Posted on 04/21/2007 5:58:54 AM PDT by NYer
You mean a reliance on facts, and an understanding of logical fallacies?
Time to sue Barclays.
I stand corrected.
Hey, I said it was possible that management was being stupid when they fired someone! Clearly when you got fired, management was being extremely stupid. That doesn’t mean that everybody who gets fired is the victim of stupid management. Geez, you should see some of the goof-offs at the company where I work—management bends over backward to look the other way, but when they get fired, they really deserve it.
Welcome to modern corporate life.
The cross, and what it represents, is a most henious thing and an egregious affront to anybody's sensibilities. No accurate portrayal of Christ's "passion" can be made into film, in that if such was truely historically accurate, then XXX wouldn't be sufficient rating, and it would be classified in the same genre of any arbitrary "snuff flick".
I also protest on issues pertainent to that of "graven images" as prohibited by the Word of God. You may argue that its nothing to get all worked up about, and that those images only "remind" you of Him. We'll see how far you get when your wife discovers pictures of some porn star in your wallet that you claim remind you of your wife (or some such picture that your wife may have). It doesn't matter whatsoever how close the resemblence may be, its not the same thing. Nobody knows what Christ looked like, nobody really knows what His agoony was, and anything else falls short of that and is not merely disrespectfull, its an outright slap in the face of our Redeemer; just as one claiming those pictures remind them of their spouse. It wold be a personal affront, and Scripture is quite clear: I am the Lord thy God, and I am a jealous God; Thou shalt have no other God's before me.
Finally, employees are not paid to worship their God in the workplace. I would have a chat with anybody that displayed any other picture than a loaf of bread and glass of wine, or a simple cross icon. A picture of Mecca wouldn't offend me either. However, a feces encrusted cross standing in a urinal while somebody is doing their business there would be. What's wrong with hanging a Native American dream catcher? IMHO, nothing.
I don't care if you have a Budda, or a Shiva, or even a goat's head inside an inverted pentagram. None of those actually are offensive, but do invoke pity in me for those that hold those items (or what they represent) in reverence.
Scripture tells us that we are to be wise as serpents but harmless as doves. As soon as I state that I'm a Christian, I'm on a lot of people's bad side. If I ever state that I'm a F'g Christian, I alienated pretty much everybody, except for those who revel in my hyposrisy. In any case, my credibility is shot to hell. Everything and anything we do or say must be guaged against what witness such brings to bear against the Truth. The truth of the matter is that for an overwhelming great majority the proof in the pudding is that the only "Bible" many people will ever see is what is evidenced in the prophesing Christian's life, and not some stinkin' picture hanging in one's cubical at one's place of employment (sort of like an in your face sort of thing).
Probably the most offensive thing is one Christian observing another person professing Christianity debauching themselves. Isn't it wonderful to run into people who stick their fingers out accusingly and cry, "You, you, you, sinner, you. You must reform, lest you burn in hell. Such wonderfull people to be around, know what I'm saying?
Hiding behind a pravcy poliy is NOT lame. Go into your HR department in the morning and ask them about getting sued for releasing private employment information. They will let you know that there is a huge liability involved.
A company with minimal HR training and standards does not provide references, other than confirming dates of employment, and title. They would never discuss a case such as this with the media, nor should they. Quite frankly its not of your (or my) business. If the guy wants to sue them, then it will come out in court.
My guess is that you will never hear of this again because there simply isnt a case—and this guy is just after some money.
I think it is our business. If it is true then people should not do business with Barclays. And if it is not true then other businesses should be reluctant to hire someone who slanders his employer.
People who do rotten things like to hide behind walls of silence.
Even worse is to run into those sinners who look who look down their nose at those who don't indulge and regard them as prudes. I've met a lot of those, but I've never seen a Christian tell a sinner he will burn in hell.
Whatever. This guys employment status is not any of my business. If what he says is true, it will come out in the court case. If what he says is true, there are many legal arms of many organizations that will come running to his aid, pro-bono.
I am willing to bet a sizeable amount of the money in my pocket that you will NEVER hear of this case again. Once the “pro bono” lawyers get two inches into this case, the company’s lawyers will dump enough of this guys garbage on the table to show that he was fired for cause.
Does it ever seem odd that cases like this never make it to a second or third story? If this was taken to court and proved accurate, you would hear about it from every evangelical pulpit in the country.
Don’t wait for it though. The silence will deafen you.
And a smart Christian knows that we should have the right to discriminate. Shunning is the only weapon that a true Christian has.
But that doesn't mean it didn't happen. I don't think the guy made this story up out of whole cloth. The fact that Barclays gave out the non-denial denial tells me they are covering their ass.
For those of you who suggested that I may have been a problem employee that Barclay's was looking to find a reason to fire, I suggest reading the article again paying strict attention to the part that states I was never placed on corrective action. I was a model employee, punctual and a hard worker.
I’m an American who has specific privilege to practice and express Christianity at my work place. If you disagree, try reading the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (as amended), you’ll see that I’m right and you’re wrong.
For you atheists and luke warm Christians that are happy that I’ve been fired, I suggest that you try having what you call “an open mind” and I call an “open grave” and accept that my Christian perspective has validity. You have to do this if you prescribe to the “Open Mind Policy”, It’s part of your belief structure/DOGMA.
If anyone would like to contact me with questions or comments, please email me at christian.romansky@gmail.com
“Whatever happened to the First Amendment? Or does that only apply to muslims and atheists?”
The first Amendment doesn’t protect you from your employer, only from the Gov’t.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.