blonde poker forum

Before my statement I must Say I am not religious in any way :

I find it quite strange that the church can say no to women being bishops... Is this not a direct contradiction of every sex discrimination law in the land see below

What is sex discrimination?
Sex discrimination is discrimination on the ground of sex. All terms and conditions of employment are covered. It also includes applying a 'provision, criterion or practice' which, although it applies to men and women equally, puts women at a disadvantage compared to men and which the employer cannot show is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim. Such an example could be a requirement to work full time.

Does it not show the church, supposedly the shining light of our society which upholds the values of fairness, tolerance etc, as just a bunch of hypocritical bigots who see them way above ordinary men and their laws ?

I can't believe how much coverage this story has got.

Let the idiots get on with it.

As Jimmy Carr once said "We all have imaginary friends, I just grew out of mine when I was 10"

Surely if the religion you belong to says no to women bishops and you disagree with that stance then you are in the wrong religion for you?

Lol men in dresses say women can't have men's jobs

<3


it's ok though they can cover up child abuse as much as they want......... got dem priorities sorted

Church of Divorce England always has been and always will be a complete joke.

My church is better than your church?

All Church are equal but some are more equal than others! oink.

I thought that the queen was the head of this same church.

Does the Catholic church allow female priests?

Damn I had 9.23am in the Sweepstake for when Kinboshi would reply.

Yep :)

Is Boshi not religious?

He's passionate about religion ;)

dunno I guess you can ask to same question about all other religions, but this is about the Church of England.

Phew, I thought I was going to have to pray for him tonight.

I had 6.55am.

Serious question, while I put my little game of 'Boshi baiting' to one side, are there any religions which do not inherently discriminate against women? I don't mean in modern times, I am asking about in their sacred texts.

Not asking that to make a point, genuinely asking if there are any non-sexist religions, or indeed religions that discriminate against men instead of women.

I'm sure with his SEO skills, his computer savvyness, his militant atheism and his general level of sarcasm, Boshi could certainly programme a 'religious thread finder and debunk autoresponder' to post a reply within a minute.

It was interesting that the Bishops and the Clergy easily passed the 2/3 threshold needed and it was only the laity that failed it.

Probably highlights that there are plenty of intelligent people on the paid staff of the church - it's just the followers who are a bit of a problem

http://www.thedailymash.co.uk/news/society/religion-still-main-threat-to-churchs-credibility-2012112149839
:)

Read it earlier this morning, but there's nothing really to add to the nonsense of the decision for a religion to discriminate against a group (that's what they do).  I just found it funny that someone from the Catholic church was mocking the CoE on this decision when they are obviously more sexist.

As you were ;)

Also, can you define 'militant atheism'?  Prefer the term 'secularist', but might match your definition although it's one that seems to have many different definitions.

Religions tend to be old organisations and old organisations tend to be, at one level or another, boys clubs.

"from the catholic church"

well not really...but then again one must never be withheld from criticizing one body just because their own is not in perfect condition :)

I think my main point is arnt they breaking tha actual law... Bishops are employed by the church but they blatantly say you can't have this Job because ur a woman ? Try that in any other workplace ur be at tribunal quicker than u can say u got a sexy Rse in that skirt...

Yes, it's sexual discrimination the same way that many "faith" schools are able to discriminate based on the religions of the parents of children.

It does seem religion has this privilege, even in the UK's relatively secular and free society.

The C of E's views on women bishops are as relevant to society as the Catholic Churchs view on contraception.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/sep/11/bad-science-pope-anti-condom

There are plenty of jobs that are exempted from the sex discrimination laws.

They are not breaking the law. Something was passed years ago stating that they were exempt from that particular law.

Bishops have historical lineage dating back to the original Twelve Apostles. They represent those first twelve disciples. Who were all men. If Jesus chose all men for these roles, and you follow the teachings of Jesus, it's kinda tough to overrule him I imagine. Being an Apostle or Bishop is like being a member of Augusta National.

....or the blonde clique

which is being threatened to be revoked if they don't change their stand on women's bishops.

ha

Frankie Boyle ‏@frankieboyle
Why not women bishops? If I’m to be told a fairy story I’d prefer it to come from someone who looks like my mum.

And they are?

Lol awesome... How they get away with that?

I'm sure you can think of them or look them up yourself. They are generally just common-sense things. Here's a few - toilet cleaner, actor, bra-fitter, stripper, prostitute, some welfare jobs, sperm donor, athlete, model, bishop.

Their defence team was awesome, there was 12 of them.

At most 2 of these are right, including bishop.

I heard one of them was working for the other side though

Yeah, but he was forgiven.

