Christian Persecution… AGAIN =(
The European Court of Human Rights is about to hear some exceedingly dry but chuckle worthy proceedings very soon. The British newspaper, Sunday Telegraph, has seen a report from the ministers arguing the case that people do not have a right to wear a crucifix at their places of employment. The ministers start from the position that the tiny cross is not required raiment by Christianity. They go on to say businesses have the right – defined in the UK’s Article 9 code – to create a dress code.  That includes an employer having the ability to tell employees – while at work – they need to hide or not wear a symbol of a man being tortured (ok, I added that last bit).

This current situation is in motion because of Shirley Chaplin and Nadia Eweida who say they were fired for wearing a crucifix to work. Back in 2006, Mrs Eweida breached her uniform policy by refusing to take off her crucifix. Mrs Chaplin was banned from working the hospital wards for essentially the same reason.  Both refused to conform to their employers uniform policy by either covering or removing their crucifix.

The Government is taking a sensible by-the-book approach. The ministers call the whole deal “manifestly ill-founded” and in their response they go on to say,

…the applicants’ wearing of a visible cross or crucifix was not a manifestation of their religion or belief within the meaning of Article 9, and… the restriction on the applicants’ wearing of a visible cross or crucifix was not an ‘interference’ with their rights protected by Article 9.

The Foreign Office, adds a line that cuts like a knife while looking right in ladies eyes.

In neither case is there any suggestion that the wearing of a visible cross or crucifix was a generally recognized form of practicing the Christian faith, still less one that is regarded (including by the applicants themselves) as a requirement of the faith.

Lord Carey, the former Archbishop of Canterbury has been in the news a lot lately.  He made sure to get his unjies in a wad over this while giving the following soundbite,

The reasoning is based on a wholly inappropriate judgment of matters of theology and worship about which they can claim no expertise. The irony is that when governments and courts dictate to Christians that the cross is a matter of insignificance, it becomes an even more important symbol and expression of our faith.

I had to add the lovely Andrea Williams, director of the Christian Legal Center since she trotted out the nausea inducing argument of the government will be trashing the Ten Commandments, the bible, and little baby Jesus soon, saying,

It is extraordinary that a Conservative government should argue that the wearing of a cross is not a generally recognized practice of the Christian faith. In recent months the courts have refused to recognize the wearing of a cross, belief in marriage between a man and a woman and Sundays as a day of worship as ‘core’ expressions of the Christian faith. What next? Will our courts overrule the Ten Commandments?

Think I just popped a blood vessel after reading the last quote.  In a cut and dry case, the government doesn’t even need to interpret the code to find an answer.  A simple glance around will find that most people that call themselves Christian do not wear a crucifix. That simple fact easily points out there is no religious mandate for all the followers of Christ to wear a small cross.  The only ammunition the religious side is emotional blackmail. Not that I expected much else, but it would be refreshing to see an actual argument.

 

Catholic Tantrum Spurs Donations
In a lovely turn of events, Francis House has had donations pour in from across the nation after the Catholic Church cut off funding for the nonprofit that helps thousands of poor and homeless people around Sacramento, California. Why, you ask, would the church do that? The new director of Francis House, Rev. Faith Whitmore is a supporter of abortion rights and gay marriage. Both of which have nothing to do with what happens inside Francis House.

In a hand delivered letter last month, the Rev. Michael Kiernan, of the Catholic Diocese of Sacramento removed the funding because Rev. Whitmore has personal beliefs that clash with the Catholic Church. Whitmore, a United Methodist minister, is a proponent of same-sex marriage. In fact, back in 2008, same sex marriage was legal for a while – and Whitmore married gay couples against church law. Also, she is not pro-abortion – but she is in favor of a woman’s right to choose. Those two things are pretty damning in this election year.

Luckily for the Francis House, this story went viral.  In a day and a half since the story broke, the largest problem the foundation has had is keeping the phones manned as donations pour in.  In a matter of hours, the funds were nearly replaced by many people, both secular and religious people donating money and pledging time to work in support of the foundation.

Things like this renew my trust in, well, MOST of humanity.  😉

 

 

I hope to see each and every one of you at the Northwest Free-thought Convention close to Seattle, Washington in about two weeks!
~Wesley

Feel free to email me or add me on Google+