Muslim in the UK woman fired for not wearing a headscarf

Posted on by
1

From here:

A Muslim woman has been awarded more than £13,500 after she was sacked for refusing to wear a headscarf at the estate agency where she worked…..

However, within days of working there she was left feeling ‘very uncomfortable and intimidated’ when Mr Ghafoor put it to her that she had not been brought up as a ‘good Muslim’ and that if she had been his daughter she would not be allowed to work and would have been long since ‘married off’.

He asked her to wear a headscarf at work – even though white non-Muslim women he employed in the same office were never asked to and never did.

On the day she was due to start her third week in the job, Mr Ghafoor told her not to bother coming in.

So much for Muslim women being free to choose whether to wear a head covering or not – and this coercion came from a fellow who was not even her husband.

Druidry to be recognized as a religion

Posted on by
2

From the BBC:

Druidry is to become the first pagan practice to be given official recognition as a religion.

The Charity Commission has accepted that druids’ worship of natural spirits could be seen as religious activity.

The Druid Network’s charitable status entitles it to tax breaks, but the organisation says it does not earn enough to benefit from this.

The commission says the network’s work in promoting druidry as a religion is in the public interest.

The move comes thousands of years after the first druids worshipped in Britain.

Druidry was one the first known spiritual practices in Britain, and druids existed in Celtic societies elsewhere in Europe as well…..

BBC religious affairs correspondent Robert Pigott says that with concern for the environment growing and the influence of mainstream faiths waning, druidry is flourishing more now than at any time since the arrival of Christianity.

Druidry’s followers are not restricted to one god or creator, but worship the spirit they believe inhabits the earth and forces of nature such as thunder.

Druids also worship the spirits of places, such as mountains and rivers, with rituals focused particularly on the turning of the seasons.

After a four-year inquiry, the Charity Commission decided that druidry offered coherent practices for the worship of a supreme being, and provided a beneficial moral framework.Add an Image

The decision will also mean that druidry will have the status of a genuine faith.

Rowan Williams, Archbishop of Canterbury, was inducted as a Druid in 2002, an act which shows a surprising degree of prescience on his part. It provides him an employment opportunity for when the time comes – perhaps it has already come – when the Church of England is no longer recognized as a religion.

Making schools safe from the threat of paperclips

Posted on by
2

From here:

Federal regulators are hard at work making the world a safer place for kids — starting with the threat posed by toxic paper clips.

Never heard of a toxic paper clip? Neither have the manufacturers of science kits for classrooms across the country.

But they’re now locked in a debate with federal officials, who just moved a step closer to requiring costly new safety tests on the components of those kits.

Free from the worry of protecting children from lead-contaminated paper clips, educators will be able to concentrate on the main task of distributing condoms – which, of course, could, in extremis, also be used to contain any stray lead-contaminated paper clips that slipped though the otherwise impenetrable bureaucratic cracks.

This particular item was reported by Fox News so, naturally, it will only be believed by the gullible halfwits and lobotomized imbeciles that constitute Fox’s intended demographic. Sensible people will see it for what it is: a piece of mindless – possibly hate-spewing – right-wing propaganda conceived by the money-grubbing, entertainment obsessed hacks employed by this squalid little excuse for a news network.

Rowan Wiliams, friend of Zoroastrians

Posted on by
Reply

From here:

Dr Rowan Williams went to the Zoroastrian Centre, in Alexandra Avenue, at 2pm, where he met members of the faith and learned about their rich history and tradition.

He said: “For a community relatively small in size it’s contribution has been enormous to the life of this country but also to the life of so many of the great world religions.

“In the light of this community I feel that I’m touching some very great roots indeed of the religious inspiration of so many of the world’s religious faiths at this present point in time.”

He was greeted by members of the Zoroastrian Trust Fund of Europe (ZTFE) and was adorned with a sash by Shenaz Sadri, a member of the group, in keeping with the traditions of the community.

Malcolm Deboo, secretary of the organisation, told Dr Williams: “We believe you are a true friend to make so much free time available to us. We Zoroastrians value your friendship.”

