|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Would Jesus Strike?
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
I find myself taking part in industrial action. Something I never thought would be part of my life. (Details here)
My lefty politics are well known on the Ship. By contrast the Christian circles I move in are very conservative. Many of my friends think striking is always wrong.
So I guess I am hoping for productive discussion in two ways: firstly is the What would Jesus do? approach helpful? And, secondly, how people think Jesus' teaching applies to industrial disputes?
Given how much of our lives are governed by our work and workplace I think the employer/employee relationship is of vital importance.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
LeRoc
Famous Dutch pirate
# 3216
|
Posted
For Jesus to strike, He'd need to have a job first.
--------------------
I know why God made the rhinoceros, it's because He couldn't see the rhinoceros, so He made the rhinoceros to be able to see it. (Clarice Lispector)
Posts: 9474 | From: Brazil / Africa | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
What en EXCELLENT question. Can't see Him doing it as a medic. CAN see Him doing it as a 'worker'. In solidarity.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
hatless
Shipmate
# 3365
|
Posted
He didn't just sweetly do whatever was asked of him. He often acted according to a bigger agenda than those around him had in mind.
I think this strike is about more than whether doctors will work on this contract. It's also about trust and honesty and reliable communication; the lack of these things. It seems to me to be more than a battle of wills or struggle to get the upper hand, and therefore, arguably creative and proper for those who follow the Way of Jesus.
--------------------
My crazy theology in novel form
Posts: 4531 | From: Stinkers | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Uncle Pete
Loyaute me lie
# 10422
|
Posted
When I was on strike some 25 years ago I was not an active church-goer. However my views were conservative-Catholic (religious) but further left than social democratic (Canadian style)
In my old age, I see no divide. God knows where my heart is. My politics are even further left than 25 years ago.
Yours is a question many ask. It is quite possible to be conservative and left-wing as long as you are happy and honest with yourself. Don't worry about what others think. If your church friends drive you away, that is their problem. It is not yours.
In solidarity, brother.
Uncle Pete
--------------------
Even more so than I was before
Posts: 20466 | From: No longer where I was | Registered: Sep 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
For an issue kike this, I think What would Jesus do is a very unproductive way of looking at it.
How would Jesus have lived if he had been trying to live an ordinary human life rather than fulfil a specific mission ? I guess he was doing that for the first years of his adult life, but we know next to nothing about how he lived in that period, and a lot about how he lived when he was fulfilling his mission.
So answering that question seems most likely just projection onto Jesus of how one thinks one ought to behave oneself.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
So what would have done as a worker or a medic for the first invisible thirty years of His life if the incarnation were in the 2nd half of the C20th onwards?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
I'm saying that answering that question is just complete guesswork. I don't think the right way to answer the question of how a Christian doctor or shop assistant or computer programmer should live in 2016 is to ask how Jesus would have lived as a doctor, shop assistant, or computer programmer.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
We do know that Jesus was not averse to strong measures in protesting the injustices of his day - whether that was some strong words directed towards the rich and powerful, or a whip of cords to the money changers. Like many of the Prophets before him, standing for the poor and marginalised, and quite capable of symbolic actions. I don't see striking as being incompatible with that.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
As the picture going around facebook says, When someone asks what would Jesus do, remember that turning over tables and scourging the moneychangers is among the options.
As Jesus didn't give any direct guidance on the point, I suspect most peoples' opinions of what Jesus would have said depend on what they think of the morality of strikes in general. (Though that will probably be tied to their interpretation of Jesus' overall ministry and teaching.)
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
I know some people have this "meek and mild, wouldn't say boo to a goose" image of Jesus. But, the Gospels portray a much more forceful personality, even a militant one.
I think rather than ask "would Jesus strike?" a better question would be "what would Jesus strike over?". If industrial action was the best route to protest against an injustice, it wouldn't surprise me to see Him front and centre on the picket line. On the other hand, he'd be very scornful of union leaders taking their members out for little benefit beyond lining their own pockets.
Striking to protest against a doctors contract that would be detrimental to patient welfare would be just the sort of cause I would think he'd be in favour of.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cliffdweller
Shipmate
# 13338
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Alan Cresswell:
I know some people have this "meek and mild, wouldn't say boo to a goose" image of Jesus. But, the Gospels portray a much more forceful personality, even a militant one.
I think rather than ask "would Jesus strike?" a better question would be "what would Jesus strike over?". If industrial action was the best route to protest against an injustice, it wouldn't surprise me to see Him front and centre on the picket line. On the other hand, he'd be very scornful of union leaders taking their members out for little benefit beyond lining their own pockets.
This.
