The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
It's About Tolerance
I'm guessing it's a result of the season but thanks to the FFN WebTeam, they've posted yet another controversial "news" item about a firehouse that was ordered to remove a creche.
And again, people are starting to line up to decry the loss of freedom of speech and religion, blindly ignoring the realities of it all. It (like the merry xmas sign in n. andover ma) was placed on a firehouse which, unless proven otherwise, is municipal property (local government) which prohibits the endorsement or sponsorship of any religion. In other words, at all government levels government needs to be religiously neutral.
This neutrality in no diminishes any one religion, it simply does not promote one over any other. Why are people so damned threatened about this issue? The government is not shutting down places of worship or preventing services. As it is any established religion is not subject to property taxes or income taxes. Would you rather see those exclusions removed? By being excluded it prevents local and federal government from in some way harassing religion and establishes a clear separation between the two.
This post is about tolerance, and many people think that by being ordered to remove religious symbols from public buildings is a form of intolerance. Perhaps, but regardless of the motivation it is based on the constitution. The reason may be intolerance but the outcome is soundly based on the constitution.
The other 'hot' topic is racism. Whether it's about tests and testing, hiring practices, forwarding of emails or nooses it all comes about as a result of intolerance. Some people can not tolerate it when somebody else gets something they wanted. Some people still have personal problems with people of a different color. Why again is that? It's 2009 and a week or so away from 2010 and there are still people with a civil war mentality when it comes to race.
Interestingly there have not been any recent threads from members, or any from the WebTeam about sexual discrimination in the fire service. Have we conquered that? Are women now readily accepted as equals in departments? What about gays and lesbians? Does your department accept those of a different sexual orientation? Or of a different sex? Do people still think women should be at home? There are some that do. And why would anyone be threatened by a gay man or woman? Or is it only straight men that have the right to make salacious comments and inappropriate actions?
No one is readily going to post that women should not be firefighters or that gays and lesbians shouldnt. They know that they will be immediately shot down if not outright removed. As well they should be. And no one is going to say that no black, latino or asian should not be firefighters, for the same reason. Although I'm sure that there are those that strongly believe they shouldn't.
Yet bring up an issue of religion and there seems to be no reserve, no issue in claiming that this nation is a christian one only and that if people don't like it they should leave this country, and that the removal of their religious symbols from public property is nothing more than an attack on them personally and on their religious beliefs. I see this as nothing more than a christian taliban.
So folks, it's christmas, how about showing some of that christian love, compassion, acceptance and tolerance that jesus himself taught. How can you claim yourself to be a christian when jesus himself would be shamed by your behavior. Unless of course, jesus meant that only for other christians, although historically, it wasn't until long after his death that people identified themselves as christian. So I'm pretty sure he was teaching that everyone should love and respect all others, not just those that believe as you do.
And again, people are starting to line up to decry the loss of freedom of speech and religion, blindly ignoring the realities of it all. It (like the merry xmas sign in n. andover ma) was placed on a firehouse which, unless proven otherwise, is municipal property (local government) which prohibits the endorsement or sponsorship of any religion. In other words, at all government levels government needs to be religiously neutral.
This neutrality in no diminishes any one religion, it simply does not promote one over any other. Why are people so damned threatened about this issue? The government is not shutting down places of worship or preventing services. As it is any established religion is not subject to property taxes or income taxes. Would you rather see those exclusions removed? By being excluded it prevents local and federal government from in some way harassing religion and establishes a clear separation between the two.
This post is about tolerance, and many people think that by being ordered to remove religious symbols from public buildings is a form of intolerance. Perhaps, but regardless of the motivation it is based on the constitution. The reason may be intolerance but the outcome is soundly based on the constitution.
The other 'hot' topic is racism. Whether it's about tests and testing, hiring practices, forwarding of emails or nooses it all comes about as a result of intolerance. Some people can not tolerate it when somebody else gets something they wanted. Some people still have personal problems with people of a different color. Why again is that? It's 2009 and a week or so away from 2010 and there are still people with a civil war mentality when it comes to race.
Interestingly there have not been any recent threads from members, or any from the WebTeam about sexual discrimination in the fire service. Have we conquered that? Are women now readily accepted as equals in departments? What about gays and lesbians? Does your department accept those of a different sexual orientation? Or of a different sex? Do people still think women should be at home? There are some that do. And why would anyone be threatened by a gay man or woman? Or is it only straight men that have the right to make salacious comments and inappropriate actions?
No one is readily going to post that women should not be firefighters or that gays and lesbians shouldnt. They know that they will be immediately shot down if not outright removed. As well they should be. And no one is going to say that no black, latino or asian should not be firefighters, for the same reason. Although I'm sure that there are those that strongly believe they shouldn't.
Yet bring up an issue of religion and there seems to be no reserve, no issue in claiming that this nation is a christian one only and that if people don't like it they should leave this country, and that the removal of their religious symbols from public property is nothing more than an attack on them personally and on their religious beliefs. I see this as nothing more than a christian taliban.