Now, if only Rowan Williams could be as big a friend to Christianity as he is to Zoroastrianism, the Anglican Church might be faring a little better than it is.

Archbishop Douglas Hambidge is astounded

Posted on by
Reply

It doesn’t take much to astound him, though, according to this letter to the Anglican Journal:

As a former member of the Anglican Consultative Council and of its standing committee, I am astounded to learn the standing committee actually voted on whether or not to dismiss The Episcopal Church from the Anglican Communion. I wonder where it imagines it has the authority to do this.

The Anglican Consultative Council, and obviously its standing committee, does not have legislative authority. It is, by definition, consultative, as is the Lambeth Conference and the meeting of Primates. That is the nature of the church.

We do not have a central supreme authority; we do not have a Curia. We have disagreements, but what binds us together is greater than things that could drive us apart. We do not always get our own way in debate; not everyone agrees with everyone else. We are not that kind of church.

What we do have is a community held together not by laws and government, but by those “bonds of affection” that have always been the basis of Anglicanism.

Archbishop Douglas Hambidge
Delta, B.C.

When Archbishop Hambidge intones, “[w]e do not have a central supreme authority”, he is not far from the mark. The Anglican Church of Canada recognises no central authority, including God’s as revealed in his Word. Instead it wafts along blown hither and thither by every gust of pagan superstition and cultural vice it encounters.

The “bonds of affection” between Anglicans has long gone, with the vast majority of worldwide Anglicans having declared themselves in impaired communion with both the ACoC and TEC. This probably doesn’t impinge much on Archbishop Hambidge’s equanimity, ensconced as he is in the insular, increasingly insignificant, neo-colonial, North American oddity that thinks it represents Anglican Christians in the West.

Should prostitution be illegal?

Posted on by
3

Not according to the author of this article:

John Moore: Prostitutions foes are welcome to their moral offence. But hands off of the law, please.

People are squeamish about sex. So it’s understandable they’re going to be squeamish about those who have a lot of it and more so about the fact that some people trade sex for money.

Tuesday’s court ruling that the Criminal Code’s hodge podge of laws surrounding the otherwise legal practice of prostitution are unreasonable has left moralists who think their squeamishness should trump other people’s freedoms sputtering. Not only are they astonished that the law will no longer backstop their efforts to impose a state morality, but they’ve been stunned by the fact that some of the most articulate people in the debate are a bunch of out and proud prostitutes lead by an affable whip-cracking dominatrix known as Madam de Sade.

The article goes on to make the familiar argument that the state should not be imposing the values of “moralists” on everyone else, thereby limiting their freedom. The problem with this argument is that it can also be used against any law that limits freedom – and all laws do that.

Implicit in the article is the presumption that it is wrong to harm other people or to unnecessarily restrict their freedom – precepts which themselves are moral. If the state is not to “legislate morality”, what should it legislate: immorality? If harming another person is an immoral act – and it is – no-one would argue that the state should not legislate against it on the grounds that it is legislating morality. One might argue that the law’s preventing destructive acts such as murder are necessary to prevent social chaos: that is also a moral judgement, though, since it assumes order is better than chaos.

Our laws are based on a Judeo-Christian ethic: to legislate morality in some form or other is inescapable. The question is, is prostitution immoral? Christian teaching says that sex other than between a married man and woman is wrong; selling sexual intimacy is wrong. Prostitution is not a private act of immorality, it is one which requires society’s acquiescence in order to operate: it should be illegal.

What happens now Obama is no longer blaming George Bush for everything?

Posted on by
12

He is blaming Fox News:

“I think Fox is part of ….the (news) tradition that has a very clear, undeniable point of view. It’s a point of view that I disagree with. It’s a point of view that I think is ultimately destructive for the long-term growth of a country that has a vibrant middle class and is competitive in the world.

But as an economic enterprise, it’s been wildly successful. And I suspect that if you ask Mr. Murdoch what his No. 1 concern is, it’s that Fox is very successful.”

