Jump to content

Mad Mad UK


memb
 Share

Recommended Posts

[quote user="Chief"][quote user="oakbri"]

I read recently that one of the UK supermarket chains was going allow muslim check out staff to refuse to serve alcohol to people. Don't ask me to prove it as it was way before christmas and I can't remember where I read it and I don't know if it ever came to anything. The point is that, as you said, immigrants were discriminated against in the work place, yet here we have the same immigrants trying to dictate which part of the job they want to do. As an employer do you employ the British applicant who will just do the whole job or the immigrant who will only do the part that suits them? To avoid discrimination you must try to fit in and not expect your host country to adopt to you.

[/quote]

Expanding this a little then.  What isd your position on female firefighters?  Reason i ask, they are not permitted to fight fires in radioactive environments in case of damage to their reproductive organs.  Fortunately male firefighters don't have reproductive organs so i guess thats okay........

I think the issue is this.  If you can comfortably accommodate a specific request or dispensation without detriment to service or standards, why not do so. Crosses, turbans, no radiation, no alcohol,...not detriment then why not??????????

[/quote]

Chief

But in the case of Sainsburys there is a huge detriment to service. if you read the report it says each time any alcohol is placed on the conveyor he either swaps with someone else or raises his hand until another member of staff handles the alcohol for him. Now imagine a very busy Sainsburys on a Saturday, thousands of people will pass through the shop during thee day, a percentage of whom will include in their shopping a beer or a bottle of wine etc etc. I don't know what percentage but I would guess it to be considerable. Certainly in my experience in supermarkets a vast majority of trolleys will have alcohol in some form or another, or maybe thats just France [:D] I think the disruption caused but the check out process being stopped each and every time alcohol is presented would by fairly big.

With the case of BA and the cross, there is obviously no detriment to service, but my opinion was that is was a gross piece of poor management to ban one group from displaying a religious symbol on the grounds that it was not necessary, but was still going to allow another group display an equally unnecessary symbol, especially when at the end of the day its the passenger that counts, and I as a passenger, don't care to see any symbols as it is of no interest to me, I just want to be checked in for my flight.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 419
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

[quote user="Deimos"]...Are the various religious "groups" just pushing to see how far they can go.

[/quote]

If every single member of a religious group was trying to wriggle out of the job they had signed up to do, I could understand the persistance with which people are using the term (or implying it).

Given that they aren't, and that the vast majority of employed people in UK are likely to be 'white'/Brits, I would imagine they constitute the largest group of  'chancers'.

This is certainly the case with employers (two of them my siblings) of my acquaintence.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Tresco

I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

The simple fact of the matter is that a poor decision like the one from Sainsburys creates a precident which can be exploited by all chancers, no matter what their creed or colour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

No you didn't state that.[:)]All the quotes and current incidences you and others cite, which are reported by various sections of the media, are about Muslims though. You don't think there is anything odd about that?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Deimos"]

Maybe it is time we stopped forcing Catholics to handle condoms at checkouts as well.  And should vegetarian check out assistance be forced to handle meat, etc., etc.  UK has gone totally mad.

[/quote]

Not just the UK. Our village pharmacist refuses to dispense birth control products - with or without prescription.

rgds

Hagar

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Tresco"]...I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

No you didn't state that.[:)]All the quotes and current incidences you and others cite, which are reported by various sections of the media, are about Muslims though. You don't think there is anything odd about that?
[/quote]

I don't know Tresco, could it be that they are the group most predominant in trying it on. It's not only in the UK this link is about Somali taxi drivers in the USA quoting their religion as a reason not to carry passngers carrying alcohol, when it is widely believed that they are using the tactic to get out of picking up small fares. http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2006-09-17-airport-check-in-usat_x.htm

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="oakbri"]...I don't know Tresco, could it be that they are the group most predominant in trying it on. [/quote]

They could be, but as the vast majority of individual cases of people testing their employers/conditions of service never make it into the public domaine, how would we say for sure?

Cases involving individual Muslims seem to be the most 'newsworthy', I'll give you that.[;-)]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="SaligoBay"][quote user="sweet 17"] PLEASE let me say hello to Saligo Bay.  Hi there!  How are you?  Happy New Year, etc.  I thought all the Americans have left?  I AM right in thinking you are American, aren't I?[/quote] Hello Sweet17, and Happy New Year to you too! Big smiley (can't find the smileys!) Will you be very disappointed if I say I'm not American?[/quote]

Sorry, Saligo Bay.  Don't quite know why I thought you were American.  The old brain definitely isn't what it used to be.

Haven't followed this thread too closely; preoccupied with life in Mad Mad France!  Will sit up and pay attention soon! 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="KathyF"]

[quote user="Chief"]

Expanding this a little then.  What isd your position on female firefighters?  Reason i ask, they are not permitted to fight fires in radioactive environments in case of damage to their reproductive organs.  Fortunately male firefighters don't have reproductive organs so i guess thats okay........ [/quote]

Chief, I think the likely reason for this ruling is that a woman firefighter might be in the very early stages of pregnancy without knowing it. Exposure to radioactivity at this crucial state of development could very badly damage the embryo.

[/quote]

Maybe so Kathy, and i am agreeing with and acknowledging the sentiment. However, in line with the discussion above, the dangers are kniown before you join (the considtions/requirements in relation to the supermarket), and people appear to be saying, those people have no right to be in the job. 

Just wondering whether this is all just part and parcel of the whole anti-muslim crap that not only is seeping its insidious way into the forum, but is so prevalent in many others.  Why can't people provide a balanced argument at the outset,l instead of just focussing on muslims al the time.  eems there is clearly an anti-muslim agenda.  The destruction of the statistics present as fact earlier in the thread highlights the problem with great clarity, and many thanks to the individual who took the time to destroy those so called 'facts'.....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="oakbri"]

[quote user="Tresco"]...I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

No you didn't state that.[:)]All the quotes and current incidences you and others cite, which are reported by various sections of the media, are about Muslims though. You don't think there is anything odd about that?
[/quote]

I don't know Tresco, could it be that they are the group most predominant in trying it on. It's not only in the UK this link is about Somali taxi drivers in the USA quoting their religion as a reason not to carry passngers carrying alcohol, when it is widely believed that they are using the tactic to get out of picking up small fares. http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2006-09-17-airport-check-in-usat_x.htm

[/quote]

Or could it be that people such as yourself are ONLY interested in quoting incidents that involve muslims...............don't know for sure, but i could make an outlandish statement and claim it to be a 'fact'.......

PS:  How do you know its a small fare until the client is in the cab.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Like so much else concerned with stereotyping, prejudice and so on, it's the unknown, isn't it?  How many of us can say we know any Muslims and their beliefs and practices intimately?  I guess not many.

One of the more unattractive aspects of humans is that they tend to dislike and be suspicious of that which is strange and "foreign" to them.

More's the pity because it must be so interesting learning about things that are totally unfamiliar and completely out of your personal comfort zone.  Scary, I admit, but interesting surely?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="oakbri"]

[quote user="Tresco"]...I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

No you didn't state that.[:)]All the quotes and current incidences you and others cite, which are reported by various sections of the media, are about Muslims though. You don't think there is anything odd about that?
[/quote]

I don't know Tresco, could it be that they are the group most predominant in trying it on. It's not only in the UK this link is about Somali taxi drivers in the USA quoting their religion as a reason not to carry passngers carrying alcohol, when it is widely believed that they are using the tactic to get out of picking up small fares. http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2006-09-17-airport-check-in-usat_x.htm

[/quote]

Seems you were a little ecomonical with the data.  Would appear that there is NOT a wide belief that the tactic is used to avoid small fares (actually it states short distance), but that it is a concern (assume there are other concerns as well). The article states that currently taxi drivers refusing fares are required to go to the back of the taxi rank queue (thus potentially losing more than the 'Big' fares you allude to them preferring).  this policy is under review, but still in force.  Text below:

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

Might just be me being wrong again, but don't some airlines refuse to take people if they feel they are drunk, or have been drinking too heavily.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you imagine the threads going up if tehse people were Muslim:....................................................

Disabled fliers get 'rescue' areas

Phoenix Sky Harbor has created "areas of rescue assistance" for disabled travelers who might not be able to use elevators during an emergency. They are well-marked areas throughout the airport where people in wheelchairs can gather during evacuation. "Firefighters would know to check (the areas) for people who need assistance down stairs," says spokeswoman Julie Rodriguez. Typically located in the landings of stairwells, the areas will be equipped with a two-way intercom system. There are 18 rescue areas at the airport, and more are in the works.

edited to read:

Muslim fliers get 'rescue' areas

Phoenix Sky Harbor has created "areas of religious assistance" for muslim travelers who might not be able to use prayer mats during an emergency. They are well-marked areas throughout the airport where muslims can gather during evacuation. "Firefighters would know to check (the areas) for muslims who need assistance praying," says spokeswoman Julie Rodriguez. Typically located in the landings of stairwells, and always facing mecca the areas will be equipped with a two-way intercom system, prayer  mats, non-alcoholic drinks, halal canteens and a benefits office. There are 18 rescue areas at the airport, and more are in the works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The point being of course, that if every single devoutly religious person input literally (or the interpretation suitable at the time thereof) every aspect of their religion into their job, then they would indeed find life unworkable living in a multicultural society. Or could it be that some groups (nothing really to do with religion, have discovered that if they make a fuss about what they are being made to do as being in contradiction of their whatever religion then they are in for massive compensation payouts when being forced to carry out such tasks, even though that was part of their contract before they took the position, (could be working for a solicitors that has made me so sceptical??).[;-)]

Georgina

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="oakbri"]

But in the case of Sainsburys there is a huge detriment to service. if you read the report it says each time any alcohol is placed on the conveyor he either swaps with someone else or raises his hand until another member of staff handles the alcohol for him. Now imagine a very busy Sainsburys on a Saturday, thousands of people will pass through the shop during thee day, a percentage of whom will include in their shopping a beer or a bottle of wine etc etc. I don't know what percentage but I would guess it to be considerable. Certainly in my experience in supermarkets a vast majority of trolleys will have alcohol in some form or another, or maybe thats just France [:D] I think the disruption caused but the check out process being stopped each and every time alcohol is presented would by fairly big.

[/quote]

 

But oakbri, the article says, quite specifically:

His customers did not appear to have any objection to his polite refusal to work with alcohol. One said: “I have no issues with it at all, it really doesn’t bother me.”

So, as I've said before. If such issues are not bothering a significant proportion of the British people, resident in Britain, who come across this sort of thing because they DO live here, why is it that a number of people on this and other forums, who DON'T live in the UK (because of their perceptions about the country) feel the need to run the place down on the basis of isolated reports in the press which sensationalise essentially trivial bits of "news" ????

What truly baffles me is why the attitude displayed is dressed up in the guise of "national pride" and sadness at the loss of all that is "British" about Britain. I can't somehow tally this pride with both the constant need to criticise the country and run it down, nor with choosing not to live there anymore. Somehow, none of this stacks up. No more than it stacks up for people to tell me how it is in the place where I live when I'm the one actually living there and they're 5 or 600 miles away.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"How many of us can say we know any Muslims and their beliefs and practices intimately? "

Well, I'm one who can. During my working life I've known hundreds of Moslems and, as most people here regularly say, there are good and bad people in every community. I know that many in that community will be embarrassed by the Sainsbury employee.

However, I don't think it racist to say that I find some of the practices which are widely condoned within some Moslem communities, mostly to do with women, completely unacceptable.

Sadly, the kind of trivial half-disguised racism that appears in our newspapers is of no help whatsoever.

Hoddy
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Sorry, but if one has any real 'national pride' then that has to be pride in a nation as it is now, warts and all. I don't see how anybody who chooses to leave the country to live elsewhere and then spend a load of time looking for things to complain about regarding their former home can claim to be 'proud'. Particularly when the sources of those complaints are often (though not necessarily always) biased, suspect and second- or third-hand rather than based on direct personal experience.

