Plain Talker Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 She was told quite clearly why she couldn't wear the chain. I don't understand her protest. I didn't quite understand the need for the British Airways staff member's (Nadia Eweida) need/compulsion/requirement to wear her cross outside the clothing, contrary to the rules. Neither was there any actual "need" for the nurse to have to wear her cross outside her clothing, as far as I could see... When I was nursing, we weren't permitted to wear jewellery, as it was an infection risk. (we could not wear nail polish, or make-up, for the same, perfectly valid reasons, and hair had to be taken up, off the collar.) It's really quite strange... when those rules were in force, under the incredibly strict matrons we had back in the day, we hardly ever found cases of MRSA, and the like, on our wards. I presume that this woman would be happy that her jewellery had carried some MRSA-type bug onto the ward, and caused an infection that meant her patient contracted something incurable, and ended up meeting their maker, somewhat prematurely...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 But to my understanding, the distress would be greater on the part of the women undergoing the fertility treatment. Off course it would, which shows that these people are not too bright as well as being petty and vindictive. John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metaphoria Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 I didn't quite understand the need for the British Airways staff member's (Nadia Eweida) need/compulsion/requirement to wear her cross outside the clothing, contrary to the rules. Neither was there any actual "need" for the nurse to have to wear her cross outside her clothing, as far as I could see... When I was nursing, we weren't permitted to wear jewellery, as it was an infection risk. (we could not wear nail polish, or make-up, for the same, perfectly valid reasons, and hair had to be taken up, off the collar.) It's really quite strange... when those rules were in force, under the incredibly strict matrons we had back in the day, we hardly ever found cases of MRSA, and the like, on our wards. I presume that this woman would be happy that her jewellery had carried some MRSA-type bug onto the ward, and caused an infection that meant her patient contracted something incurable, and ended up meeting their maker, somewhat prematurely...? I think the lady in question wanted to make her faith visible, perhaps because people of other faiths can do so in public, in this case the medical profession. Perhaps she has seen ladies walking around in hajabs and thinks it unfair that her faith can't be as visible as others. Thing is, health and safety policy overides, and rules are rules. Personally I can't see how she could question that. But, and it's a big but...I don't think it's fair to suggest that this lady would be happy swinging MRSA around. I really don't think this was her intention. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
[Matt] Posted April 7, 2010 Share Posted April 7, 2010 Are implying that Grahame is a bit of a hypocrite?:hihi:Surely i dont even have to imply that... everyone else knows already... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metaphoria Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 I think it would be refreshing to see people question and debate christian teaching, rather than read digs at Grahame. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 I think it would be refreshing to see people question and debate christian teaching, rather than read digs at Grahame. So start a thread about it. This one's called... "Are Christians discriminated against in the UK?" How would such questioning and/or such a debate speak to that? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
redwhine Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 I think the lady in question wanted to make her faith visible, perhaps because people of other faiths can do so in public, in this case the medical profession. Perhaps she has seen ladies walking around in hajabs and thinks it unfair that her faith can't be as visible as others. But the cross is not necessarily a symbol of christian faith. Many people wear crosses merely as adornments. Hells Angels have tattoos of crosses. Had Jebus lived in modern America, christians would be wearing little electric chairs. And I wouldn't mind betting that not everybody who wears a hajab(...whatever that is?...) does so to display their faith. Some of them (...if it's what I think it is...) wear it so as not to get stoned (No! Not that 'stoned'. I mean literally stoned to death.) Others will wear it to 'fit in' culturally. Either way, when she's paid to be a nurse, she should be nursing and not witnessing, preaching nor proselytising. She'd only be being discriminated against for being a christian if she could show that non-christians were allowed to wear crosses on necklesses and she wasn't. Thing is, health and safety policy overides, and rules are rules. Personally I can't see how she could question that. Apparently she must still be allowed to wear the god-goggles. But, and it's a big but...I don't think it's fair to suggest that this lady would be happy swinging MRSA around. I really don't think this was her intention. ...and I really do think that that was intended to be humourous; after all, if you think you're going to heaven when you die, why hang around here? Quicken things up a bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John X Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 This one's called... "Are Christians discriminated against in the UK?" And after nearly 1000 posts I think we can say the answer is a definitive..... No! John X Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sccsux Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 And after nearly 1000 posts I think we can say the answer is a definitive..... No! John X I said the same, about 15 pages ago:hihi:. Yet some delusional (religious) folk still seem to think christians are discriminated against. Whereas, in reality, it is the christians who want the right to be able to discriminate against non-christians:loopy:. I'm beginning to think that some people sleep on their side and their brains fall out of their ears and they forget to put it back in before posting online:hihi: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Grahame Posted April 8, 2010 Share Posted April 8, 2010 And after nearly 1000 posts I think we can say the answer is a definitive..... No! John X With the attitude you all have. No way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.