So folks, it's christmas, how about showing some of that christian love, compassion, acceptance and tolerance that jesus himself taught. How can you claim yourself to be a christian when jesus himself would be shamed by your behavior. Unless of course, jesus meant that only for other christians, although historically, it wasn't until long after his death that people identified themselves as christian. So I'm pretty sure he was teaching that everyone should love and respect all others, not just those that believe as you do.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by Erin T. on
-
People are threatened by the reality of Jesus Christ and that's all there is to it. This holiday season is about him not us. Those who are followers of "The Way" will be ostracized as the Bible clearly states." This country has become demasculinized and feminized.
-
Permalink Reply by John Crabbe on
-
Good post Jack and I agree.
I've read some comments already and of course followed the other sign discussion. You ever get the feeling that despite a good debate, nobody listens? I mean despite the responses people still come on and say the exact same thing.
-
Permalink Reply by Jack/dt on
-
Mike, to me it's not about what was done in the past and, as has been shown things that were 'acceptable' in the past are no longer so. White only fountains, separate schools, women not allowed to work or, if they did, to succeed.
Many people still do not seem to get it, that specific displays, on public property is not and should not be allowed. For all of the reasons I gave in the initial post.
Despite, or in spite of the commercialization of christmas it should be he celebration of a man who preached tolerance and inclusion of all people, regardless of who they were, where they came from or what they believed. Someone correct me if I'm wrong but I believed that man is quoted as saying, "render unto caesar what it caesar's..." I think even jesus understood the separation of 'church' and state.
-
-
Erin, by saying conclusively and absolutely that "People are threatened by the reality of Jesus Christ and that's all there is to it." so easily dismisses everyone else who believes differently.
I respect your beliefs and your right to express them, but you have to understand that they are yours and when said so steadfastly leave no room for anyone else with different views. Is that really the teaching of jesus? Or is it just a more narrowly defined one of recent years?
-
-
John
Thanks, I'm hoping for an open and well thought out discussion on what tolerance is and how we should all be working to achieve it in the fire service.
-
Permalink Reply by Oldman on
-
There in lays the problem, Jack,
Who is going to define tolerance, so that it won't exclude or favor one individual or group over another? How are we going to achieve tolerance when it gets to the point that we cannot say or do anything without someone complaining?
I suppose that in order to really be tolerant, there can be no decorated trees either, as this too is a reference to Christianity.
I just really don't see where the line would be drawn. The starting point (in my opinion) was the drafting of the constitution, but if a defined end point cannot be denoted, then the line just becomes a circle.
-
Permalink Reply by Wade Seely on
-
Jack,
I would add my two cents, but I believe that you covered everything that I would have mentioned. Thank you for having a level head and trying to show others what the cores issues are. This country was founed on the belief of freedoms, and free thinking, sadly it seems that those ideals have been lost in todays culture.
TCSS
-
Permalink Reply by KAYA Fatih on
-
Hi I am from Turkish
my job fireman
istanbul fire depart
my msn adress
fatihkaya@live.de
come on please
-
-
Oldman,
There are two separate points, one which is the display of religious items on municipal property and the other which is the acceptance and allowance of disparate beliefs. There is only minor overlap between the two.
Being tolerant of another's beliefs has nothing to do with displaying a specific religious belief on public property. There should be no religious displays on public buildings or property. Why do christians more than any other religion take such great offense when it comes to displaying their beliefs on public property? Public buildings are supposed to be neutral so as not to favor one religion over another. Why is that so difficult for some to grasp?
Jump in and help string lights at your church, your home and your neighbors. If I was nearby and had the time, I'd help. But I stand fast in the notion that public entities supported by public funds should not be endorsing private views. That goes for political ones as well.
As for decorated trees, have at it. If your town allows it then decorate the tree, it's not a religious symbol (unless you're a druid). A 'reference' to christianity is not the same as a symbol of christianity. In fact the tree has less to do with christianity and more to do with pagan beliefs. As it was a seasonal display it was co-opted by christians.
Not that it really has anything to do with the discussion but, in my opinion if a defined end point can not be denoted then it might be a circle, it might equally be a line that extends to infinity...with no discernible end point.
-
-
Wade, it's not just free thinking that's been lost, it's critical thinking as well.
-
-
This is a copy and paste that I put on the other thread as well....just wanted to put it here to because I'm sure people will not read or try to understand the point on that thread.
Consider this:
Remove religion from the issue here and institute another controversy amongst people....politics.
You have the right and "freedom of speech" to campaign for whatever candidate you want on your own time. You can put all the yard signs you want in your yard. You can scream from the top of your lungs why you believe this is the best person to be voted in. Individual freedom....freedom of speech...there you go.
Why can't you do that while ON-DUTY as a firefighter or place yard signs in front of the station then???
Is it infringing on your freedom of speech? Are your beliefs being quashed?
NO, because you are a representative of the public and your views can be constued as the depts endorsement of a certain candidate. It is the same reason you can't campaign in a FD uniform. You represent the community and as such your personal feelings and beliefs can be easily misconstrued as a public endorsement on a candidate.
This is the very same reason military members can not campaign in uniform or make it appear as they are endorsing one candidate over another. Their freedom of speech is still there, they can put yard signs in their yard or have bumber stickers on their car, but they can't campaign while on official public duty.
Now...take out the politics here and reinstitute religion and you may see the reason this is not an infringement.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