I suppose you might argue that the Britain you are proud of is the one from 50 years ago, that ceased to exist once the immigrants started flooding in (yes, I have heard that being put forward seriously). I would suggest that is not pride, but nostalgia. And we all know that nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Hoddy"]

However, I don't think it racist to say that I find some of the practices which are widely condoned within some Moslem communities, mostly to do with women, completely unacceptable. [/quote]

I agree - subordination, forced marriages (which affect muslim men as well as women) and the so called 'honour' killings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Chief"][quote user="oakbri"]

[quote user="Tresco"]...I don't remember anyone implying that the only chancers are non-white, in fact a couple of posts have mentioned that the Sainsbury decision could, for example, pave the way for Catholics to refuse to serve birth control, many catholics are white.

No you didn't state that.[:)]All the quotes and current incidences you and others cite, which are reported by various sections of the media, are about Muslims though. You don't think there is anything odd about that?
[/quote]

I don't know Tresco, could it be that they are the group most predominant in trying it on. It's not only in the UK this link is about Somali taxi drivers in the USA quoting their religion as a reason not to carry passngers carrying alcohol, when it is widely believed that they are using the tactic to get out of picking up small fares. http://www.usatoday.com/money/biztravel/2006-09-17-airport-check-in-usat_x.htm

[/quote]

Seems you were a little ecomonical with the data.  Would appear that there is NOT a wide belief that the tactic is used to avoid small fares (actually it states short distance), but that it is a concern (assume there are other concerns as well). The article states that currently taxi drivers refusing fares are required to go to the back of the taxi rank queue (thus potentially losing more than the 'Big' fares you allude to them preferring).  this policy is under review, but still in force.  Text below:

Minneapolis-St. Paul is concerned that its taxi service is deteriorating. Citing their religious beliefs, some Muslim taxi drivers from Somalia are refusing to transport customers carrying or suspected of carrying alcohol. It started with one driver a few years ago, but the average number of fare refusals has grown to about three a day, says airport spokesman Patrick Hogan. "Travelers often feel surprised and insulted," he says. "Sometimes, several drivers in a row refuse carriage."

Taxi drivers and officials from the airport, taxi companies and the Muslim American Society are discussing how to address the issue. Partly out of concern that taxi drivers might be citing religion to avoid short-distance fares, the airport is now forcing drivers who refuse a fare to go to the end of the line for waiting taxis. It is not a popular decision among drivers, Hogan says.

Might just be me being wrong again, but don't some airlines refuse to take people if they feel they are drunk, or have been drinking too heavily.

[/quote]

Chief

Sorry for using the word widely, that was my mistake, I had read various reports which all voiced the same suspicion, hence my conclusion it was a wide belief, however the origin of the sources would have been the same. I stand corrected.

As for small fare or short distance, I would guess they mean one and the same.

As for your final remark on airlines not taking drunk passengers, I am not sure what you are getting at or what relevance it has. Airlines can refuse drunk passengers, as can taxi drivers, thats no problem. The report was not about drunk passengers, it quite clearly talked about passengers arriving with duty free in their bags from their flight, which is not uncommon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

[quote user="Chief"]

Can you imagine the threads going up if tehse people were Muslim:....................................................

Disabled fliers get 'rescue' areas

Phoenix Sky Harbor has created "areas of rescue assistance" for disabled travelers who might not be able to use elevators during an emergency. They are well-marked areas throughout the airport where people in wheelchairs can gather during evacuation. "Firefighters would know to check (the areas) for people who need assistance down stairs," says spokeswoman Julie Rodriguez. Typically located in the landings of stairwells, the areas will be equipped with a two-way intercom system. There are 18 rescue areas at the airport, and more are in the works.

edited to read:

Muslim fliers get 'rescue' areas

Phoenix Sky Harbor has created "areas of religious assistance" for muslim travelers who might not be able to use prayer mats during an emergency. They are well-marked areas throughout the airport where muslims can gather during evacuation. "Firefighters would know to check (the areas) for muslims who need assistance praying," says spokeswoman Julie Rodriguez. Typically located in the landings of stairwells, and always facing mecca the areas will be equipped with a two-way intercom system, prayer  mats, non-alcoholic drinks, halal canteens and a benefits office. There are 18 rescue areas at the airport, and more are in the works.

