Lion IRC wrote:

Garm never wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:I was talking about (healthy) atheists who object to the sound of people praying - in a hospice for the dying.

When exactly did hospices become places of atheist fascism? Oh, that's right: never.

Lion IRC never wrote:There is nothing "secular" or COMMUNIST about a hospice. It's not a place where Big Brother imposes its dictatorial church/state separation on our personal beliefs, "political correctness gone mad" versus 50,000 year old and still going strong theism. These are sick and dying people and their carers - LEAVE THEM ALONE!.

FIFY.

re-FIFY

Christianity goes back 50,000 years?

Oh, and by the way early Christians were communist.

Your really beginning to develop a knack for displaying your ignorance.

Big Brother? For your information it wasn't an atheist dictatorial institution that imposed a separation of of church and state in the US. It was the Supreme Court interpreting the constitution of the US.

Dawn is working in an institution that by her account is almost wholly funded by state and federal government money. Just like publicly funded schools individual or voluntary prayer should not be banned, but mandatory attendance of public prayer meetings and sermons should be, and are if supported by public funds.

The terms of the funding seem fair to me. From what Dawn has written early in this thread the institution is required to provide "Clergy" to those patients that want it. But there is no requirement for staff to attend mandatory sermons and participate in prayer on the governments dime.

From some of the posts on this thread is seems that Dawn has been told to sit down and shut up about something that isn't right.

Fuck that! If the clergy are there to help comfort patients and family then that's what they should be doing. Not leading staff meetings unless they have some kind of degree or educational credentials in how to deal non-religiously with patients and grieving family.

And any clergy working in a hospice that is government funded should have educational credentials that go beyond being just being clergy.

Lion IRC wrote:

paceetrate wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:Ahh...the workplace.
That lovely world where you NEVER have to put up with stuff you don't like.

I wouldn't work somewhere that tried to get me doing something which was against my religion.

Careful, dear, your privilege is showing.

I was talking about (healthy) atheists who object to the sound of people praying - in a hospice for the dying.

...during a staff meeting with no clients present.

Oldskeptic wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:

Garm never wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:I was talking about (healthy) atheists who object to the sound of people praying - in a hospice for the dying.

When exactly did hospices become places of atheist fascism? Oh, that's right: never.

Lion IRC never wrote:There is nothing "secular" or COMMUNIST about a hospice. It's not a place where Big Brother imposes its dictatorial church/state separation on our personal beliefs, "political correctness gone mad" versus 50,000 year old and still going strong theism. These are sick and dying people and their carers - LEAVE THEM ALONE!.

FIFY.

re-FIFY

Christianity goes back 50,000 years?

Oh, and by the way early Christians were communist.

Your really beginning to develop a knack for displaying your ignorance.

Big Brother? For your information it wasn't an atheist dictatorial institution that imposed a separation of of church and state in the US. It was the Supreme Court interpreting the constitution of the US.

Dawn is working in an institution that by her account is almost wholly funded by state and federal government money. Just like publicly funded schools individual or voluntary prayer should not be banned, but mandatory attendance of public prayer meetings and sermons should be, and are if supported by public funds.

The terms of the funding seem fair to me. From what Dawn has written early in this thread the institution is required to provide "Clergy" to those patients that want it. But there is no requirement for staff to attend mandatory sermons and participate in prayer on the governments dime.

Before you start in on people with accusations of ignorance note that you're the one asking the question.
I did not assert Christianity was 50,000 years old.
Go back and read it again. Then we'll talk.

An anecdote for what it might be worth;

I was working in a small office there were just five of us. One of the blokes suddenly became a born-again-Pentacostal. He began exclaiming "PRAISE THE LORD!" ,loudly and often.This not only caused me to bite end off my biro more than once,it was also extremely annoying.

I explained to him that this behaviour was very distracting and inappropriate in an office and asked him to tone it down.He ignored me.

