Bosses can now legally ban headscarves, crosses and turbans in the workplace.

First topic message reminder :

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/31/bosses-can-ban-headscarves-and-crucifixes-eu-judge-says/

Is it a step forwards?
I tend to think not..... I agree that a full face veil is not appropriate at work, but if a headscarf, turban, crucifix, or any other article worn for religious or cultural reasons doesn't interfere with the job why ban them?

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Like I said, I would prefer to wear trainers and shorts, but I cannot.

Well there is a limit, and you wouldn't want to frighten your co-workers.

I have great legs thank you.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Preaching where? You have the choice to walk away and not listen.

How can a child walk away from his own parents?

Or in school?

Or when its played over speakers, like it is in some Muslim countries?

So if people are allowed to preach their views, I can certainly speak mine.

How else do you think people are converted half the time to religion?

By preaching

Well if they're converted by preaching, they obviously want to be converted.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

How can a child walk away from his own parents?

Or in school?

Or when its played over speakers, like it is in some Muslim countries?

So if people are allowed to preach their views, I can certainly speak mine.

How else do you think people are converted half the time to religion?

By preaching

Well if they're converted by preaching, they obviously want to be converted.

Or brainwashed.

Or vulnerable.

Again you have to be for or against preaching, as by preaching, the intent is to convert people

So which is it?

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Well if they're converted by preaching, they obviously want to be converted.

Or brainwashed.

Or vulnerable.

Again you have to be for or against preaching, as by preaching, the intent is to convert people

So which is it?

I don't believe in brainwashing.

It's not either/or. If they like what they hear, they'll want to convert. They don't need to be vulnerable.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:

Or brainwashed.

Or vulnerable.

Again you have to be for or against preaching, as by preaching, the intent is to convert people

So which is it?

I don't believe in brainwashing.

It's not either/or. If they like what they hear, they'll want to convert. They don't need to be vulnerable.

That did not answer the question

You said "let others believe what they want."


Preaching is not allowing people to believe what they want, as they are trying to convert them.

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I don't believe in brainwashing.

It's not either/or. If they like what they hear, they'll want to convert. They don't need to be vulnerable.

That did not answer the question

You said "let others believe what they want."


Preaching is not allowing people to believe what they want, as they are trying to convert them.

If you disapprove of preaching, why are you doing it? You're trying to persuade people to drop their religion, and if you can't do that, you're in favour of forcing them to at least drop it superficially.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


That did not answer the question

You said "let others believe what they want."


Preaching is not allowing people to believe what they want, as they are trying to convert them.

If you disapprove of preaching, why are you doing it? You're trying to persuade people to drop their religion, and if you can't do that, you're in favour of forcing them to at least drop it superficially.

I never made any claims, that was you.
The rest of your post is pure invention.
I cannot force anyone to do anything.
If they by what I say, further look into themselves, that is up to them.

So again you avoid answering, you made the view and now cannot condemn those who religious preach

Go firgure

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

If you disapprove of preaching, why are you doing it? You're trying to persuade people to drop their religion, and if you can't do that, you're in favour of forcing them to at least drop it superficially.

I never made any claims, that was you.
The rest of your post is pure invention.
I cannot force anyone to do anything.
If they by what I say, further look into themselves, that is up to them.

So again you avoid answering, you made the view and now cannot condemn those who religious preach

Go firgure

I didn't claim that you can force them to do anything, I said you were in favour of forcing them, which you are.

What you're doing is no different to what religious preachers do. They cannot force anyone to become a believer, they can only hope they will listen - just like you.

We're talking about adults in the workplace here who want to wear religious symbols by choice, not because there's a preacher in the lobby, so it's all a bit irrelevant anyway.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


I never made any claims, that was you.
The rest of your post is pure invention.
I cannot force anyone to do anything.
If they by what I say, further look into themselves, that is up to them.

So again you avoid answering, you made the view and now cannot condemn those who religious preach

Go firgure

I didn't claim that you can force them to do anything, I said you were in favour of forcing them, which you are.

What you're doing is no different to what religious preachers do. They cannot force anyone to become a believer, they can only hope they will listen - just like you.

We're talking about adults in the workplace here who want to wear religious symbols by choice, not because there's a preacher in the lobby, so it's all a bit irrelevant anyway.

Misdirection again.
I said and back a company to have dress codes that are based on equality and do not privilege religions.

So if you think I am wrong, of which I am not against preaching by religious people, why can you not condemn religious people who preach?

Its a simple question you keep avoiding.

You are trying to impose inequality in the work place, as you want to privilege religious people.

So try again

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

I didn't claim that you can force them to do anything, I said you were in favour of forcing them, which you are.

What you're doing is no different to what religious preachers do. They cannot force anyone to become a believer, they can only hope they will listen - just like you.

We're talking about adults in the workplace here who want to wear religious symbols by choice, not because there's a preacher in the lobby, so it's all a bit irrelevant anyway.

Misdirection again.
I said and back a company to have dress codes that are based on equality and do not privilege religions.

So if you think I am wrong, of which I am not against preaching by religious people, why can you not condemn religious people who preach?

Its a simple question you keep avoiding.

You are trying to impose inequality in the work place, as you want to privilege religious people.

