Fallible wrote:OR she could try raising her concerns AGAIN with the hope that these people are actually human beings who care about other people.

SHE is not the only person. I think she has made it clear other people WANT the prayer.

amkerman wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

Fallible wrote:Of course you think it's her being unreasonable - you happen to believe the same bollocks the praying types do. It's not a part of her job to have to sit there while people talk to their imaginary friends - oddly you don't seem to have any problem at all with the fully of grown adults talking to something they can't see, or with Dawn being made to pander to the childish delusions of others, on her time.

No. That is not why I think she is being unreasonable. As I have already stated what is being said and what my beliefs are make no difference to me.

On her time? It's the organizations time, not hers, and she can quit if it bothers her so, or bring an ipod or something if they allow it. If they didn't allow her to listed to her ipod during the prayer, that would be cause for concern.

In your fairy imaginationland, does the employer provide ipods, or do they grow on trees?

They are things you can buy at stores with money. If she doesn't have any money maybe she can try counting to 100 in her head during the prayer.

What do ipods cost? $300? Is that what non-christians have to pay in order to not be forced to sit through prayer meetings? Does that sound like a fair and secular system to you?
You keep coming with alternatives for the non-believer. Wouldn't just asking the believer to obey both their god and the law the more satisfactory solution?

trubble76 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

No. That is not why I think she is being unreasonable. As I have already stated what is being said and what my beliefs are make no difference to me.

On her time? It's the organizations time, not hers, and she can quit if it bothers her so, or bring an ipod or something if they allow it. If they didn't allow her to listed to her ipod during the prayer, that would be cause for concern.

In your fairy imaginationland, does the employer provide ipods, or do they grow on trees?

They are things you can buy at stores with money. If she doesn't have any money maybe she can try counting to 100 in her head during the prayer.

What do ipods cost? $300? Is that what non-christians have to pay in order to not be forced to sit through prayer meetings? Does that sound like a fair and secular system to you?
You keep coming with alternatives for the non-believer. Wouldn't just asking the believer to obey both their god and the law the more satisfactory solution?

You can get a 4gb mp3 player for around £20/30... that would do the job... but I recommend she gets ipod earbuds and ramps the volume right up because the sound leakage is just immense and it would really piss of the praying poo faces

mattwilson wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

trubble76 wrote:

In your fairy imaginationland, does the employer provide ipods, or do they grow on trees?

They are things you can buy at stores with money. If she doesn't have any money maybe she can try counting to 100 in her head during the prayer.

What do ipods cost? $300? Is that what non-christians have to pay in order to not be forced to sit through prayer meetings? Does that sound like a fair and secular system to you?
You keep coming with alternatives for the non-believer. Wouldn't just asking the believer to obey both their god and the law the more satisfactory solution?

You can get a 4gb mp3 player for around £20/30... that would do the job... but I recommend she gets ipod earbuds and ramps the volume right up because the sound leakage is just immense and it would really piss of the praying poo faces

Fuck the ipod then, how about some of this?

In the long run, demographics are on our side. I hope that when we're in the majority, we aren't pricks about it. I cringe at the notion of atheists telling theists who object to a sign saying 'There is no God and the Constitution isn't based on the 10 Commandments' in a US courtroom that they don't have to look at it. I would find it shameful to discover an atheist nonprofit accepting taxpayer money and discriminating against theists in their hiring practices. And please, when atheists are in the majority, I hope they aren't snots about having a little atheism affirmation ceremony at the mandatory staff meetings and telling anyone who doesn't like it that they should show a little humility, some respect for the majority, and keep their mouths shut.

Mister Agenda wrote:In the long run, demographics are on our side. I hope that when we're in the majority, we aren't pricks about it. I cringe at the notion of atheists telling theists who object to a sign saying 'There is no God and the Constitution isn't based on the 10 Commandments' in a US courtroom that they don't have to look at it. I would find it shameful to discover an atheist nonprofit accepting taxpayer money and discriminating against theists in their hiring practices. And please, when atheists are in the majority, I hope they aren't snots about having a little atheism affirmation ceremony at the mandatory staff meetings and telling anyone who doesn't like it that they should show a little humility, some respect for the majority, and keep their mouths shut.

No, we have no morals so I'm sure we'd ship them all off to gas chambers. Oh wait, I mean gulags, gas chambers was the catholics.

amkerman wrote:

Fallible wrote:OR she could try raising her concerns AGAIN with the hope that these people are actually human beings who care about other people.

SHE is not the only person. I think she has made it clear other people WANT the prayer.

What makes their WANT acceptable and hers not? Apparently what they want they get, even though it puts someone else out. Apparently, the wants of those whose beliefs you share should be granted even when others have different wants, and it's against the law. Go figure.

I don't think an iPod would solve anything, since Dawn has already said she was rebuked for not paying attention to the prayers, when she tried to write something down.
I think amkerman, and others of his ilk, need to take their own advice and stop bitching when they are found to be acting unlawfully by imposing their peculiar delusions on other people.

DaveD wrote:I don't think an iPod would solve anything, since Dawn has already said she was rebuked for not paying attention to the prayers, when she tried to write something down.
I think amkerman, and others of his ilk, need to take their own advice and stop bitching when they are found to be acting unlawfully by imposing their peculiar delusions on other people.

Well once I am found to be acting unlawfully, maybe then you'll have a valid point.

amkerman wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:It's already legislated.

Not only are they being complete twats about this, they are breaking the law and disobeying the messiah they claim to be following.

Do you have a statute or a case citation?

So you accept that they are disobeying their messiah?