--------------------
"Here is the world. Beautiful and terrible things will happen. Don't be afraid." -Frederick Buechner
Posts: 11242 | From: a small canyon overlooking the city | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think Jesus would have been protesting all sorts of things, some we agree with, others we don't. I think he would have been prepared to strike, if that had been appropriate, but it wasn't at the time.
So yes, it comes down to "do you think Jesus would have been on the side of the Junior Doctors" which very much comes down to our view of the dispute. But to argue that Jesus would never have supported industrial action is to misunderstand him.
--------------------
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
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
I'm wondering about the hesitation? Is there an aspect of obedience to constituted authority, the rendering to Caesar?
I also wonder however about the other side, might you be morally and ethically obligated to strike if the reasons are sound and the proposed results will contribute to the greater good, for patients, for physicians, for others working you?
I am fairly certain that Jesus doesn't much get involved with such things on the practical level.
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Can you see Him keeping people suffering? I can see Him refusing to be paid and doing the job anyway.
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
Ethical situations in the workplace are quite a test. Many of the members of my church regard striking as wrong but some are in managerial and senior positions. I wonder if they consider WJWD before moving work offshore or changing employment conditions.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Martin60
Shipmate
# 368
|
Posted
Fascinating. How would Jesus as management treat Jesus as workers and vice versa? In the NHS? Serving Himself in the sick?
--------------------
Love wins
Posts: 17586 | From: Never Dobunni after all. Corieltauvi after all. Just moved to the capital. | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Schroedinger's cat
Ship's cool cat
# 64
|
Posted
I think there is an aspect of "render to Caesar" but this is so often used to say "do what you are told". I don't think that is what Jesus meant at all - he was not one to do what authority told him.
Christians in medical work have a range of loyalties : God, the Hippocratic oath, their patients, their employers (i.e. the government, in the end). There are other subtleties within this as well, but this is a start.
So if their patients ask them to do something that violates their oath, or goes against what God has said*, they should not do it. If their employers - including the government - tells them to do something that is not in the best interests of their patients, they should challenge it. Their training is - to an extent - about knowing what is the best and right for patients in their care. If we don't trust them to do that - if we think that a government minister knows better - we should get rid of them all.
In the end, I think Christians who think that the render passage means we should never challenge our governments has completely missed the point. It is, I think, the duty of Christians to challenge the governments and hold them to account.
*That doesn't mean their own interpretation of this. It is, I think, very rare that there will be a clash, especially where the core principle of doing no harm is considered.
--------------------
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
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
I think there is an aspect of "render to Caesar" but this is so often used to say "do what you are told". I don't think that is what Jesus meant at all - he was not one to do what authority told him.
Well, he DID in fact bow to legitimate authority about its legitimate business, and encouraged his followers to do the same. He paid tax, even though theologically he knew he wasn't obliged to. He rebuked Peter when he tried to rescue Christ by taking up arms against the arrest squad.
He made the protests during his trials that any innocent man might make (but never cheated by playing the God card, which would have been overthrowing human authority). He called them on illegalities. He submitted to arrest and even to trial, flogging, and crucifixion.
But when the authority got too big for its britches, he took them down. Thus the episode with the whip in the temple (setting up a market there was WAY exceeding their authority) and the zillion rebukes to the Pharisees, scribes, elders, etc. for exceeding or cancelling the Law of God by their edicts.
So would he strike? I suppose it depends on the etails of the situation. But in a country where strike action is a right of the citizens, and where authority has clearly exceeded or contradicted its proper role, yeah, I could see him doing this.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
moonlitdoor
Shipmate
# 11707
|
Posted
A lot of decisions we face are ethical but not only ethical. They are also prudential, ie we have to make judgements about the likely consequences of our actions, both for ourselves and for others.
It's quite possible for person A's decision to do something and person B's decision not to do it to both be morally proper, based on differing assessments of the consequences. Our choices are also a reflection of our personality, some are bold some are cautious. Some like to meet issues head on, others like to find a way of resolving conflict, etc
Jesus during his earthly life avoided sin, so we can say his choices were all morally proper, but personally I don't think he had a super power to foresee the effect of every action. But even if he did we do not, so as long as we are happy with the ethical basis on which we've made our decisions, I don't think it's productive to worry about whether Jesus would have reached the same decision.
--------------------
We've evolved to being strange monkeys, but in the next life he'll help us be something more worthwhile - Gwai
Posts: 2210 | From: london | Registered: Aug 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
Thanks for some interesting replies.
