Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 129

Thread: Religion day in the ECHR

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member Sync's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    27,424
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default Religion day in the ECHR

    BBC News - British Airways Christian employee Nadia Eweida wins case

    Verdicts today in 4 cases citing religious discrimination.

    1 was successful where a BA employee argued that she should be allowed to wear a cross to work. It was unsurprising it was successful as BA themselves altered their uniform code 4 years ago to allow it. But the point was a good one to pursue and you have to admire her for it.

    2 others were rejected, both of which seem pretty spurious on the face of it (basically 2 people employed to provide a service refused or threatened to refuse providing that service to gay people and objected to being let go).

    The more debatable one was a nurse who wanted to wear a cross to work having the ban on doing so upheld on health and safety rules. This would seem to indicate there's still a grey area where h&s risks may be viewed by employers as outweighing the rights to religious expression. Again it's pretty much open and shut, but it does mean that future cases will be on the cards.
    I'm living in America, and in America, you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business. Now f***ing pay me.

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member Mr. Bumble's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    Crawling from the wreckage.
    Posts
    18,244
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Sync View Post
    BBC News - British Airways Christian employee Nadia Eweida wins case

    Verdicts today in 4 cases citing religious discrimination.

    1 was successful where a BA employee argued that she should be allowed to wear a cross to work. It was unsurprising it was successful as BA themselves altered their uniform code 4 years ago to allow it. But the point was a good one to pursue and you have to admire her for it.

    2 others were rejected, both of which seem pretty spurious on the face of it (basically 2 people employed to provide a service refused or threatened to refuse providing that service to gay people and objected to being let go).

    The more debatable one was a nurse who wanted to wear a cross to work having the ban on doing so upheld on health and safety rules. This would seem to indicate there's still a grey area where h&s risks may be viewed by employers as outweighing the rights to religious expression. Again it's pretty much open and shut, but it does mean that future cases will be on the cards.
    Nothing stopping the nurse wearing a cross inside his/her clothing or a cross that adhered to H&S standards e.g. made of plastic and/or worn tight to the skin.
    Cry your hardest now, it opens the lungs, washes the countenance, exercises the eyes and softens down the temper. So cry away.

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member Sync's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    27,424
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Bumble View Post
    Nothing stopping the nurse wearing a cross inside his/her clothing or a cross that adhered to H&S standards e.g. made of plastic and/or worn tight to the skin.
    The first verdict relating to BA would indicate that to be true all right.
    I'm living in America, and in America, you're on your own. America's not a country. It's just a business. Now f***ing pay me.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member White Horse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dundalk
    Posts
    7,054
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    The decisions are not surprising but provide welcome clarification as to the right to wear outward symbols of faith.

    Once the wearing of such symbols does not cause a health and safety issue, the ECHR finds that an employer has no right to prevent their display.

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member LamportsEdge's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Posts
    21,912
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Suppose we should be grateful the serene advocate isn't demanding the right to re-enact the crucifixion at set times during the day.

    Mind you the sight of a couple of berserkers nailing each other to wooden crosses and moaning for joy would enliven the dull progress of the security queue. One could offer marks for technique.

    On a more serious note though one wonders at the motivation of people who demand to be allowed to display religious insignia or symbol. Are there any figures available on exactly how many infidels have suddenly been converted on catching sight of a cheapo crucifix dangling around the neck of a promoter?

    Or is the point of the thing a way of saying 'I'm in the departure lounge for heaven whereas all ye sinners are on Ryanair to hell and damnation'?

    Personally I'm of the opinion that if xtians want to volunteer to wear the intellectual equivalent of a yellow star then that saves me time and effort in bars and nightclubs because I know who to avoid.
    Whenever understanding exists, accepting or rejecting is unnecessary. (Fundamentals of a Gnostic Education).

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member USER1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    9,308
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Sounds like good sensible results to me i am particularly happy with the ruling of the case of the 2 people employed to provide a service refused or threatened to refuse providing that service to gay people and objected to being let go, i have followed both cases and the ruling in these cases will make it much harder for people to try to get away with it!!!

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member USER1234's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    9,308
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    B.A. had already admitted they were wrong and allowed their employees to wear religious symbols on their uniform, this just confirmed it

  8. #8
    Politics.ie Royalty toxic avenger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,031
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Pretty sensible all in all. I'd quibble about the hospital 'health and safety' ruling, but I'd agree in the other two cases (the homosexuality ones).

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member White Horse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Dundalk
    Posts
    7,054
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by USER1234 View Post
    Sounds like a god results to me i am particularly happy with the ruling of the case of the 2 people employed to provide a service refused or threatened to refuse providing that service to gay people and objected to being let go, i have followed both cases and the ruling in these cases will make it much harder for people to try to get away with it!!!
    Did you not find it odd that the employer asked a heterosexual Christian lay minister to give "sex therapy" advice (as opposed to relationship counselling) to two homosexuals?

    I agree with your general premise that those employed by the State tp provide relationship concelling should be able to provide that service to all people in relationships that are legally permitted by the state.

    However, there is still something fishy about this particular case.

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Royalty toxic avenger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    19,031
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by LamportsEdge View Post
    Suppose we should be grateful the serene advocate isn't demanding the right to re-enact the crucifixion at set times during the day.

    Mind you the sight of a couple of berserkers nailing each other to wooden crosses and moaning for joy would enliven the dull progress of the security queue. One could offer marks for technique.

    On a more serious note though one wonders at the motivation of people who demand to be allowed to display religious insignia or symbol. Are there any figures available on exactly how many infidels have suddenly been converted on catching sight of a cheapo crucifix dangling around the neck of a promoter?

    Or is the point of the thing a way of saying 'I'm in the departure lounge for heaven whereas all ye sinners are on Ryanair to hell and damnation'?

    Personally I'm of the opinion that if xtians want to volunteer to wear the intellectual equivalent of a yellow star then that saves me time and effort in bars and nightclubs because I know who to avoid.

    I think a minute in your company would have the same effect on most people...

    With regard to wearing religious medals or crucifixes - the woman who works at British Airways usually had it tucked in, it just happened that day that what she wore meant it was exposed. It was a petty and vindictive thing to do to her, and I can guarantee that no person of any other religious faith would ever have been remotely bothered by her crucifix - it's only the likes of you, the professionally offended, who scream like little girls at any hint of someone being openly religious.

Page 1 of 13 1234511 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •