Getting Cross

It's ten o'clock on Sunday morning, that means its time for Joy of Tights to be angry about religion.  Subject of today's rant, the European Court of Human Rights judgement on Nadia Eweida.

Nadia Eweida, 60, was sent home from work by BA in 2006 for refusing to hide or take off the cross around her neck. On the 15th January she was awarded 32,000 Euros by court after judges said there had been a violation of Article 9 of the European Convention on Human Rights

Now, from my point of view, you wear what your employee wants you to wear.  If they want you wear tan tights, white socks and tiny shorts as a Hooter's girl, then that's what you wear.

Is Hooter's more popular than the church in the background cannot think why?

If they want you to dress as a bunny girl with black tights and sandals then that's what you do.

If you don't like the dress code, don't winge about it - get another job!  It is sad that the European court did not show the same common sense as the British legal system - its enough to make you euroskeptic.  It is just unfair when most people follow the dress code and a few get away with it more religious (= lifestyle choice) reasons.

Airline employee wears her uniform.  What if she claimed tights and heels were against her religion?

A ‘jubilant’ Ms Eweida, who had lost at a string of hearings in Britain, said her first reaction to the ruling had been to say: ‘Thank you, Jesus.’ 

"Thank you Jesus" for Christian fashion sense

Gay guy in tights

Now it is all very well thanking Jesus, but  her victory came as three other Christians lost claims at the European Court of Human Rights. Nurse Shirley Chaplin, who wanted to wear a cross with her uniform, was told that her bosses were right to remove her from the wards because of the importance of health and safety for NHS patients.  And two Christians who were sacked in gay rights disputes were both properly dismissed, the Strasbourg court ruled.

Gillian Ladele, a registrar with Islington council, had declined to conduct civil partnership ceremonies. Gary McFarlane, a Relate counsellor, had been reluctant to give sex advice to gay couples.

Now I'm sure all gay guys will celebrate this as a victory for common sense.......

Gay guy in tights

Gay guy in tights

Gay guy in tights showing us his equipment

..... but why didn't Jesus give victory to these other people in their court cases.  I would have thought that the issue of homosexuality is more fundamental for fundamentalists than cross wearing.  After all St Paul says

"Romans 1:26-27: "For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence [sic] of their error which was meet."

And here for Saint Paul are some guys enjoying their tights and themselves:

Like the boots and sandals boys

 Saint Paul must be turning in his crypt.

Now it is not just Saint Paul, Moses was into gay bashing as well.

Leviticus 18:22: "Thou shalt not lie with mankind, as with womankind: it is abomination."

Now you will notice that Yahweh is quite liberal - nothing is said about women lezzing it up:

Still another one to upset Yahweh.

I'm surprised this guy wasn't hit by a  thunder bolt and reduced to a pair of smoking socks.  Perhaps he will be now I've brought Yahweh's attention to him

More fundamentally given the Jesus we read in the gospels - rather than the one presented by the fundamentalist church -....

No not Jesus some bloke with long hair and a beard.  Like the socks on the left

......you would expect him to sort out all the pain and suffering in the world rather than give Ms Eweida lots of dosh.

Charity funding raising for hospitals would be unnecessary if Jesus healed everyone

What I'm not saying

(1) That people can't wear crosses - they just have to do it on their own time.

Nice boots

(2) That people can't display crosses in their own homes.  Just not at work

(3) That people cannot display all kinds of religious junk (I mean religious paraphernalia (I mean religious artifacts)) in their own homes.

Hope Mary, Jesus and all the saints are helping you keep fit girls.

A solution
I even have a solution to the wearing religious symbols at work issue.  Get a tattoo

Follow peaches example - but with something a little more religious

Advantages of religious tattoos

• Can be covered up by thick tights, trousers or other clothing if not allowed at work.
• Present no hygiene problems.
• What could be a greater symbol of devotion to a god than having him (or her) tattooed on your body. Religious jewelry is so easy to take off anyone would think you are not convinced your god is the best.  Waiting for another one to come along?

Rather than a swirly pattern, you could have a scripture verse on your leg

Rather than stars why not a discrete cross tattoo that could be hidden by ankle boots when required.

Looks like some Christians may already be using this art form:

A bit home made

Go to a proper artist!