Dawn said that they receive govt funds so it would seem that the constitution should cover it. However like so many people who believe in fantasies they have gotten around to insisting that others believe their fantasies too.

I make no determination on whether they are disobeying their messiah.

You fail to understand the constitution then, it seems.

No one is making her believe anything. To "make" someone belive is nearly impossible, unless of course you are weak minded.

"You make no determination..." Cute.

So does the constitution allow the establishment of religion in a govt funded workplace now?

amkerman wrote:

DaveD wrote:I don't think an iPod would solve anything, since Dawn has already said she was rebuked for not paying attention to the prayers, when she tried to write something down.
I think amkerman, and others of his ilk, need to take their own advice and stop bitching when they are found to be acting unlawfully by imposing their peculiar delusions on other people.

Well once I am found to be acting unlawfully, maybe then you'll have a valid point.

Does your dictionary not have 'ilk' in it?

ilk
1    [ilk] Show IPA
noun
1.
family, class, or kind: he and all his ilk.

Fallible wrote:OR she could try raising her concerns AGAIN with the hope that these people are actually human beings who care about other people.

Of course that will work: they are christians after all. Oh, wait...

Mister Agenda wrote:In the long run, demographics are on our side. I hope that when we're in the majority, we aren't pricks about it. I cringe at the notion of atheists telling theists who object to a sign saying 'There is no God and the Constitution isn't based on the 10 Commandments' in a US courtroom that they don't have to look at it.

Why would an atheist/secularist have any desire to put up such a sign in a public building?

Mister Agenda wrote:I would find it shameful to discover an atheist nonprofit accepting taxpayer money and discriminating against theists in their hiring practices.

So would I and I would defend them so long as they were abiding by the rules/policies/procedures of the organisation.

Mister Agenda wrote:And please, when atheists are in the majority, I hope they aren't snots about having a little atheism affirmation ceremony at the mandatory staff meetings and telling anyone who doesn't like it that they should show a little humility, some respect for the majority, and keep their mouths shut.

If they did I for one would laugh at them.

John

Onyx8 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

Do you have a statute or a case citation?

So you accept that they are disobeying their messiah?

Dawn said that they receive govt funds so it would seem that the constitution should cover it. However like so many people who believe in fantasies they have gotten around to insisting that others believe their fantasies too.

I make no determination on whether they are disobeying their messiah.

You fail to understand the constitution then, it seems.

No one is making her believe anything. To "make" someone belive is nearly impossible, unless of course you are weak minded.

"You make no determination..." Cute.

So does the constitution allow the establishment of religion in a govt funded workplace now?

No one has shown that they have established a religion.

We have been told we must be respectful and pay attention. No writing is allowed. No iPods. I suspect I would get in trouble for reading something, but I will probably try that anyway. We must give attention to the chaplain. It is not just a prayer. She preaches a sermon and ends with a prayer. The purpose of her participation is supposed to be about saying the names of the people who have died that week so we can have a moment of silence (like they do in our other offices). She uses the time we are supposed to be remembering the deceased with sermons about her pet religion. It doesn't have anything to do with the deceased. She is the one who says she is pleasing the majority. Actually the other staff members (even ones I know are Christian) look bored silly and impatient which is probably why we were chastised about paying attention. The Christians were the ones writing during her sermons. They were trying to get their work done and make good use of the time. These meetings are supposed to be focused on patient care and are quite long enough without her preaching.

I am there to do my job and we are supposed to be focused on patient care, not fulfilling her needs to preach to us. It is a needless waste of time.

Dawn wrote: The purpose of her participation is supposed to be about saying the names of the people who have died that week so we can have a moment of silence (like they do in our other offices). She uses the time we are supposed to be remembering the deceased with sermons about her pet religion.

It sounds like that would be worth raising as she is subverting the opportunity for private remembrance.

John

amkerman wrote:

Fallible wrote:Of course you think it's her being unreasonable - you happen to believe the same bollocks the praying types do. It's not a part of her job to have to sit there while people talk to their imaginary friends - oddly you don't seem to have any problem at all with the fully of grown adults talking to something they can't see, or with Dawn being made to pander to the childish delusions of others, on her time.

No. That is not why I think she is being unreasonable. As I have already stated what is being said and what my beliefs are make no difference to me.

On her time? It's the organizations time, not hers, and she can quit if it bothers her so, or bring an ipod or something if they allow it. If they didn't allow her to listed to her ipod during the prayer, that would be cause for concern.

Dawn just explained that she would not be allowed to listen to an ipod, so are you now concerned as you said you would be in the part I bolded above?

Dawn wrote:We have been told we must be respectful and pay attention. No writing is allowed. No iPods. I suspect I would get in trouble for reading something, but I will probably try that anyway. We must give attention to the chaplain. It is not just a prayer. She preaches a sermon and ends with a prayer. The purpose of her participation is supposed to be about saying the names of the people who have died that week so we can have a moment of silence (like they do in our other offices). She uses the time we are supposed to be remembering the deceased with sermons about her pet religion. It doesn't have anything to do with the deceased. She is the one who says she is pleasing the majority. Actually the other staff members (even ones I know are Christian) look bored silly and impatient which is probably why we were chastised about paying attention. The Christians were the ones writing during her sermons. They were trying to get their work done and make good use of the time. These meetings are supposed to be focused on patient care and are quite long enough without her preaching.

I am there to do my job and we are supposed to be focused on patient care, not fulfilling her needs to preach to us. It is a needless waste of time.

Kill vem... kill vem allllllll

Clear cut case of religious discrimination, it seems to me.

You should talk to a lawyer, Dawn. Or maybe the ACLU.