Is this just too far????

[SB]

Opinions please, I am interested.
I have heard today on the BBC (UK) that due to a complaint from a Muslim traffic warden, the crown from the top of the Metropolitan Police Service (London, England) badge will be removed for those who object to wearing a cross (the crown has a tiny, tiny cross on the top of it)
This badge, with the exception of the centre cypher (E II R for the current Queen, G VI R for the last King etc) has been pretty much unchanged in 200 years.
Is this political correctness gone too far or is this a fair request.
On a personal note, I can't say that I would get really worked up and resign from my job if something I wore had a crescent etc on it.
Are we selling 200 years of heritage down the river or keeping up with the times?

[Mike Tx]

The problem with tolerance, as I see it, is that the people preaching this bull expect you to be tolerant of them, and bend to thier will, but they won't be tolerant of you. Screw them.

[Sparky]

Ditto what MikeTx said.

This whole tolerance thing is just intolerable.

[Babylon]

yeah just seen that today on the front of the paper,and had my girlfriend look at me with a odd look..em its all a bit far really,the bloke who started all this was a traffic warden who also apparently would not rise when a instructor entered class(as alledgely he would respect no one bar allah)...so what can you do with someone like that.Many many muslim officers have worn the met symbol for years then as usual we bow to one extremist...why cos we're scared of offending anyone.......all a bit odd really..

[Wonga]

Another example of political correctness gone mad

No one forced this person to take a position with the Met.How long has this person worked for the Met ? Are they serial complainers ? If so and there is lots they find offensive , how far should an organisation go to appease one person ??

This kind of symbolism represents a tradition that officers of all faiths are proud of and it is my belief that it is only offensive if people WANT it to be offensive.IMHO it's not offensive per se,only to those who want it to be.

[Don]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Babylon:
so what can you do with someone like that.

---

You can take the Son of a Bitch out and beat the dog schidt out of him. It's what he needs, it's what he deserves, and damnit, it's what he is ASKING FOR!

I agree with Mike Tx and Sparky!

[ateamer]

Depart the SOB and then bomb where he came from to make sure there are no others. When he refused to stand up when the instructor entered the room, he should have been fired on the spot. I'm sick and tired of these idiots who refuse to be part of the civilized world demanding that we kiss their aasses. And I'm sick of the nutless worms who buckle under to them.

[Jim Burnes]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Soho bandit:
This badge, with the exception of the centre cypher (E II R for the current Queen, G VI R for the last King etc) has been pretty much unchanged in 200 years.
Is this political correctness gone too far or is this a fair request.
?

---

Too far out. There is nothing in the Muslim religion which requires the faithful to be intolerant of any type Cross.

The guy must be trying to make his name in his community, it makes no sense otherwise.

Ignore it.

Jim Burnes

[SB]

This is from todays Evening Standard, Londons leading newspaper.
web page

[Urban Jedi]

I read this on the way home today, and have to say I was utterly bemused.

Not so much at the attitude of the staff member who stated he found the cross 'offensive' (although hey, if he found it offensive, then get a new job pal - its been on our badge since the early 1800s) but the attitude of the Met Police supporting the removal of the crown and cross from the insignia for those who don't want to
wear it.

What??????????????

I swore an allegiance to the queen. Its our one symbol of Britishness still standing. And noone, absolutely noone, from the Met Police dares to syand up and say 'Hold on a minute, this is wrong....'

Ha. Why am I not surprised, though?

[Pigskin]

Damn Don, don't sugarcoat it, just tell us what you feel.

[555]

There is too much violence on this forum.

[ 08-12-2002, 02:43 PM: Message edited by: 555 ]

[Watchman]

I have a real problem with this PC crap.

The symbol was there when he took the job...right ?

What gives him the right to bitch about something he should have been aware of BEFORE he took the job?

Two things are wrong here.
1. By him accepting employment at that position, he should be willing to live with the symbols.
2. The management ought to have the balls to tell this guy to lump it or leave it.

To **** off the many for the few is BS.

[Watchman]

I guess we ought to get ready for the "liberal slant" on things now eh ?

Or "onslaught" that is...

[CinaC]

quote:

---

The problem with tolerance, as I see it, is that the people preaching this bull expect you to be tolerant of them, and bend to thier will, but they won't be tolerant of you. Screw them.

---

There’s a big difference, as I see it, between requesting that employees of an agency not be required to wear religious icons; and some punk walking up to your automotive shop and telling you to take the religious necklace off your neck.

quote:

---

Many many muslim officers have worn the met symbol for years then as usual we bow to one extremist

---

EXTREMIST? Oh, please. Extremists strap bombs to themselves and walk into grocery stores. Extremists hijack airplanes and crash them into buildings. Asking an employer to not force him to wear a cross, or not force him to stand for an instructor hardly makes the guy an extremist. If Osama Bin Laden was THIS kind of extremist, the management offices of the World Trade Center would have received a petition and not an airplane!

quote:

---

You can take the Son of a Bitch out and beat the dog schidt out of him. It's what he needs, it's what he deserves, and damnit, it's what he is ASKING FOR!

---

I remember quite a few discussion threads about officers covering for other officers who drank, and then drove inebriated. And I don’t recall very many O.com members saying that police who drank and drove should ever be taken out beaten. Actually, I remember the general opinion that on-duty officers should cover for their off-duty brethren ... which is all fine and good. But I just find the difference in response to two different situations -- one which has the very real potential of ruining several officers careers, and innocent people’s lives -- really ****ed up.

quote:

---

then bomb where he came from to make sure there are no others.

---

This is so ignorant it doesn’t deserve a response, especially after Babylon’s post which made it clear that many Muslim officers have served without complaint. So one complains, and you want to bomb all Muslims?

quote:

---

Ignore it.

---

Damn good advice, Jim, but of course you knew that already. Don’t most of you guys have enough stress in your lives already without seeking more out?

quote:

---

I guess we ought to get ready for the "liberal slant" on things now eh ?

---

Ok -- just to be real quick and summarize:

Beating people up for suggesting changes to religious icons on uniforms = Wrong.

Not beating people up for drinking & driving and expecting their badge to cover them = Wrong.

Bombing people because someone in their general grouping is looked on as silly = Really Wrong.

Calling someone who suggests changes to religious icon an “extremist” = really odd.