Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 [8] 9 10
 71 
 on: Yesterday at 06:31 PM 
Started by Mark - Last post by blueberryhill
http://www.academia.edu/15180832/The_Transparent_Traveler_The_Performance_and_Culture_of_Airport_Security_Introduction_

Rachel Hall, author of above, on R4 today  said terrorism is "the art of surprise."  Interesting but really chilling. Sophisticated intelligence gathering is obviously the way forward but really difficult to be one step ahead,  which the French are finding.
Apparently the French media have decided not to give the terrorists so much publicity, won't publish photos etc. Might make some difference, I suppose.

 72 
 on: Yesterday at 06:25 PM 
Started by eira_arian - Last post by Joe
Perhaps it would help stem the spread of superbugs if hospitals went down the old road of not allowing more than two or three visitors per patient, made it a firm rule that said visitors should sit on the chairs provided rather than on the bed, and brought back the former visiting hour rules.  I had the misfortune to be in hospital 12 years ago where visitors could come in between 2 and 8 pm and some patients had their whole family, kids included, sitting beside and on their beds, eating food and effectively turning it into a day's outing.  So please don't tell me that that doesn't increase the chances of patients catching superbugs.   Also it's extremely annoying for other patients to have to put up with this, particularly as the visitors were allowed to remain well beyond 8pm.
I have no objection to  uniform rules or a dress code, but, and I'm what you might call a non-practising Christian, I certainly don't see why the wearing of a cross should be one of them.

Have you been into hospital recently? Such visiting rules are in place. But where did I say that they were also not helpful? It's about incremental changes and jewellery is an infection control risk.

 73 
 on: Yesterday at 06:11 PM 
Started by eira_arian - Last post by Aileen
The wearing of the cross would likely come under infection control rules, in which case it is certainly not ridiculous. Medics on ward rounds can't wear ties either and must roll their sleeves up to the elbow. Ridiculous eh? Hospitals trying to stem the spread of superbugs, I ask you!
Perhaps it would help stem the spread of superbugs if hospitals went down the old road of not allowing more than two or three visitors per patient, made it a firm rule that said visitors should sit on the chairs provided rather than on the bed, and brought back the former visiting hour rules.  I had the misfortune to be in hospital 12 years ago where visitors could come in between 2 and 8 pm and some patients had their whole family, kids included, sitting beside and on their beds, eating food and effectively turning it into a day's outing.  So please don't tell me that that doesn't increase the chances of patients catching superbugs.   Also it's extremely annoying for other patients to have to put up with this, particularly as the visitors were allowed to remain well beyond 8pm.

Quote
A company has a right to impose uniform rules. You and the Christians wearing the crosses may not like it, but it's not evidence of the dreaded 'PC' brigade trying to spoil anyone's fun.
I have no objection to  uniform rules or a dress code, but, and I'm what you might call a non-practising Christian, I certainly don't see why the wearing of a cross should be one of them.

 74 
 on: Yesterday at 06:05 PM 
Started by amongsttheleaves - Last post by Littlebuddha
I watched the replay again last night as TV was pretty rubbish. I enjoyed it even more than when it was played. For a start  I could relax knowing that Andy had won. It was pure pleasure and enjoyed it very much.

Andy was I thought even more emotional than his first Wimbledon win, it was a great release for him. He said he would enjoy his second win better and celebrate with family, team and friends. I really think he would enjoy it better than the first win.

I am  now looking forward to the Rio Olympics how Andy and team GB do well.

 75 
 on: Yesterday at 05:46 PM 
Started by eira_arian - Last post by Joe
Mrs Chaplin lost hers on the grounds that as she was a nurse it could pose a health safety problem, which is ridiculous as she was apparently in the habit of wearing it under her uniform and had done so for years, although Mrs Eweida won her case, after which BA agreed that she could wear it 'discreetly', i.e. not visibly.  I can find nothing to prove that the government's stance has changed since then and there have been several case which I've seen reported in the media where a company or organisation has objected to staff wearing crosses visibly, and in fact just before I retired I worked for a firm which employed around 150 staff which took the same view.  So I would say that that is evidence enough that there's still a fair amount of queasiness around on the part of the PC brigade when it comes to Christians who wish to wear crosses as part of their faith just in case it should cause 'offence'.

The wearing of the cross would likely come under infection control rules, in which case it is certainly not ridiculous. Medics on ward rounds can't wear ties either and must roll their sleeves up to the elbow. Ridiculous eh? Hospitals trying to stem the spread of superbugs, I ask you!

A company has a right to impose uniform rules. You and the Christians wearing the crosses may not like it, but it's not evidence of the dreaded 'PC' brigade trying to spoil anyone's fun.

 76 
 on: Yesterday at 05:46 PM 
Started by amongsttheleaves - Last post by Tonedial
WINS 7-5 6-1| JO KONTA v VANIA KING | MONTREAL | ROUND 2

http://www.flashscores.co.uk/match/2eTPpWuH/#match-summary

 77 
 on: Yesterday at 05:45 PM 
Started by Mark - Last post by Philip
Care

 78 
 on: Yesterday at 05:44 PM 
Started by rafa - Last post by Philip
Travel

 79 
 on: Yesterday at 05:40 PM 
Started by eira_arian - Last post by Murray Magic
PC has done a tremendous lot of damage to this country and to our young people in particular, both in family life and education. This is still a Christian country and yet many people are not allowed to wear a crucifix in view in the workplace, for fear of upsetting someone. Now the PC brigade want to house refugees all together in ghettos, where they are most unlikely to integrate with everyone else and have less incentive to try and learn English. I agree about the needless wars and taking of innocent lives, but I do not agree that we should take the responsibility. That lies firmly at the doors of the politicians, (and their puppet masters) which is why it's so important that we retain the ability to hold them to account and kick them out of office and unless Brexit happens, we will soon lose that right too....which is why I voted to Leave. You are entitled to your opinion, but I'm sticking to mine.
The politicians voted for bombing campaigns just recently in Syria so yes they are responsible but so are we - the electorate - I vote for a political party which is against bombing campaigns, illegal wars and trident who vote accordingly, nfortunately they are outnumbered by the other parties and the electorate which keep them in power.  Voting Leave, of course is your choice and democratic right, but you are sadly misinformed if you think Brexit will help in holding politicians to account - it is just going to make the Tories hold even stronger and slowly but surely our rights will disappear, along with any compassion and sympathy for the most vulnerable members of our society.  It's sad that there is so much lack of general compassion for others - especially a group of of refugees who understandably are feeling "out of sorts" for being ripped from a place they called home and placed in a strange country!!! 

 80 
 on: Yesterday at 05:34 PM 
Started by eira_arian - Last post by Aileen
And what was the outcome of that case from over four years ago?
Mrs Chaplin lost hers on the grounds that as she was a nurse it could pose a health safety problem, which is ridiculous as she was apparently in the habit of wearing it under her uniform and had done so for years, although Mrs Eweida won her case, after which BA agreed that she could wear it 'discreetly', i.e. not visibly.  I can find nothing to prove that the government's stance has changed since then and there have been several case which I've seen reported in the media where a company or organisation has objected to staff wearing crosses visibly, and in fact just before I retired I worked for a firm which employed around 150 staff which took the same view.  So I would say that that is evidence enough that there's still a fair amount of queasiness around on the part of the PC brigade when it comes to Christians who wish to wear crosses as part of their faith just in case it should cause 'offence'.

Pages: 1 ... 5 6 7 [8] 9 10