But you’re not arguing against me. To some extent, we do agree. So while I agree it’s not all that simple, I don’t think it’s fair to make it seem like nothing will ever be decided.
You’re thinking about this entirely the wrong way. It’s not words that are the problem, it’s the “honest expression of opinion” itself. I too would hate people not being allowed the same extent of free speech, but I dislike even more the idea that we should just let teachers or other federal employees treat one religion as being above another and passing that on to kids or having it affect their work.
I would suggest that the amount of people who are actually offended by someone wearing a cross is very, very small. Consider these boards; much more atheistic than the general population, yet off the top of my head I can only think of two posters who might consider wearing a cross to be actually offensive.
I’m not entirely happy that “They’re just offended! It’s petty!” is your standard explanation for how people feel, but I suppose at least you are willing to think about it.
It would not be thought police. The behaviour, wearing a cross, is open. And I would consider trying to “get people thinking about religion and God” to be an active attempt to convert. What else is it? You’re actively doing something that is trying to get them to agree with you.
To be fair, though, i’ll ask; Say someone complains that they cannot wear a cross openly, when they are able to wear it under their clothes. Could you give me some examples of reasons they might have for this other than wanting people to know they are Christian pretty constantly?
I thought that was what I was replying to - if the clothes stop you from doing the job somehow, the owner shouldn’t have to accomodate you.
I think you replied to this part of my post before you read the rest. This response seems uninformed by my point about reasonable accomodation. Yes, it IS a lot easier than you think to draw that line, I think, when you have this standard in place.
We can’t expect people to give up their religious practices as people while they are at work, or even to appear and proclaim that they are of one religion or another (say, by wearing a cross or a headress that doesn’t interfere with a uniform or something). The accomodation standard is simply that we do not specially prohibit religious expression in cases where other personal expression is allowed. So unless there is a general policy against earrings (say, for safety while working as a machinist) then there can be no reasonable policy against cross earings.
People are willing to keep quiet when things are done in the name of THEIR religion…even if it’s not really what they believe. I sometimes tune into one of the three religious channels our cable company provides. Someone preaching to thousands in some mega cathedral about the abomination of gays and the sanctity of marriage. Someone in that congragation of eight thousand would have to be gay or know and love someone who is. Yet no one stands up and says “stop”. There were germans who didn’t approve of what Hitler was doing to the jews and didn’t speak up. When an intelligent design fundie is being debated on some news show, why can’t it be by a christian who intelligently explains evolution? I think they’ld be labled “ungodly”.
Thanks for saying this. It’s true. We see now the beginnings of other Christians saying that the fundies do not speak for all Christians. Bishop John Spong is very active in urging Christianity to abandon it’s antiquated traditions.
I searched for a poem I remembered and found this
The poem
The story of the former German U boat commander who wrote it is pretty interesting , although I’m not sure it’s 100% accurate.
In these troubled times both religious and political and both, we need to speak up.
