Malcolm Armsteen wrote:
For a number of reasons (safety through to not wanting to appear sectarian) some organisations have a no-symbols policy. More have a no-jewelry policy. As far as I am aware every single case of a Christian being discriminated against has actually been a case of breach of company dress code, or in one case putting a religious symbol in a company vehicle. This is then spun as being anti-Christian, with all sorts of testicular logic being deployed, such as Sikhs being allowed to wear turbans, Muslim women with headscarves, Shamans with necklaces of infants' skulls and so on.
This is what bloody annoys me about these poor-Christians-are-so-persecuted stories. They make out that being required to comply with the rules that everyone else has to comply with is a dreadful imposition, when the reality is that they are screaming for a privilege which, for good reason, no-one else is allowed. They also carry on as if not being able to wear their piece of jewellery in some way attacks and weakens their religion when there is no requirement whatsoever in the Christian religion for wearing crucifixes. Further, if wearing your cross means so much to you, what is wrong with wearing it inside your clothes? It seems to be the ostentatious display of the cross that they want, which doesn't seem massively Christian to me.