Next morning I took him aside. Gathering as much sincerity as I could,I looked him straight in the eye and promised to punch his lights out if he did not cease and desist. I was bluffing,but he didn't know that.He desisted immediately.

These are sick and dying people and their carers - LEAVE THEM ALONE!.

I can't disagree with that.

John

I bet if you posted this on a christian website you'd get lots of support. Most sane people (religious or not) agree it's wrong to impose the religious practices of one particular branch of a religion in a workplace that contains people who don't associate with those beliefs. (because obviously once you allow one set of beliefs to hijack a government funded workplace, you open the floodgates for all sorts of crazy shit)

But never underestimate the lengths some people will go to defend Jesus' place in the workplace. ie: equate the act of opposing religious oppression to that of oppressing religious people!

Because we all know in JesusLand... If christians don't possess the right to violate the human rights of other citizens, it means their rights are being infringed upon by the government!!!

yeeeehhhaaaawwww!!!! let me get my gun, lets go on a good old fashioned witch hunt!!!!

Lion IRC wrote:There is nothing "secular" or COMMUNIST about a hospice. It's not a place where Big Brother imposes its dictatorial church/state separation on our personal beliefs, "political correctness gone mad" versus 50,000 year old and still going strong theism. These are sick and dying people and their carers - LEAVE THEM ALONE!.

Point missed entirely. Go back and reread the thread.

This thread isn't about religious views being forced upon patients, but about employees being forced to attend religious rituals during staff meetings. Plus, Dawn's already explained that...

Hospice chaplains are supposed to offer spiritual support to patients and families at their request and in a way that is respectful to them no matter what religion they have.

...which makes your hysterical rant about 'leaving sick and dying people alone' entirely superfluous to this discussion. We are not talking about patients being withheld spiritual support, because that's simply not what's at stake here. Central to the issue is staff being forced to attend religious rituals. Try to stick to the topic.

Lion IRC wrote:

z8000783 wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:A hospice - a place where people go to die - offering spiritual support, a place which has bereavement services and chaplains, clergy and employees who are Christians.....

Shocking! I can't imagine how hard that must be for you - a healthy person - to have to put up with.

I know!

Maybe you can find work at an atheists-only hospice.

FIFY

There is nothing "secular" about a hospice. It's not a place where you impose church/state separation, "political correctness" on sick and dying people and their carers. I'm astonished that a great big strong healthy atheist cant cope with something as culturally ORGANIC and central to our spirituality as human beings as prayer - also referred to in the bible as meditation.

I'm continually flummoxed by the way you seem totally happy to misunderstand every fucking point made in any given thread. You still don't understand that these prayers DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE FUCKINGT PATIENTS, THEY ARE FOR STAFF ONLY. And yet you continue to refer to the patients as though they have the first fucking thing to do with it.

It's nothing to do with not being able to 'cope' either, as you so delightfully misrepresent Dawn's opinion, it's about WHY SOME PEOPLE'S PERSONAL PREFERENCE FOR BELIEVING ABSURDITIES MEANS THEY GET TO FORCE THAT PERSONAL PREFRERENCE ON EVERYONE ELSE AT WORK.

Why don't you ask yourself why a tribe of great big strong healthy theists can't cope with the prospect of a day's work without having to trample over everyone else's rights, just to get their imaginary friend fix, like junkies on a come-down. You won't. Because that would be far too uncomfortable.

amkerman wrote:

Fallible wrote:So...she shouldn't suck it up if she's being forced to pay attention, but otherwise she should.

She should suck it up anyways because failure to comply could mean her job, but I fail to see the point in mandating attention of non-believers (or anyone, for that matter) If the prayer is wholly irrelevant to the objectives of the staff meeting.

Edited for completeness of thought.

So you don't think that rather than suck it up she should challenge the fact that she is being made to do something which is not in her contract.

Lion, how exactly does one impose church/state separation on personal beliefs?

Personal beliefs are personal, and unaffected by anything imposed short of brainwashing or drugs.

It is only specifically NON-personal aspects of belief, the aspects that affect others, that can be separated by a church/state ruling.

