The British government asserts that Christians have no right to wear a cross or crucifix at work and is eager to prove it in court.
The case was initiated by two British women Nadia Eweida and Shirley Chaplin, after they were punished for refusing to take off their religious symbols.
Nadia Ewedia is a British Airways employee, who was asked to cover her cross while at work, and was placed on unpaid leave when she refused to do so. Shirley Chaplin is a nurse moved to a desk position after she refused to remove a crucifix.
The women claim they were discriminated against when their employers barred them from wearing a cross and crucifix respectively.
The government position is that wearing the cross is not a “requirement of the faith” and therefore employers can ban the wearing of the cross at work.
The case has been taken to the European Court of Human Rights, which is to decide on whether the right to wear a cross is protected under Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights.
Article 9 states: “Everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion; this right includes freedom to change his religion or belief, and freedom, either alone or in community with others and in public or private, to manifest his religion or belief, in worship, teaching, practice and observance.”
Eweida and Chaplin claim banning the cross and crucifix at work violates their human right to manifest their religion.
But the authorities insist that since wearing the cross is not a “requirement of the faith” it does not fall under the remit of Article 9.
Lawyers for the two women say “manifesting” religion includes doing things that are not a “requirement of the faith”, and that they are therefore protected by human rights.
The case has stirred up British society. The former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord Carey, accused authorities of “dictating” to Christians, saying it was another example of Christianity becoming sidelined.
Many say the government’s position in this case is largely shaped by the British Roman Catholic Church’s attacks on the government’s plan to legalize same-sex marriage.
The plans were announced by conservatives during the parliamentary elections of 2010.
The country’s PM David Cameron himself spoke in favor of ending the ban on same-sex marriage at the Conservative Party Conference in October 2011. People should embrace same-sex marriage because of their conservatism and their commitment to family values and not in spite of it, Cameron said.
RELATED ARTICLES
- EVs pollute 1850 times more than Fossil Fuel cars according to new study
- UK Warns that China is Preparing for Total Nuclear War with the West
- Canada Borderline Bans Christianity, Outlaws Reading Aloud From Bible in Public
- Jacob Rothschild Dies At Age 87
- UK Government-Funded Study Found Virtually No Dental Benefit From Fluoridation
Loading ...
People should have the right to wear any symbol they want around their neck. It is their neck.
Is this another step to global tyranny?
orwellian insanity Reloaded…
Apparently Cameron failed to promote homosexuality among Jews,his people.
Religion is something man created because of fear. If we got rid of religion there would be fewer wars. Dumb people.
Religion was created by Man to try to explain the unexplainable:
“Why do we exist?”
“Why does the world exist?”
“Is there life after life?”
“Is there a bigger picture?”
Conveniently, religious beliefs in God and Heaven etc are utterly unverifiable.
However, the religious notion of enduring suffering now in this life and then recieving our reward in an imaginary blissful afterlife, could only have been dreamed up by those who would make us suffer their exploitations.
In the modern context, promoting the belief in recieving reward in an imaginary afterlife is much cheaper than actually giving us reward in our retirement in this life after our exploiters have physically used us up in wage slavery…
Imagine a world without religion to guide our sense of right and wrong, a world where the scientific denial of afterlife is the general belief…
If there is no afterlife, then it does not matter one iota what each of us do in the here and now. Those who rape, kill and plunder will arrive at the same place as those who live a virtuous life: simply ceaseing to exist at the point of death without further sanction or consequence, beyond that imposed in the here and now, for any act committed during that life.
Be thankful that there is religion even if you think it nonsense. The alternative would be barbarism.
I have no need for an imaginary being to know right from wrong.
More dirty deeds have been carried out in “GODS NAME”
than for any other reason.
I am thankful that religion is nonsense for one day all will come to accept the truth and we will be free from these barbaric beliefs.
Religion may require morality but,Morality does not require religion.
Crass propaganda in support of Blairism,ie fucking everything up and everyone over likewise went uninvestigated by the Police.
I see the Policemen today,fucking idiots.
But this is a country that does not investigate criminals who refuse to cede their tenure to rank outsiders who defeat them in elections.
Mr Blair,too important to bugger off when voted out,the Police agreed,Mr Blair was too important to investigate for election fraud.
He had a mandate to fuck up the world and took a deferred payment for doing so.
Author Mr Archer had hopes the Subcontinentals would boot the Jewish enclave out of Government.
This is what happens when jews rule your country ;-).
UK is already sharia compatible: 3 thousand honor crimes in 2010, not jailed!
And 9 GDP total debt, never refundable!
No problem. Put dozens of Buddha with lotus flower on the desk.
Whinging poms at it again.
People should do as i say!
I’ll wager Cameron sucked-off a few of his peers to get where he is today.