|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Disabled people not welcome here
|
Zappa
Ship's Wake
# 8433
|
Posted
Holy fuckeroovey, batboy.
*Checks*
No apparently it's not April 1.
I'm thinking What Would Jesus Say? I'm hoping it would be too fruity for a Christian website. Of their sort, that is, not the Ship's.
Because I reckon Jesus would say something like "listen, you fucking dickfloggers, get your distortion of good news out of your arses and start listening to my words and looking at my actions. 'cause yeah, I told anyone with difficulties to fuck off. Sure I did."
I'm just a wee tad angry about this sort of fuckwittery in the name of Jesus. ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
shameless self promotion - because I think it's worth it
and mayhap this too: http://broken-moments.blogspot.co.nz/
Posts: 18917 | From: "Central" is all they call it | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gee D
Shipmate
# 13815
|
Posted
This has been picked up by the ABC, who call the church a national Christian group!
--------------------
Not every Anglican in Sydney is Sydney Anglican
Posts: 7028 | From: Warrawee NSW Australia | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Huia
Shipmate
# 3473
|
Posted
Holy crap. What next? Only people with brown eyes? Or adults over 5 ft 8"? Or those born in a month with an 'r' in it? I think this verges on blasphemy.
Any of our Aussie Shipmates care to Mystery Worship these drongos? ![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
Huia
--------------------
Charity gives food from the table, Justice gives a place at the table.
Posts: 10382 | From: Te Wai Pounamu | Registered: Oct 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
According to this articale from ABC, the NZ Herald doesn't have it quite right.
They are still very fucked up, just not quite as much as the first article states.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Good friggin' grief! Have they never read the gospels???
I've never been completely comfortable with the whole Mystery Worship thing; but, in this case...GO FOR IT!!
Pity I can't do it, being far away. I have disabilities, mostly of the invisible kind, so they might say things in front of me that they (hopefully!) wouldn't in front of someone visibly disabled.
And, if they turned out to be as stated, I'd be sorely tempted to pull a prank or three.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
Yes. My thought was: be careful what you wish for.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
You do a serious disservice to people with mental disabilities when you include bigoted morons such as these in that category.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mark_in_manchester
not waving, but...
# 15978
|
Posted
Sounds like they have an OT perspective on excluding the disabled from the temple. When did Christianity make big changes there - perhaps it was early, thinking of Peter's vision of unclean foods, the Tower of Siloam story, etc - or perhaps not? I can just about remember a 'put them aside somewhere and pretend they're not there' attitude which ISTM was more common in wider society when I was small (1970s UK), though there were several members of my MOTR church back then who we knew we were meant to 'be kind' to - not that we really were, kids being evil bastards.
--------------------
"We are punished by our sins, not for them" - Elbert Hubbard
(so good, I wanted to see it after my posts and not only after those of shipmate JBohn from whom I stole it)
Posts: 1596 | Registered: Oct 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Marvin the Martian
Interplanetary
# 4360
|
Posted
- They're talking about people being in leadership roles in a service, not being part of the congregation.
- They're talking specifically about people who uncontrollably exhibit behaviours that are incompatible with the ethos of the church in question (their example being that they would want to exclude from public ministry someone who would uncontrollably repeat swear words throughout a sermon they were preaching).
If someone with a mental disease that caused them to call everyone they met a cocksucking whore applied to be the next priest at your church, then how would you feel about it?
This group does not seem to me to be saying that everyone with a mental illness is like that. They're just saying that in order to refuse to hire the ones who are, they need an exemption from the legislation. I don't know enough about them to speculate on whether they would use such an exemption to exclude people with non-disruptive disabilities as well, but nothing they've said in the two articles linked to date points that way so far as I can see.
--------------------
Hail Gallaxhar
Posts: 30100 | From: Adrift on a sea of surreality | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
mr cheesy
Shipmate
# 3330
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If someone with a mental disease that caused them to call everyone they met a cocksucking whore applied to be the next priest at your church, then how would you feel about it?
I think it would depend on the context. Some people have mental illnesses which lead to vocal tics. The only person I've ever met who has this illness would have made an excellent priest - although they had various other issues which unfortunately would have been a greater barrier.
Of course, there are a whole load of other people whose language is a reflection of the fact that they are deeply unpleasant people.
I don't think necessarily someone who has unfortunate vocal tics is unfit to be a priest.
--------------------
arse
Posts: 10697 | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by lilBuddha:
You do a serious disservice to people with mental disabilities when you include bigoted morons such as these in that category.
I'm sure you temporarily forgot that 'morons' began as a category of people with an intellectual disability, became a slur against all people with a disability before broadening out as a general term of abuse.
I believe people with an intellectual disability and those with a mental illness have the right to be bigoted, foolish and to take risks. I just added the last because I like threes, although its possibly both the most important of the three listed, and the least relevant. The point is, they have the right to be human, and to make silly mistakes.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by simontoad:
I'm sure you temporarily forgot that 'morons' began as a category of people with an intellectual disability, became a slur against all people with a disability before broadening out as a general term of abuse.
I am aware of the historical usage. I am also aware that the vast majority of English speakers will not be, it is not anywhere near a hate word for the mental health community and the the current usage is as a synonym for idiot.¹
quote:
I believe people with an intellectual disability and those with a mental illness have the right to be bigoted, foolish and to take risks. I just added the last because I like threes, although its possibly both the most important of the three listed, and the least relevant. The point is, they have the right to be human, and to make silly mistakes.
