Okay, lets get to the root of this:
It's a necklace.
It's jewelry.
The fact that it consists of a cross-shaped piece of metal hanging from a chain is irrelevant. It is jewelry.
That British Airways takes action against her for refusing to obey their dress code does not, in any way, constitute discrimination.
That Mrs Eweida and her supporters continue to claim that she was fired for wearing "a symbol of her faith" does not make it so.
"Frankly I think the British Airways order for her not to wear a cross was loopy."I don't understand it, I don't think anybody understands it and that is my view."
No, pay attention. She can wear the necklace, she must, however, obey the dress code and wear it under her uniform.
She was suspended for refusing to obey her employer's dress code, not for wearing a necklace. She was suspended because, like most of the wacky religious right, she feels that rules should apply to everyone except her, not because this is some targeted anti-Christian hate tactic.
George Galloway, the Respect leader, said: "[...] BA must bring this woman back to work right now, compensate her and apologise to her and then explain to the rest of us what twisted thought mechanism allowed such a stupid thing to be done."
Were you not paying attention to that whole "suspended for refusing to obey her employer's dress code" bit?
Kinda makes me wonder how Mrs Eweida, her supporters and their ilk view this disturbing campaign to ban Moslem women from wearing their veils.
Bet they're not so into religious freedom then, are they?
No comments:
Post a Comment