
The Pollard Agency, a Fruithurst, Ala.-based contract security company, unlawfully discriminated against an employee because of her religion, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission EEOC charged in a lawsuit it filed on March 8, 2010.
According to the EEOC’s suit, the Pollard Agency violated federal law by firing Marian Lawson from a client location in Monticello, Ga., rather than accommodating her beliefs as a Mennonite Baptist that she cover her hair with a scarf.
Do they mean Mennonite Anabaptist? or Anabaptist Mennonite? or German Baptist?
Maybe Marian is a Mennonite Baptist.
Is there such a thing?
Anyway, towards the end of the story, this:
“Title VII protects employees from having to make the difficult choice between their religious beliefs and their employment,” said Robert Dawkins, regional attorney for the EEOC’s Atlanta District Office.
Maybe we American Christians are being spared too many difficult choices regarding our beliefs.
Maybe.
What do you think?
Oh, and here’s the source for the above story: Pollard Agency Sued By EEOC For Religious Discrimination
Devil in the Vatican?
What’s with this from the UK Times Online?
Father Gabriele Amorth, 85, who has been the Vatican’s chief exorcist for 25 years and says he has dealt with 70,000 cases of demonic possession, said that the consequences of satanic infiltration included power struggles at the Vatican as well as “cardinals who do not believe in Jesus, and bishops who are linked to the Demon”.
He added: “When one speaks of ‘the smoke of Satan’ [a phrase coined by Pope Paul VI in 1972] in the holy rooms, it is all true – including these latest stories of violence and paedophilia.”
Source: Chief exorcist Father Gabriele Amorth says Devil is in the Vatican
You. Practice Critical Thinking
As you may know, I was at another church this past Saturday for the wedding of my now-nephew and already-niece.
In my wanderings there, I saw a poster. I photographed it. Today I found it online. Here’s the graphic I found online:
Apply some critical thinking to its message.
What’s true?
What isn’t?
What does the Bible say?