Saturday, October 14, 2006

Not getting a full service.

What is the difference between these articles?

A policeman is excused from guarding the Israeli embassy.
A chemist refuses to dispense the pill.
A teaching assistant refuses to remove a veil.

Nothing really. All of them are performing public duties on behalf of the government and are not performing their full role for a religious reason. We are getting reduced services and still paying full price. Yet, except for the teaching assistant, nothing is being done. Why is that? Is it because the veil has been raised in government circles as a bad thing and an example is being made? In two of the cases it seems that dispensation are being made. The chemist seems to be allowed to do this and the policeman is being allowed to change his duties. That can't be right. There should be a code of conduct that these guys have to meet and if they don't they lose the contracts they have. After all I'm sure some joined to police force to punish criminals. Do they refuse to attend a hostage situation because the hostage is a known criminal? 'Nope. I'm sorry I'm not risking myself for a criminal.' 'I'm not dispensing a heart pill to him because he is a homosexual'. It won't be long now we have started on the slippery slope.

Doesn't it seem interesting how much these issues seem to be coming into the public view so much lately. I think these things have been happening for years and nobody has raised the profile because they are scared of being branded intolerant. The gloves seem off at the moment as the media swings behind pointing all these things out more and more of us are up in arms. If we were armed that is.

The pot is starting to boil.


Post a Comment

<< Home