Hence the separation of church/state, INCREASES freedom of personal pursuit of belief by specifically NOT imposing the structures of specific belief outside a setting where they they are voluntary.

The problem with fantasies is you can't really insist that everyone else believes in yours, the other problem with fantasies is that most believers of fantasies eventually get around to doing exactly that.

(With a tip of the hat to the "Only an asshole quotes himself" meme.)

amkerman wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:

amkerman wrote:

Onyx8 wrote:

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.

But there is ample precedent that it is illegal for businesses that receive government funding to do precisely what Dawn describes.

orpheus wrote:But there is ample precedent that it is illegal for businesses that receive government funding to do precisely what Dawn describes.

I'm not sure if this is an Establishment case so much as a case of religious discrimination. You simply cannot force an employee to participate in a religious activity, unless it is a necessary and inherent part of the job. And that holds regardless of whether the business is gov't funded.

Either way, it seems clearly illegal to me.

zulumoose wrote:Lion, how exactly does one impose church/state separation on personal beliefs?

Personal beliefs are personal, and unaffected by anything imposed short of brainwashing or drugs.

It is only specifically NON-personal aspects of belief, the aspects that affect others, that can be separated by a church/state ruling.

Hence the separation of church/state, INCREASES freedom of personal pursuit of belief by specifically NOT imposing the structures of specific belief outside a setting where they they are voluntary.

I think you're forgetting that in the feeble minds of some believers, the freedom they most want is the freedom from doubt that comes from having everyone else pandering to (ie 'respecting') whatever belief system they have chosen (or, more likely, have been indoctrinated into).

Shrunk wrote:

orpheus wrote:But there is ample precedent that it is illegal for businesses that receive government funding to do precisely what Dawn describes.

I'm not sure if this is an Establishment case so much as a case of religious discrimination. You simply cannot force an employee to participate in a religious activity, unless it is a necessary and inherent part of the job. And that holds regardless of whether the business is gov't funded.

Either way, it seems clearly illegal to me.

I agree.

tolman wrote:

zulumoose wrote:Lion, how exactly does one impose church/state separation on personal beliefs?

Personal beliefs are personal, and unaffected by anything imposed short of brainwashing or drugs.

It is only specifically NON-personal aspects of belief, the aspects that affect others, that can be separated by a church/state ruling.

Hence the separation of church/state, INCREASES freedom of personal pursuit of belief by specifically NOT imposing the structures of specific belief outside a setting where they they are voluntary.

I think you're forgetting that in the feeble minds of some believers, the freedom they most want is the freedom from doubt that comes from having everyone else pandering to (ie 'respecting') whatever belief system they have chosen (or, more likely, have been indoctrinated into).

This is what I don't get. Even back when I was sent to a scary fundie school growing up they were very strict supporters of separation of church and state. Even they understood that freedom came from separation. The people who want pandering to their beliefs are really not thinking this through. I guess thinking isn't part of the equation for them.

Lion IRC wrote:

z8000783 wrote:

Lion IRC wrote:A hospice - a place where people go to die - offering spiritual support, a place which has bereavement services and chaplains, clergy and employees who are Christians.....

Shocking! I can't imagine how hard that must be for you - a healthy person - to have to put up with.

I know!

Maybe you can find work at an atheists-only hospice.

FIFY

There is nothing "secular" about a hospice. It's not a place where you impose church/state separation, "political correctness" on sick and dying people and their carers. I'm astonished that a great big strong healthy atheist cant cope with something as culturally ORGANIC and central to our spirituality as human beings as prayer - also referred to in the bible as meditation.

I used to volunteer at a hospice. I was very popular and got many referrals. Turns out a lot of people don't want to spend their last days getting preached at, even if they aren't atheists themselves. One codger said 'Send over that damned atheist, at least he's not trying to get me to pray every ten minutes!'.

The terrorism of the jungle and growling gut, it never changes.

Best Wishes to you,
FT