Firstly, I take the view that WWJD*, is very sound theology. The writer to the Hebrews described Jesus as the author and perfecter of our faith and we are called to be disciples - followers of Jesus. Hence, I think the question What would Jesus do? in a given situation is a great place to start. This is sensible, practical theology. There are, for me two caveats to this. Firstly, there are a small number of situations where what Jesus would do as the Son of God is different to what he would want his followers to do. But I really do think that the exception. Jesus really was fully human and he showed us how to live. The second caveat is that it's not always easy to see how Jesus would treat certain situations and hence we are left with our own interpretations. As with so many areas of theology. But I don't think that makes it an invalid or unhelpful question. As always, we are called to be faithful and do our best to follow Jesus.
In terms of industrial action, I am torn in several ways at the moment.
There can be several objections to strike action from a moral point of view. Firstly, someone striking is acting in their own interests (at least in part) and standing up for their rights. Jesus' model of self-sacrifice in a challenge to this. However, I do not think it that simple. Not least because Jesus modeled peaceful resistance as well. Furthermore strike action is collective. Each worker arguably has a duty to their co-workers and each will benefit from any improvement in terms and conditions as a result of industrial action. Surely, it is right to partake in the action and the sacrifice involved, if you expect to enjoy the benefits. Another aspect of this is that the clear majority (98%) voted in favour of this action and I feel a duty to respect that vote. Even though by a strange twist** I didn't get to actually take part in the vote. This duty is balanced against other duties - primarily to patients to provide safe care. Some people take a very strict view of contracts in the sense that any strike action is a breach of contract; you are employed to work: you owe it to your employer to turn up and work. In English law, a properly mandated strike is a specific exemption to this breach. However, I know some who feel that whilst it may be legal, that does not make it moral. I think there is some basis to this - it is my responsibility to honour my contract and turn up to work.
In response to that, I do think industrial action is a necessary right. I say this, because both employers have a responsibility to their employees and vice versa but there is a power imbalance. I know that small companies can be adversely affected by bad employees such that it imperils the viability of the business but in most cases the power resides with the employer much more than the employee. (It is worth remembering when you hear representatives of big business complaining about employee rights and how it's bad for small business that the leading cause of business failure is lack of cash flow. And the cash flow problem is often caused by larger businesses not paying on time - and sometimes not at all, knowing that the small business cannot afford the legal action to enforce it).
Ultimately, I think the right to strike is the only available redress the employee has to this large power imbalance that exists. Especially in times of high unemployment and/or low wages the company can exploit the employees’ need of income. Sorry, to be more precise, collective bargaining (including, but hopefully rarely using, the right to strike).
Jesus stood up to authorities over-reaching their power. Jesus stood up for others who were oppressed.
So, I found myself on a picket line the other day. somewhere I never expected to be.
For me, the vital component of this whole situation has been and continues to be the willingness of consultants to support the junior doctors. I have no doubt that the hospital I work in has arranged work patterns and workloads to make the strike safe. This has allowed me to participate.
I think I am doing the right thing. In part this is because I know that personally, I probably won't be adversely affected in financial terms. I have been offered pay protection and will finish my training in 3 years*** but what of the next generation? I should stand up for them. Especially when they're already being saddled with huge student debt. But mostly because it's not about the money: the structure of the contract is unsafe for doctors and thus very unsafe for patients. I feel a moral duty to stand up to this. I would do anything other than striking. However, I do not think there is an alternative. I really cannot see one.
WWJD? I am not sure, but I think he'd be on the picket line too. And I suspect that is true of many disputes (though clearly not all.)
AFZ
* I always wanted a WWBD bracelet... What Would Buffy Do? ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
** When the ballot papers were sent out I was working in Wales which is unaffected by this contract. I now work in England again.
*** I am planning to take 3 years out for research and so may end up in a mess when I come back to full-time clinical work. Who knows?
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Dafyd
Shipmate
# 5549
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
* I always wanted a WWBD bracelet... What Would Buffy Do?
Angst a lot about her poor romantic choices in a cemetery, until something came along upon whom she could take out her frustrations with lethal force?
--------------------
we remain, thanks to original sin, much in love with talking about, rather than with, one another. Rowan Williams
Posts: 10567 | From: Edinburgh | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Lamb Chopped
Ship's kebab
# 5528
|
Posted
Is anybody else reading the thread title in the same sense as "Would a cobra strike?"
Just me then.
--------------------
Er, this is what I've been up to (book).
Oh, that you would rend the heavens and come down!
Posts: 20059 | From: off in left field somewhere | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by moonlitdoor:
For an issue kike this, I think What would Jesus do is a very unproductive way of looking at it. How would Jesus have lived if he had been trying to live an ordinary human life rather than fulfil a specific mission ?
