From The Washington Post:
I can't figure out what religious belief is being squelched. Ok, the Pope believes that homosexuality is sinful, but I'll note that he isn't generally opposed to hiring sinners. Nor even opposed to hiring sinners who don't agree with him about whether they're sinners.
And I've never heard of any rule [1] which says that you may not hire people who don't share your religion. There's nothing in the Bible which says "Thou shalt not hire a gay accountant." [2]
[1]Though I'm willing to find out if I've missed something.
[2] Wibble alert. Did they have accounting back then? I think the Babylonians had accounting, but did it become a lost art for a while?
"Your country is well known for its firm commitment to equality of opportunity for all members of society. Yet ... the effect of some of the legislation designed to achieve this goal has been to impose unjust limitations on the freedom of religious communities to act in accordance with their beliefs," he told the bishops.
I can't figure out what religious belief is being squelched. Ok, the Pope believes that homosexuality is sinful, but I'll note that he isn't generally opposed to hiring sinners. Nor even opposed to hiring sinners who don't agree with him about whether they're sinners.
And I've never heard of any rule [1] which says that you may not hire people who don't share your religion. There's nothing in the Bible which says "Thou shalt not hire a gay accountant." [2]
[1]Though I'm willing to find out if I've missed something.
[2] Wibble alert. Did they have accounting back then? I think the Babylonians had accounting, but did it become a lost art for a while?
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 04:41 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 04:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:10 pm (UTC)ETA: Cassell's Latin & English Dictionary tells me:
account, subst. (...) =account books tabulae (-arum)
accountant, scriba
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:12 pm (UTC)1. hiring people who openly break church laws/rules/ guides as church employees certainly sends a confusing message.
2. the Catholic church cannot place children in a home that doesnt conform to their idea of a healthy/moral/safe place for kids.... but they were forced to shut down ALL orphan placement in many areas because the new laws mean they cannot "discriminate" against gays in placing children......which means that they cannot follow their own religious guidelines for placing children.
etc, etc, etc
not to mention the issues with Catholic/religious hospitals being told they must administer abortions under the new laws...... which is also all about religious issues and freedom to practice.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:23 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:30 pm (UTC)What new law is this?
Some people were claiming the Freedom of Choice Act would have such an effect, but that died in Congress back in 2007, and Obama has said that he doesn't consider reintroducing it a high priority. Considering the leisurely pace with which he moves on things he does say are a high priority, odds are it's not coming back any time soon.
Here's an article from the Catholic News Service dispelling some of the rumors about the proposed law.
can't resist an irrelevant side-topic
Date: 2010-02-02 05:32 pm (UTC)The evidence cited on Wikipedia regarding 12th c double entry most likely comes from Goitein's A Mediterranean Society, which shows very detailed book-keeping, amortizing of loans and many features of what we consider "modern" accounting among Jewish businessmen in Cairo.
...I was going to write about the parable of the talents, which seems to offer direct evidence of systems of investment and the use of business agents, but when was it written? 3rd c AD? 4th? We might as well say "at least since the time of Mohammed," since we already know he was at some point a traveling business agent for a cloth merchant and accountable to his boss.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 05:50 pm (UTC)Where did you get that nonsense from?
There aren't any Catholic/religious hospitals in the NHS! I don't think there are any private ones in the UK, either. Medicine isn't the religious sectarian issue that education is.
Nor are Catholic doctors/nurses required to administer abortions contrary to their conscience. (I was in the pub just last night with an Irish catholic doctor working in the NHS. His attitude is simple: "I just don't do gyn work and have no qualifications in contraceptive advice.")
I suspect you've been reading too much American fundy propaganda.
What this is really about is Catholic schools not being allowed to practice bigotry against teachers, lay employees, or other non-clergy staff who don't toe the line. (There is, I gather, a loophole in the law for practicing members of clergy; it's obviously a bit barking to take non-discrimination to the extreme of allowing, say, a Catholic to sue for discrimination if a Mosque refuses to offer them a job as Imam.)
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 06:48 pm (UTC)From Texas A&M U:
Who Was the First Accountant?
To cut to the chase, roll down to the end for a timeline/summary in table form.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 07:57 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 08:51 pm (UTC)Btw, scrolling down past the WP quote, my mind tossed up "And yet you incessantly stand on your head, do you think at your age it is right?"
/bemusedoutsider here/
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 09:06 pm (UTC)You see, back in Roman times (and quite a lot more recently as well) the government would basically auction off the right to collect taxes to private individuals. These individuals would then make their profit by wringing out more in taxes than what they paid to become the tax collector. Zacchaeus was odious not because he was a government bureaucrat, but because he was profiting directly from extorting taxes from the people. Indeed, it was the fact that he was a private actor, not a civil servant, that allowed him to return everyone's tax money after he heard the teachings of Christ.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 09:09 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 09:15 pm (UTC)It's just the old master narrative of Western history popping up again: stuff happened in the Middle East but then it was ancient. By the time it moved to Europe and got reinvented it had become modern.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-02 11:59 pm (UTC)Not the least in the world. The clear and unambiguous message is that when a Church acts in secular matters, it is bound by secular law. Requiring a Priest adhere to Church teachings is a bona fide job requirement. Requiring the secretary or janitor to do so is not.
Hiring people, placing children for adoption, and the practice of medicine are secular activities.
Did you really mean to suggest that the Church does not discriminate against Gays by refusing to let them adopt children with those scare quotes? Really?
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 12:35 am (UTC)i said that the church has a vested interest in placing children, who are in their care, into homes they find suitable.
their idea of suitable is NOT the same of secular adoption agencies.
fact
so if a Jewish adoption agency said they wanted to place the children in their care with solid jewsih parents, who will raise the children in accordance with jewish law/religious rules.... obviously they will discriminate against non jews....... right? or anything contrary to Jewish religious law.....
right?
so if you have a religious adoption agency they will OBVIOUSLY place children with parents who meet their religions idea of "good family"
and why does an adoption agency have to be secular? its not like Catholic adoption agencies dont claim to be Catholic?
i cant adopt from Jewish agencies (not Jewish) form Muslim agencies (not Muslim) or from China (too fat) thats their right. i may not like it.. but its their adoption agency.
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:21 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 04:27 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 07:16 am (UTC)Nor did I say you did. I called out your use of scare quotes in the context of a sentence about a specific organization performing a specific activity in a discriminatory manner.
so if a Jewish adoption agency said they wanted to place the children in their care with solid jewsih parents, who will raise the children in accordance with jewish law/religious rules.... obviously they will discriminate against non jews....... right? or anything contrary to Jewish religious law.....
right?
If you're under the impression that I think a Jewish adoption agency should be allowed to discriminate on the basis of religion, you've confused me with someone else.
and why does an adoption agency have to be secular?
Because adopting children is a secular activity, regulated by the secular state. Being Catholic doesn't exempt Catholic organizations from having to conform to fire codes, either.
i cant adopt from Jewish agencies (not Jewish) form Muslim agencies (not Muslim) or from China (too fat) thats their right. i may not like it.. but its their adoption agency.
You are aware that Americans have been adopting children from China for decades now, yes?
no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 08:09 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 02:35 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-02-03 04:23 pm (UTC)I know all you see before you is a kindly old man, and I’d like nothing better than to buy some souvenirs, have a little dinner and tell everybody back home about your hospitality. However, this is merely a disguise, and if I’m forced to drop it I shall do so at once. So for your own sakes, please do not force me to become less than a kindly old man.
Re: can't resist an irrelevant side-topic
Date: 2010-02-03 04:54 pm (UTC)