This is quite correct I think. And if you listen to some corners a lot of them were voting against on a sort of protest at the voting structure. It's a shoe in when the next Synod or hierachy term starts.

I've tried to work out which ones you think are correct and which you don't, but I can't do it. I'm pretty sure you're guessing anyway - "at most 2" is a way of keeping your options open. So which ones?

You're wrong anyway. I checked with the Equality & Human Rights Commission yesterday and all the ones I listed are accepted by them as bona-fide exceptions in the Sex Discrimination Act 1975. Some other exceptions listed are beautician, bodyguard, Halal butcher, transsexual reassignment counsellor and gay nightclub pole-dancer.

You checked with the Equality and Human Rights Commission and they confirmed that there is legislation in place to stop women becoming sperm donors?

Also model, athlete, stripper??? 

I was going for certain types of Welfare Officer as the other legitimate one but I´ll happily admit that it´s based on assumptions that I made based on some knowledge of this piece of legislation, rather than any detailed knowledge of specifically this element of it.

Are you saying that if you wanted to open a strip joint you would expect the law to insist that you hired some male strippers if they applied for the job?

Do we think God should abide by the law tho? This is God's law. And if I was God I would do as I please thanks. I should be allowed to drive at whatever speed I want because I will never crash. But let's say I was drunk one night and did crash, well I could save all the victims with my resurrection skills and could repair any damage instantly. Sending God on a speed awareness course for going 40 in a 30 seems pretty anal to me.

Definitely the most sense ever spoken on a Sicilian thread

Lol... perfectly good topical thought provoking thread and you turn up ...

tbf, I swerved pretending I know anything about the topic except that female strippers should always be female imo

Amen

when would a female stripper not be a female stripper? you clarified the gender aspect before reaching the end of your statement

It's not that the people in those jobs have be a particular gender, just that it is permissable to make some jobs available only to people of one gender, such as the ones I listed. There are several reasons for it - to preserve dignity or decency, a requirement for strength, authenticity in entertainment and so on.

What's the issue with 'model'? If you are selling men's clothes, do you think the role of modelling them should be open to women? And what's wrong with 'athlete'? Try entering the AAA Women's Trials and see how far you get. I just picked on athlete, but many sports roles are only open to one gender.

Some other examples of roles listed in the Act or its Amendments as being capable of being advertised just to one gender include lady-in-waiting, contraceptive pill manufacturing operative, condom tester, surrogate mother, single-sex school laundry assistant and dominatrix.

Also, jobs at a womans refuge, are restricted to women. Lots of other examples, but I'm on my phone and can't be asked putting any real effort into a thread started by sicilian.

Yep all fair enough points, I hadn´t thought it through sufficiently/in the right sort of way and just thought it sounded silly so I criticised it but you´re right, apologies for being a bit of a dick about it and to all for the slight thread derail.

From this point I got a thinking about a tangent. Would it be fair to say that most faith schools perform better than non religious schools? I don't know the stats on it but presume that is the case as I hear of a lot of lay Catholics following the protocol of masses every Sunday and feigning Catholicism just so they can get their kids into Catholic Primary School. My sister in fact did this. But anyway, back to the point and that is why do faith schools perform better if they indeed do?

Does religion bring better familial discipline and therefore better behaved children? Sort of confused by it.

Out of all the schools, in the area I live, the pupils of the faith schools are far better behaved, look less scruffy and are more polite. This is purely my own observation and not backed up by statistics or a criminal register of sorts.

There are good faith schools and bad faith schools, just as there are good and bad non-faith schools. Sometimes it's a matter of funding.

The religion of the parents shouldn't be the determining factor though.

This is correct. Bring back grammar schools.

So the only reason as a whole the faith schools are normally better is probably because they are better funded? Rather than the principles of each religion that asks for each student to behave in a certain way, normally more pleasantly?

Your assertion assumes that religion is needed to make people behave morally. I'd argue that isn't the case and religion can in fact be a cause of 'bad' behaviour such as discrimination against others.

nope, I am only trying to figure out why Parents can go to desperate measures to get their son/daughter into faith schools.

Similarly purely on an anecdotal basis I did teacher training in 2 state schools in Derbyshire

The catholic state school had a solid culture of learning and respect and the school priest was basically the school counsellor in charge of the pastoral welfare of the pupils
The bog standard comprehensive was staffed by teachers who just wanted the easiest way of controlling the herd and achieving vaguely respectable league positions to secure funding; pastoral care was dealt with in the least disruptive (to the staff) way possible.

My impression from talking to people in other schools was that the better schools were down to better staff rather than any difference in pupil intake - maybe the in-demand faith schools get that way because of the virtuous circle of: better staff - better pupils - better results - better staff