[/quote]

Chief, as you said, imagine how many posts would go up if the story read about providing areas only for muslims, and quite rightly. Why would they not also provide all these facilities for catholics, protestants, buddhists, sikhs etc etc etc? Interestingly why did you add at the end the provision of a benefits office, what does that have to do with the provisioning of places of worship, or do you believe muslims are more likely to be claiming benefit?

As some other previous posters have aleady written that they don't like some areas of Islam, I will add to this that I am with them. My personal view is that Islam is a religion which promotes brutality and oppression. I find sharia law, the subjugation of women, the stoning of women, the amputations performed on criminals, the forced marriages, the honour killings all totally repugnant. I also believe that any religion, whilst it condones these actions, has no place in Great Britain.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Nostalga for me ...was feeling safe and relaxed whilst walking through the streets of London.

Feeling sure that is spending  time in  a hospital that I would be safe

Knowing that I had some freedom ...somewhere to park the car...not easy now.

Able to talk to people who were not focused  on property sales or the building of a big empire.

Nostalga for me was the long walks in the country and the simple picnics in a field with the two people who introduced me to the countryside

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Heard on the radio this morning - not in the Sun or Mail,

1.   Saudi has got a method of dealing with thieves.   They amputate their right hand and left foot.   I guess that minus those appendages it makes both stealing and running away pretty awkward.

2.   UK - a coroner dealing with the death of a young muslim girl found dead dumped on a riverbank has stated she was "murdered", the implication being given that it was an "Honour Killing", probably by a member of the family after she refused to be forced into an arranged marriage.   The police state they are looking at ways to find whoever committed this dreadful crime on that poor young woman, but of course the barriers are up and they are getting nowhere through a veil of silence, even from the "grieving family".   What sort of family would not want everything possible done to find who had committed this atrocity on their child ?

She is not the first nor the last this will happen to.  Only last year a teenage Kurdish girl was murdered by family for very similar "offences" (as seen through the eyes of her father), a man she should have been able to trust to be looking out at his daughter's best interests in life.  Instead he instigated and even helped in the murder of his child, simply because she did not want to remain married to a man she barely knew or even liked.

I say no more on the subject.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Lots of horrible things are done in the name of "religion" or "faith" but on the other hand millions practice their beliefs without ever causing harm to others.  It has always seemed to me that those individuals who are naturally unpleasant use their religious doctrines as a cloak for performing unspeakable acts.  They would probably have acted badly, even without the "excuse" - they just feel it gives them some sort of moral justification.  Tough to argue with anybody who thinks that there's an afterlife where they will be rewarded for doing these horrible things - what punishment can mere mortals give them that will in any way alter their agenda when they have such a belief system?

But I still reckon that the majority of people of all faiths and nationalities do not act in this way - happily human nature is better than many people give it credit for and most people really can tell right from wrong.  And make no mistake, crimes committed under the excuse of "faith" have been going on since time immemorial, it wasn't any better 20 years ago (or 200 for that matter) - it's simply that we hear more about it now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Maybe before outright condemnation of people doing things under the guise of "religion", and the assumption that this only applies to "other" religions (whatever you choose that to mean) you might all care to read the headlines in today's Times?http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3174882.ece

While you're at it, have a look at the actual number of "faith schools" at the bottom of the article. If, as has been contended elsewhere in this thread, there's a muslim takeover bid for the UK, it's certainly not happening in the education sector, is it?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Too true, Betty.  Belonging to a large catholic family myself, I know that bigotry is not a preserve of "other" religions. My uncle (a monk) never spoke to my mother again when she took my sister out of Catholic school and sent her to the state one, because the convent wasn't teaching her anything - and refused to send me there either for the same (you would think) very sensible reason.  OK, it was hardly an unspeakable act but it's a cruel way to treat a close family member in the name of religion.[:@]
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share


×
×
  • Create New...