Worker fired after posting picture of Jesus (in his cubicle)

WND ^ | April 21, 2007

[Dan Evans]

Maybe you weren't a prude who alienated himself from the rest of his office-mates, as indicated in this story?

Or maybe he doesn't work for the creeps at Barclays.

[Dan Evans]

But....its probably true that this guy was either not meeting the standards or was late or was just a bad rep.

I'm not so sure. What I didn't hear was a denial by the company that the events did not happen. I suspect that they did not deny it because he could have sued if they did.

Hiding behind "privacy policy" is pretty lame. I hear large companies reveal all kinds of information when they are in the right.

[beezdotcom]

However, I have seen depictions which have offended me deeply.

Funny, I'm more offended by those who would dilute the suffering Christ was forced to endure on our behalf. To each their own, I suppose.

[beezdotcom]

In fact, I believe any employer shoould be able to fire any employee at any time for any reason.

I happen to agree with you. That being said, I'm perfectly willing to give negative publicity to any employer whose motivations I find less than sound.

[SoldierMedic]

Personally, I tend to focus more on the resurrection as opposed to the crucifixion.

[Allosaurs_r_us]

"Most companies do not want to fire someone. It takes time and a lot of money to hire and then train a new employee, then months more before he or she is productive enough to start really contributing in a way that helps the company’s bottom line. They usually cut employees a lot of slack because they don’t want to deal with EEOC complaints and tie their attorneys up. So when someone gets fired and claims discrimination, it’s possible that management was stupid but it’s also possible that the employee screwed up."

Bull Shirt! You can be fired just because they don't like your crooked teeth! I have seen it many times in my 53 years. The only job I have ever been fired from was over sending a letter into the company paper about the sad state of moral in the warehouse. I had just previously been given a raise for my outstanding work!

I did a lot more than just contribute. I was writing programs on my own time for these people. They just couldn't stand the criticism. I was under the false pretense that what was sent into the paper was to remain anonymous. Silly me! They lied! Go figure! So it is very likely, especially after the song and dance their rep made, that this could indeed be true. The pic had been taken down and placed face down on his desk. That in itself gives his story credibility. I have seen much worse. Lefties don't need a reason to fire you. Hell, maybe your farts don't stink like everybody elses.

[Dan Evans]

In fact, I believe any employer shoould be able to fire any employee at any time for any reason.

I agree, it should not be a matter of law. We should have the right to discriminate for any reason. But we are losing that right. Churches are in danger of losing their tax-exempt status because they refuse to hire homosexuals. The state should not have the right to buy our rights away by giving tax-exemption in exchange for constitutional rights.

But Barclays are still a bunch of creeps for firing him and I will remember the name.

[isom35]

but if it had been Muhammad, no suspension at all I’d bet.

[beezdotcom]

However, I have seen depictions which have offended me deeply.

Out of curiousity, could you point me to one of those? The only offensive depiction that immediately comes to mind is Mapplethorpe's crucifix in urine. I have no idea what sort of depiction you might find "offensive".

In fact, given that all of Judeo-Christian religion is imbued with the idea of blood sacrifice, I'm surprised you don't find the whole CONCEPT offensive.

[beezdotcom]

Personally, I tend to focus more on the resurrection as opposed to the crucifixion.

Christ seemed to feel BOTH were important, as I read it. Are you offended by The Lord's Supper, where we are asked to (symbolically or otherwise) EAT his very BODY, and DRINK his BLOOD?

[TomServo]

"What I CAN tell you is that Barclays has very strict policies around nondescrimination (sic), especially religious.

Too bad the folks at WND can't spell "discrimination".

[Dan Evans]

Time for a lawsuit.

I think that's a big mistake. If one of my employees turns out to be a member of a Muslim Jihadist sect, I want to be able to fire him.

[SoldierMedic]

Salvedor Dali did some very odd crucifixion pieces (Although, Dali was an odd individual). Or the "celebrations" in some countries where people are also crucified, those offend me as well.

Christianity to me isn't so much about blood sacrifice (Although it is a part of it), as it is about resurection and everlasting life. I dunno, personal opinion.

[SoldierMedic]

Are you offended by The Lord's Supper, where we are asked to (symbolically or otherwise) EAT his very BODY, and DRINK his BLOOD?

Why would I be offended by Sacrement? I haven't called into question your beliefs, why do the same to me?

[Dan Evans]

“Too bad the folks at WND can’t spell “discrimination”.”

Look up “(sic)”. It means WND didn’t misspell the word, the boob at Barclays did.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sic

[beezdotcom]

Why would I be offended by Sacrement? I haven't called into question your beliefs, why do the same to me?

Why? Great question. Your choice of the word "offended" in describing overly accurate depictions of the Crucifixion is where I'm stuck. That word choice gives me pause.

To say it turns your stomach, to say it makes you squeamish, to say that it breaks your heart with disgust at what they did to our Lord, to say that you are offended at THE PERPETRATORS of the torture - well, those word choices all have different connotations. I'm trying to figure out precisely what YOU mean by "offensive". For example, did you find the movie The Passion offensive? If so, why?

There are usually reasons why people become _offended_ at accurate depictions that include graphic detail. I'm trying to get to the heart of why, in this case.

[tenthirteen]

I work for a Government agency. In this office is a picture of President Ronald Reagan, General George Patton, Lt. Col. Oliver North, a US marine (the Marlboro Man from Iraqi combat zone) and an American flag stands in the corner. I love this place.

[beezdotcom]

Salvedor Dali did some very odd crucifixion pieces (Although, Dali was an odd individual).

I find some of those offensive, too, but mainly because they twist the reality and meaning of the event.

Or the "celebrations" in some countries where people are also crucified, those offend me as well.

I don't know enough about the ones in particular that offend you, although I imagine a celebratory mood would give room for offense. I grieve for thse individuals who feel they need to undergo crucifixion for their OWN relationship with God to be enhanced - but they don't offend me.

[JCEccles]

Read the entire article, junior.

You're displaying the same embarrassing knee-jerk reaction you always display in support of the fundamentlaist faith of materialist Darwinism.

[Cvengr]

IMHO, most people who accuse others as offensive are actually telegraphing past sin in their hardened hearts by defensive mechanisms in their thinking processes. They confuse their defensiveness as another’s offense in order to deny their responsibility for their own thinking and volition.