• Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
  • Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
Collapse

You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:

  • You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
  • You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
  • If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.

Previously on "BA offends christians"

Collapse

  • Mailman
    replied
    Originally posted by zathras
    The covering of the face in certain Muslim communities is not a religous requirement, it is a cultural one. The most extreme comes from the Wahadi sect of Islam originally based in Saudi Arabia.
    And coming to a street near you soon.

    Anyway...absolute twaddle...the veil in this country is not a cultural sign, it is a religious sign...one used to say "IM SPECIAL, IM A MUSLIM, DONT YOU GO OPPRESSING ME!".

    The wearing of a cross is an expression of religous faith.
    Which is exactly what the veil is IN THIS COUNTRY.

    Turbins are a requirement of the Sikh religion.
    And should be banned when riding a motorbike. Having said that Ive never seen a sikh riding a motor bike yet, although maybe the ones I have seen (but not realised) realise that perhaps a turbin aint gonna do squat when you hit the road with your fat head?

    Mailman

    Leave a comment:


  • BoredBloke
    replied
    I thought this was going to be along the lines of

    "I pity da fool who wears da cross.....I ain't gettin' on no plane sucka!"

    Leave a comment:


  • Forumbore
    replied
    Originally posted by zathras
    The covering of the face in certain Muslim communities is not a religous requirement, it is a cultural one. The most extreme comes from the Wahadi sect of Islam originally based in Saudi Arabia

    The wearing of a cross is an expression of religous faith.

    Turbins are a requirement of the Sikh religion.

    Apart from obvious problems when someone covering up in a society where 80% of communication is non-verbal, there are other problems with the veil.
    Polly Toynbee explains this rather well in todays Guardian

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/Columnists...924022,00.html

    Leave a comment:


  • Dundeegeorge
    replied
    Good attempt

    Originally posted by TheOmegaMan
    I can deduce a great deal from nipple hardness and orientation. Consequently I require all women to be topless in a one-to-one situation providing that they are lookers. Saggy breasts really skew my intuition.

    at a beard there JW, but we know you're a bender, remember.....

    Leave a comment:


  • TheOmegaMan
    replied
    I can deduce a great deal from nipple hardness and orientation. Consequently I require all women to be topless in a one-to-one situation providing that they are lookers. Saggy breasts really skew my intuition.

    Leave a comment:


  • zathras
    replied
    Originally posted by Mailman
    if sihks can wear their turbins, and muslamies can wear headscarves or come in like it
    The covering of the face in certain Muslim communities is not a religous requirement, it is a cultural one. The most extreme comes from the Wahadi sect of Islam originally based in Saudi Arabia

    The wearing of a cross is an expression of religous faith.

    Turbins are a requirement of the Sikh religion.

    Apart from obvious problems when someone covering up in a society where 80% of communication is non-verbal, there are other problems with the veil.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mordac
    replied
    Originally posted by Mailman
    Imagine the outcry if BA tried to ban veils!

    The woman has a point, if sihks can wear their turbins, and muslamies can wear headscarves or come in like it halloween or dress as a set prop from star wars then whats the problem with a small cross?

    Mailman
    I would guess the descrimination laws are designed to protect non-native religions, not native ones, since it was probably assumed they didn't need protection. If that is the case, you can descriminate against Christians all day long and the law can't touch you.

    Still it's not all bad news.

    Chico.

    Leave a comment:


  • Mailman
    replied
    Imagine the outcry if BA tried to ban veils!

    The woman has a point, if sihks can wear their turbins, and muslamies can wear headscarves or come in like it halloween or dress as a set prop from star wars then whats the problem with a small cross?

    Actually what she should have done was to play the race card. Opps thats right, it dont apply to her cause she is white innit

    Mailman

    Leave a comment:


  • Pondlife
    started a topic BA offends christians

    BA offends christians

    From the BBC

    Ms Eweida said she was standing up for her faith
    A Heathrow Airport employee has said she plans to sue British Airways for religious discrimination in a row over the wearing of a cross necklace.
    ..............

    John Andrews, communications officer for the diocese of Bath and Wells, said: "I think BA are being extremely offensive to members of the Christian faith."

Working...
X