andrewducker (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
andrewducker) wrote2009-03-25 10:58 am
andrewducker) wrote2009-03-25 10:58 am
Ignorance is...
Apparently only 22% of people know that Easter is about Jesus.
At least, that's what the article says. If you look at the actual questions that got that result, it's clear that only 22% of the population _care_ about Jesus and his relationship with The Easter Bunny.
[Poll #1371630]
At least, that's what the article says. If you look at the actual questions that got that result, it's clear that only 22% of the population _care_ about Jesus and his relationship with The Easter Bunny.
[Poll #1371630]
Ooh you and your absolutes!
If by ‘lack of caring’ in this sense you mean that people don’t care that the Easter Bank Holiday weekend is due to a religious festival, my concern is that if it’s shown that people don’t care then they might abolish the holiday.
If you’re going to abolish religious bank holidays of course then they should be replaced – my mother, for example, objected to working on Maunday Thursday (the day before Good Friday) as she is a Catholic and it is a religious holiday. I’m not a Catholic, I don’t care about me having the day off. I do care that she was denied it. So perhaps a system where a people can nominate their own religious bank holidays – I’d love a day off at the Spring Equinox (which I in fact get at Easter, it originally way back when being basically the same thign and all) and at Beltane and Samhuinn (which I have to book off as holiday). The difference would be that you nominate these holidays and you have a right to take them regardless of work pressures (as opposed to holiday which needs to be approved). This could work at individual level or corporate – a bank could nominate itself as Zoroastrian for example, and be legally closed every 7th Wednesday (or whatever their holidays happen to be)
Theoretically? Yes. Practically? Head spinnage.
If people stop caring at all we are in danger of losign all bank holidays – which means no time off at Christmas. Personally I think the winter solstice celebration is fundamentally important to society, and this would be a bad thing.
If by ‘lack of caring about Christianity’ you mean a loss of respect for people’s religion, then ‘bad’
If by ‘lack of caring about Christianity’ you mean at managerial and governmental levels whereby we become in a wholly secular society, then ‘good’ (although see above where this has to be done carefully with respect to people’s genuine faith and to the religious underpinnings (allbethey only nominally religious) of western society.
I abstained from that question but overall I’d say any lack of caring is a bad thing. People don’t care enough. People shouldn’t stop caring. There should just be equality of care.
Lxxx
Re: Ooh you and your absolutes!
Of course it can - good and bad are just opinions, after all. I think it's great, for instance. I wish more people didn't care about Christianity, or any other religion. People in favour of Christianity would presumably think it was bad.
I do care that she was denied it.
I care if she tried to book it off a reasonable amount of time in advance and was denied. If she jut expected to get it off for free then I'm not so sympathetic.
So perhaps a system where a people can nominate their own religious bank holidays – I’d love a day off at the Spring Equinox
That's effectively what we have at work - our bank holidays are just added onto our holiday days and we can take them whenever we like - with the exception of Christmas and New Year (two days each one) where the whole company is shut.
There should just be equality of care.
I should be forced to care about whether people believe in Jesus?
Re: Ooh you and your absolutes!
Yes, but the statement is so vague that in 99% of cases people will need a considerable amount more information before being able to have an opinion.
I do care that she was denied it. etc
Yes, she gave notice - in fact in this particular case she was denied it because she wanted it as a religious holiday and her boss was a fundamentalist atheist. Had she asked it for it off for other reasons she might have got it. Thinking about it, this could be part of the source of my dislike of fundamentalist atheism, and yes I know she should have taken her to court because believe me that was just the start of it but anyway she didn't and that's that.
That's effectively what we have at work - our bank holidays are just added onto our holiday days and we can take them whenever we like
Yes but presumably they need to be approved - if a whole department wanted to take Easter Monday off then it wouldn't be? My hypothesis was that you would get them automatically - with notice etc of course, perhaps by completing a form on commencement of employment stating which religious holidays you want to take (religion referring to a set of beliefs - if you're agnostic but believe you should have the 23rd of May off, then fine)
I should be forced to care about whether people believe in Jesus?
That's what I mean about the statement being ambiguous. You shouldn't care whether people believe in Jesus, but you should care (forced to care is a moot statement due to it's inherent impossibility) that, if they do, they have the right to be respected and not to be persecuted. To be cared about. As they should care about you. As everyone has a right to be cared about. What worries me is people not caring about others on the grounds that they are Christian/white/female/old/a banker/too intelligent/ginger/fat etc etc to the point where we have no society.
Largely I see this as a government thing. If the bank holiday were called Spring bank holiday, fine. To refer to it as Easter whilst people have no idea why is what is wrong.
Re: Ooh you and your absolutes!
That's really, really wrong. I totally disapprove of that. I can understand why she didn't sue him, but I'd also understand if she set fire to his car.
That's what I mean about the statement being ambiguous. You shouldn't care whether people believe in Jesus, but you should care (forced to care is a moot statement due to it's inherent impossibility) that, if they do, they have the right to be respected and not to be persecuted.
Aaah. I'm absolutely on the side of _them_ being respected, if not their ideas. Everyone should be given a certain level of basic respect - it demeans us all to treat each other badly.
Re: Ooh you and your absolutes!
I agree with this.
At a basic level, I don't see why anyone should get a particular right because of their beliefs. This includes wearing particular things, taking certain breaks. To implement this would be somewhat difficult however, as to do so you're probably either giving the rights to all & leaving them open to interpretation, or denying rights to all & thus making the workplace less flexible for everyone.
On a more pragmatic level, I don't believe in making life difficult for people (so if someone wishes to wear a cross / headscarf / bangle as long as it doesn't affect their ability to carry out their job effectively, I don't really care).
Where I can get a bit pissy is around holidays though: I can be flexible, but ultimately if I get my holiday booking in first & it's approved, I don't expect to be forced to reschedule because of colleagues religious choices or e.g. kids holidays. I am more than happy to be asked, but I don't expect that anyone's beliefs or choices will take precedence unless there's some kind of emergency / crisis.
Re: Ooh you and your absolutes!