So try again

Look, someone who wears a headscarf, turban, or crucifix can still adhere to the dress code in every other way. Why would anyone else want the right to wear those things if they're not religious? It's just rather petulant to demand that right if they have no desire to wear them. It's hardly "inequality".

You clearly are against religious preaching, but you can't really condemn religious people who preach because you preach at people yourself.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


Misdirection again.
I said and back a company to have dress codes that are based on equality and do not privilege religions.

So if you think I am wrong, of which I am not against preaching by religious people, why can you not condemn religious people who preach?

Its a simple question you keep avoiding.

You are trying to impose inequality in the work place, as you want to privilege religious people.

So try again

Look, someone who wears a headscarf, turban, or crucifix can still adhere to the dress code in every other way. Why would anyone else want the right to wear those things if they're not religious? It's just rather petulant to demand that right if they have no desire to wear them. It's hardly "inequality".

You clearly are against religious preaching, but you can't really condemn religious people who preach because you preach at people yourself.

They won't be able to if they are not part of the dress code, whether religious or not.
Like I said, I cannot go into work in shorts, baseball cap and trainers, because they have a smart dress code.
Its you that is the one demanding that companies bow down to religious beliefs. Its a privilege and your faith should be your own time, not the time you work for a company.

You back inequality to bow down to the demands  of the religious.

I am not against religious preaching, as I back freedom of speech.

That is why I back my right to preach.

So either you back my right and the right of preachers to preach, or you do not?

Try again and last chance

Thorin wrote:

Raggamuffin wrote:

Look, someone who wears a headscarf, turban, or crucifix can still adhere to the dress code in every other way. Why would anyone else want the right to wear those things if they're not religious? It's just rather petulant to demand that right if they have no desire to wear them. It's hardly "inequality".

You clearly are against religious preaching, but you can't really condemn religious people who preach because you preach at people yourself.

They won't be able to if they are not part of the dress code, whether religious or not.
Like I said, I cannot go into work in shorts, baseball cap and trainers, because they have a smart dress code.
Its you that is the one demanding that companies bow down to religious beliefs. Its a privilege and your faith should be your own time, not the time you work for a company.

You back inequality to bow down to the demands  of the religious.

I am not against religious preaching, as I back freedom of speech.

That is why I back my right to preach.

So either you back my right and the right of preachers to preach, or you do not?

Try again and last chance

The religious people wouldn't be able to go to work in shorts, baseball cap, and trainers either then. You could always ask for the right to wear a head scarf or a turban and see what happens.

I don't care if you want to preach at people here or anywhere else until you're blue in the face, I just object to your hypocrisy when you complain about religious people preaching. Get it?

You don't get to decide if I have a "last chance". Honestly, you're worse than anyone for demanding that others bow down to you. Nobody is going to. If you choose to leave this discussion, that's up to you. I will be leaving it shortly because I have work to do. Perhaps you have work to do as well? Maybe not.

Raggamuffin wrote:

Thorin wrote:


They won't be able to if they are not part of the dress code, whether religious or not.
Like I said, I cannot go into work in shorts, baseball cap and trainers, because they have a smart dress code.
Its you that is the one demanding that companies bow down to religious beliefs. Its a privilege and your faith should be your own time, not the time you work for a company.

You back inequality to bow down to the demands  of the religious.

I am not against religious preaching, as I back freedom of speech.

That is why I back my right to preach.

So either you back my right and the right of preachers to preach, or you do not?

Try again and last chance

The religious people wouldn't be able to go to work in shorts, baseball cap, and trainers either then. You could always ask for the right to wear a head scarf or a turban and see what happens.

I don't care if you want to preach at people here or anywhere else until you're blue in the face, I just object to your hypocrisy when you complain about religious people preaching. Get it?

You don't get to decide if I have a "last chance". Honestly, you're worse than anyone for demanding that others bow down to you. Nobody is going to. If you choose to leave this discussion, that's up to you. I will be leaving it shortly because I have work to do. Perhaps you have work to do as well? Maybe not.

I have never objected to religious people preaching, I just generally criticize what they preach.

A vast difference, which proves you are the hypocrite here, when you dug yourself a hole on this.

I just did decide and the verdict is you promoted double standards by saying You said "let others believe what they want." Preaching does not allow for that.

So that part of the debate is done.

The other, well countless religious people do not wear all these religious items given as an example and this is because they are not compulsory. That means that no religious person can claim they need to wear them whilst at work. As its a privilege. So no religious person should demand off a company what they can wear. That is then forcing their religious beliefs on the company. The turban is headwear, as is the hijab and I cannot wear headwear for example a baseball cap. So why are privilidged to wear something they want, and I cannot?

You see, its the religious demanding people bow down to their demands, when there is no religious requirement to wear the Hijab (which is not even clothing in the Quran) or the crucifix or the turban or Jewish cap. Even if it was, its a belief and a belief does not mean you can demand wearing to your employer.

You though wish to have inequality, which says it all to me, because you wish to demand religious people have more rights than everyone else.

Have a nice day

Syl wrote:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/05/31/bosses-can-ban-headscarves-and-crucifixes-eu-judge-says/

Is it a step forwards?
I tend to think not..... I agree that a full face veil is not appropriate at work, but if a headscarf, turban, crucifix, or any other article worn for religious or cultural reasons doesn't interfere with the job why ban them?

unfortunately in this PC day and age you cannot pick and choose it has to be all or nothing.