Leaving aside the obvious facts that every news network has a “point of view” and is run “as an economic enterprise”, how can anyone seriously claim that, in a nation that has free speech, a news network’s point of view is what is destroying US growth? Does it make policy, bail out banks, create trillions of dollars of debt?

No, it reports – as objectively as any other news outlet – news and peddles ideas; just like CNN and MSNBC. I think ideas are what ultimately change things for better or worse and if ideas from the right are starting to resonate, perhaps it is because when Obama chanted “change you can believe in” he didn’t have any of his own that actually work.

English as it is meant to be

Posted on by
Reply

No committees, no computers, no OED even: instead a language that is populist and subversive. A dictionary from an individual, Dr. Samuel Johnson:Add an Image

Lexicographer
A writer of dictionaries, a harmless drudge.

Oats
A grain, which in England is generally given to horses, but in Scotland supports the people.

From here:

On June 18, 1746, the bookseller and publisher Robert Dodsley held a breakfast at the Golden Anchor near Holborn Bar to celebrate the successful negotiation of a massive contract for a new dictionary of the English language. The prospective author of this project, Samuel Johnson, who signed his contract during the breakfast, was the arche-typal English amateur. A university drop-out, now aged 37, he had published some poetry and a lot of literary journalism, but had never attempted such exacting work before. Johnson’s story is symbolic of the populist and subversive spirit of English. No one present at the Golden Anchor could have imagined how significant this moment would turn out to be, though knowing the author they might have suspected something special. The trainee lexicographer was vigorous, fit, tenacious, independent and strong-minded. He would settle the importance of English in an intensely practical and typically Anglo-Saxon way — on his own terms. Rather than debate arguments about English vocabulary with a committee of experts, he would research and write the dictionary himself.

New Dean and rector of Christ Church Cathedral, Montreal is “liberal in ethics”. Nudge, wink.

Posted on by
5

What does being “liberal in ethics” while being supposedly evangelical and orthodox in other areas really mean in practice? Well, in this case it means that the new dean can live as an active homosexual, marry another man – that’s the “ethics” bit – and expect everyone to believe his claim to orthodoxy elsewhere.

The problem is that by adopting a code of sexual ethics – one that coincidentally benefits him – that runs counter to clear Biblical injunctions and 2000 years of Christian teaching, he invites scepticism about his real attachment to evangelical preaching, orthodox Trinitarian theology and fervent discipleship. When his alleged orthodoxy becomes less than entirely convenient what is to stop Father Kennington becoming as “liberal” in that – assuming he isn’t already – as he is in his tolerance for homoerotic liaisons?

From here (page 1):

The next Dean of the Diocese of Montreal and Rector of Christ Church Cathedral

Father Kennington, who was selected after a year-long search, succeeds Very Rev. Michael Pitts, who

retired last year after serving in the post since 1991 and who is also from Britain, although he was already serving in Montreal at the time of his appointment. Another point in common is that both men were in contact with Russia and Russian Orthodoxy in their early careers.

In a biographical note supplied to the cathedral, Father Kennington describes himself as “liberal in ethics, evangelical in preaching, catholic in liturgy and orthodox in his understanding of Trinitarian theology and Christology.” He “is passionate about mission and about helping people grow in faith to become fervent disciples of Christ so that the Christian Community can build God’s Dominion of love, justice and peace.”

Father Kennington also writes that he will enter into a civil partnership in May. His partner, Jonathan, will join him in Montreal shortly after that. Father Kennington has three adult children – a son and two daughters – from a previous marriage.

The article goes on to say:

Paul is highly qualified, is a man of faith, gives priority to pastoral matters, encourages lay ministries, understands the importance of liturgy and music in worship, is a wonderful preacher, lives a good Christian life, and is delightful to meet.

I’m sure he is a lovely bloke, but how did we get from the point where the qualifications for being a Deacon included “the husband of one wife” to “the ex-husband of one wife and now the husband of one man – but he lives a good Christian life; really, he does”. No wonder the Anglican Church of Canada is a laughing stock.