I agree. But the implication seemed to be, to me, that the church took its position because of mental illness. Apologies if I read incorrectly.
¹Took the effort to make the explanation in threes. ![[Smile]](smile.gif)
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
I don't know enough about them to speculate on whether they would use such an exemption to exclude people with non-disruptive disabilities as well, but nothing they've said in the two articles linked to date points that way so far as I can see.
Thing is, no one need to hire literally anyone who applies. INAA,² but why would they feel they need a special exemption to not hire candidates with "problematic behaviours" if not to discriminate?
²I Am Not An Australian.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ethne Alba
Shipmate
# 5804
|
Posted
There is something behind all this.
Something that is not being spoken of.
And until That is out in the light, it just all sounds bonkers.
Then again, i think that it may all sound bonkers even once light is shed!
This church has not got as far as women in leadership yet though, so i'm not holding my breath.....
Posts: 3126 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Boogie
Boogie on down!
# 13538
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
- They're talking about people being in leadership roles in a service, not being part of the congregation.
- They're talking specifically about people who uncontrollably exhibit behaviours that are incompatible with the ethos of the church in question (their example being that they would want to exclude from public ministry someone who would uncontrollably repeat swear words throughout a sermon they were preaching).
If someone with a mental disease that caused them to call everyone they met a cocksucking whore applied to be the next priest at your church, then how would you feel about it?
This group does not seem to me to be saying that everyone with a mental illness is like that. They're just saying that in order to refuse to hire the ones who are, they need an exemption from the legislation. I don't know enough about them to speculate on whether they would use such an exemption to exclude people with non-disruptive disabilities as well, but nothing they've said in the two articles linked to date points that way so far as I can see.
If they are looking at fitness for work they need to look at the person, not the disability.
You'd maybe think that someone with dyslexia and ADHD would make a poor teacher - you'd be very wrong.
[ 13. June 2017, 16:41: Message edited by: Boogie ]
--------------------
Garden. Room. Walk
Posts: 13030 | From: Boogie Wonderland | Registered: Mar 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ethne Alba:
This church has not got as far as women in leadership yet though, so i'm not holding my breath.....
A woman thinking she could lead a congregation is a disturbing behaviour.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
Are you serious?
--------------------
"I take prayer too seriously to use it as an excuse for avoiding work and responsibility." -- The Revd Martin Luther King Jr.
Posts: 10542 | From: The Great Southwest | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
Is your question serious?
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
This group does not seem to me to be saying that everyone with a mental illness is like that. They're just saying that in order to refuse to hire the ones who are, they need an exemption from the legislation.
But they don't. If someone has the rather unlikely affliction of calling everyone he meets a "cocksucking whore", and his affliction cannot be managed, there is no reasonable accommodation that can be made to place him in a public-facing role.
You can put him in a back-office job, because you can teach your other staff members that that's just a thing that Billy does, but you can't explain that to random punters.
Almost all disabilities are not like that, of course.
[ 13. June 2017, 19:54: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ethne Alba
Shipmate
# 5804
|
Posted
Lil Buddha....ok.....point taken.....
![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Put it another way....there are no women on their leadership team.
[ 13. June 2017, 20:03: Message edited by: Ethne Alba ]
Posts: 3126 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Marvin the Martian:
If someone with a mental disease that caused them to call everyone they met a cocksucking whore applied to be the next priest at your church, then how would you feel about it?
I would probably think it is far more honest than the usual "SO pleased to see you. Hope you are OK. Tell me about it" that we seem to like.
Everyone in any form of ministry has areas that they are less than suited to. I don't think that should exclude them from "ministry" if some accommodation can be made.
The article (which may or may not be accurate) says they want to prevent certain people from attending, as it would disrupt the "sacred space". Given that their sacred space seems to be right up their own arses, I am not really sure how much of a point they have*.
*None, FFS.
--------------------
Blog
Music for your enjoyment
Lord may all my hard times be healing times
take out this broken heart and renew my mind.
Posts: 18859 | From: At the bottom of a deep dark well. | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
lilBuddha
Shipmate
# 14333
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ethne Alba:
Lil Buddha....ok.....point taken.....
Put it another way....there are no women on their leadership team.
Yes. Recognising that women are not inferior does seem to be the step before admitting the same for LGBT+.
--------------------
I put on my rockin' shoes in the morning
Hallellou, hallellou
Posts: 17627 | From: the round earth's imagined corners | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dark Knight
Super Zero
# 9415
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Ethne Alba:
There is something behind all this.
Something that is not being spoken of.
And until That is out in the light, it just all sounds bonkers.
Then again, i think that it may all sound bonkers even once light is shed!
This church has not got as far as women in leadership yet though, so i'm not holding my breath.....
With respect, I would think it is obvious.
This church, and others like it, want to preemptively ensure that they can't be subject to legal sanctions or injunction for excluding LGBTIQ people from ministry roles.
I've been doing some research in this area, and many churches here do this already, but I guess getting ahead of any possible legal challenge is prudent.
Not prudent - what's the word I'm looking for? - prurient.
Hence all the guff about "problematic behaviours".
--------------------
So don't ever call me lucky
You don't know what I done, what it was, who I lost, or what it cost me - A B Original: I C U
----
Love is as strong as death (Song of Solomon 8:6).
Posts: 2958 | From: Beyond the Yellow Brick Road | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Printer-friendly view
