homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam

The Geek Culture Forums


Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply
my profile | directory login | | search | faq | forum home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» The Geek Culture Forums   » News, Reviews, Views!   » Your News!   » As we have God under the spotlight at present...

 - UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!    
Author Topic: As we have God under the spotlight at present...
Grummash

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 4289

Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 14:56      Profile for Grummash     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
What about this then???

--------------------
...and yet, across the gulf of space, minds immeasurably superior to ours regarded this earth with envious eyes...

Posts: 2335 | From: Lancashire,UK | Registered: Aug 2005  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 15:18      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm of two minds about the Church of Scotland's predicament. First, it should have dealt with the afffairs of its members/staff without regard to their gender, so in that I agree with Ms. Percy. However, I'm not sure that it's absolutely necessary to deal with this in the courts. Had Ms. Percy exhausted all forms of challenges in the church system? If so, and the church still needed a kick in the butt, then I'm glad she took it to the courts.

The last two paragraphs of the article are really significant:

quote:
Michael Rubenstein, editor of Industrial Relations Law Reports, and an expert on employment law, said it was arguable that the traditional view that clergy have no employment rights enforceable in the civil courts was outmoded, and that the law lords might decide that in 2005 that clergy are no longer in a special position. Crown servants and police were once similarly excluded but are now protected under employment law.

He added: "Efforts, over the years, of unions [trying] to organise church workers might suggest that the traditional view is anachronistic. The House of Lords will have to decide whether they are in such a special position. The tendency in modern employment law is to bring more people in and say these status exclusions are not appropriate. One might say you look at the relationship and the terms, and if it looks like a duck and walks like a duck, then perhaps the court should say it is a duck."

As an American citizen who's lived under the "Congress shall make no law regarding an establishment of religion," it would seem facially absurd for the state to make laws regarding what happens in church. However, we do have employment laws that apply to the Church and I'm glad of them. The Church needs accountability and if it can't be maintained from within, then by all means provide that accountability from without.

The PSU L-CHRIST listserv Verse of the Day was this one from Romans: You, therefore, have no excuse, you who pass judgment on someone else, for at whatever point you judge the other, you are condemning yourself, because you who pass judgment do the same things. ~Romans 2:1, NIV~

The people who harrassed Ms. Percy and did not confront the men who committed similar crimes should be ashamed of themselves. They're only perpetrating those crimes by not bringing them out into the open and dealing with them. It's like what happened in the Catholic church... all the molestation crap was covered up and allowed to continue for so many years. The Church needs to give up its pride and admit that it's comprised of imperfect people, that it has imperfections, and deal with those imperfections in all openness, honesty and love.

Oh, and the claims of the church clergy that they're employed by God and not the people, that's bull. Yes, they should take direction from God and follow His commands, but then everyone should. To be excluded from obeisance to state law because of their occupation is incomprehensible (and unbiblical, too!).

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 16:23      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I'm with the church on this one. (arghhh, did I really type that?)

The church is not like an ordinary employer, they (supposedly) are the earthly representatives of The Man Upstairs, and their profession is preaching the Divine Law to we mere mortals. If the church sacks a member of clergy for failing to practice what he/she preaches, that's a good thing.

What you or I might think of the actual 'offence' and how best to deal with it isn't the point, they take their religion seriously in rural Scotland, and there's not a lot of emphasis on the 'forgiveness' side of things. By breaking one of the Big Ten, she's destroyed her credibility with the congregation, and if the congregation want her to go, she's got to go.

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 17:23      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I agree with you, TFD, that if she committed adultery, she should be reprimanded, and if that involves removing her from the pastorate, all right. But I also agree with Ms. Percy's assertion that if they're chastising her, they also need to chastise everyone else who's done the same thing.

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
csk

Member # 1941

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 18:37      Profile for csk     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
It's an interesting issue, and raises a lot of questions, at least for me. I don't think many people would have a problem with allowing churches to sack ministers for adultery, presuming all adulterers were treated in the same way. But I get the impression that most non church people would expect that women ministers should be allowed, which at least some churches prohibit based on their interpretation of the bible. It's not really fair to allow the church extra-legal discrimination in one case, but not the other.

Of course, the most practical way about it is to just let the church do what it wants, and anyone who doesn't like it will just go out and form a breakaway church that suits their beliefs better [Wink]

--------------------
6 weeks to go!

Posts: 4455 | From: Sydney, Australia | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
The Famous Druid

Gold Hearted SuperFan!
Member # 1769

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 19:02      Profile for The Famous Druid     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by csk:
It's not really fair to allow the church extra-legal discrimination in one case, but not the other.

You can't apply the normal rules of logic here.
In most cases, it would be ludicrous to sack an employee for eating a ham sandwich, but if that 'employee' is a rabbi....

--------------------
If you watch 'The History Of NASA' backwards, it's about a space agency that has no manned spaceflight capability, then does low-orbit flights, then lands on the Moon.

Posts: 10680 | From: Melbourne, Australia | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 20:56      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by The Famous Druid:
In most cases, it would be ludicrous to sack an employee for eating a ham sandwich, but if that 'employee' is a rabbi....

Well, as long as both girl rabbis and boy rabbis get sacked equally... [Wink]

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 21:02      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I wouldn't like to be sacked with a rabbi. They have beards!

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
fs

Solid Nitrozanium SuperFan!
Member # 1181

Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 21:45      Profile for fs   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by Rhonwyyn:
I wouldn't like to be sacked with a rabbi. They have beards!

Depends on the beard. Some guys they don't suit, some guys they do. For instance maswan is now sporting an übersexy goatee look. He hates it, but he humors me. And I think he kind of likes stroking it and laughing in an evil way, even if he won't admit it.

So, personally I'm a fan of facial hair. And chest hair. I like my guys kind of fuzzy. Not a fan of gorilla like body hair, but some is good.

--------------------
I'm in ur database, makin' moar recordz.

Posts: 1973 | From: The Cat Ship | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
Rhonwyyn

Solid Gold SuperFan!
Member # 2854

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 24, 2005 21:55      Profile for Rhonwyyn   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
I can tolerate goatees and subtle shadow, but full-on beards? Can't stand 'em! Plus, they're scratchy!

--------------------
Change the way you SEE, not the way you LOOK!

Posts: 3849 | From: Lancaster, PA | Registered: Jul 2004  |  IP: Logged
ChildeRoland
Alpha Geek
Member # 3880

Member Rated:
4
Icon 1 posted October 25, 2005 03:13      Profile for ChildeRoland     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
'It's for ticklin' your thighs [Razz] [Wink] '

--------------------
=====================
Childe Roland

Posts: 311 | Registered: Apr 2005  |  IP: Logged
Allan
SuperFan!
Member # 1717

Member Rated:
5
Icon 1 posted October 25, 2005 05:06      Profile for Allan     Send New Private Message       Edit/Delete Post   Reply With Quote 
quote:
Originally posted by ChildeRoland:
'It's for ticklin' your thighs [Razz] [Wink] '

...and though my kiss was fuelled by sex, she crossed her legs and broke my specs...
Posts: 1280 | From: Edinburgh, Scotland / Frankfurt, Germany | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged


All times are Eastern Time  
Post New Topic  New Poll  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
 - Printer-friendly view of this topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | Geek Culture Home Page

© 2015 Geek Culture

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.4.0



homeGeek CultureWebstoreeCards!Forums!Joy of Tech!AY2K!webcam