I'm not sure that even makes sense - if he was "trying to live an ordinary human life", set up a carpenter's shop and raise kids, he wouldn't be Jesus.
That being said, given that He wasn't afraid to overturn the tables in the temple, I am certain that he would support strike action in appropriate circumstances. Whether these are those circumstances is a more complicated question, but I don't have any difficulty with the idea that striking can be Christian.
Does it make a difference that you're a doctor rather than a factory floor sweeper? To the extent that the strike causes inconvenience, but not extra pain and suffering in patients, probably not.
A strike that would cause extra pain and suffering is something that I'd find difficulty justifying.
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Leorning Cniht:
A strike that would cause extra pain and suffering is something that I'd find difficulty justifying.
There is no doubt that the junior doctors strike have had consequences on patients, with postponed operations being the biggest impact. But, since the proposed contract would result in even greater detrimental impact on patient wellbeing over a much longer period of time an argument can be made that the inconvenience to patients now is going to be offset by a much greater reduction in patient safety in the future. That's if the strikes have the effect of forcing the government to the negotiating table to devise a contract that puts patient safety and welfare first (assuming that the current contract that was devised with that aim is actually inadequate).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Og, King of Bashan
Ship's giant Amorite
# 9562
|
Posted
Having little familiarity with the specific strike at issue, I will just pop in to offer Martin Luther King's last sermon, I've Been to the Mountaintop, as a persuasive use of scripture to encourage people to participate in nonviolent direct economic action in support of a sanitation worker's strike.
(You always hear about this sermon as his prediction of his own death the following day; it is actually a pretty incredible sermon on the Good Samaritan, who King suggests is different from the two men who pass because he does not ask "what will happen to me if I stop" but rather "what will happen to this man if I do not stop.")
--------------------
"I like to eat crawfish and drink beer. That's despair?" ― Walker Percy
Posts: 3259 | From: Denver, Colorado, USA | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Whether or not to withhold one's labour is a question for the individual and their conscience.
To pose the question What would Jesus do/ is foolish and pointless (it might also be considered impertinent) since the only 'answer' is going to be one formed by the preferences and prejudices of the individual.
None of us has the remotest idea what Our Lord would have said about many of the issues of the day - after all, even the Gospels are only hearsay, although they have been accorded a status that implies that they are an accurate recording of Jesus's words.
So, the answer to WWJS/ WWJD is whatever the person posing it wants it to be - for evidence I'd cite the pastors and ministers who are frequently called on to bolster political campaigns.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
None of us has the remotest idea what Our Lord would have said about many of the issues of the day - after all, even the Gospels are only hearsay, although they have been accorded a status that implies that they are an accurate recording of Jesus's words.
If the Gospel accounts do not record the actual deeds and words of Jesus then the only logical conclusion is that they record what the authors thought Jesus would have said and done in those circumstances. If it was OK for them to think WWJS / WWJD and record their thoughts in the form of Gospels, then it doesn't seem entirely unreasonable for us to do the same (well, probably without writing down our thoughts as Gospel Truth).
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
So, the answer to WWJS/ WWJD is whatever the person posing it wants it to be - for evidence I'd cite the pastors and ministers who are frequently called on to bolster political campaigns.
Of all the people I listen to during elections I regret the clerics that get wheeled out are last in a long queue. A little way after celebrity chefs and sportspersons.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
To pose the question What would Jesus do/ is foolish and pointless (it might also be considered impertinent) since the only 'answer' is going to be one formed by the preferences and prejudices of the individual.
None of us has the remotest idea what Our Lord would have said about many of the issues of the day - after all, even the Gospels are only hearsay, although they have been accorded a status that implies that they are an accurate recording of Jesus's words.
So, the answer to WWJS/ WWJD is whatever the person posing it wants it to be.
I completely disagree. He's us calls people to follow him. He said he only did what he saw his father doing.
Of course, as with any theology, the risk of bias and preconceptions is always there. However I don't think that invalidates the question - especially when people use it as a self-challenge.
A pastor friend of mine often notes how we wrestle with some of the less straight forward teachings in the bible, whilst we ignore the obvious stuff. Maybe we should focus on simple obedience to the things we know first.
A growing challenge in the UK is homelessness. I don't know what the answer is. I know some people feel strongly that giving money to people begging is counter-productive. WWJD? I don't know BUT I do know that he would care. It's an ambivalent attitude that worries me most. WWJD? Well, he would definitely care. What you do next is then up for debate.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
A growing challenge in the UK is homelessness. I don't know what the answer is. I know some people feel strongly that giving money to people begging is counter-productive. WWJD? I don't know BUT I do know that he would care. It's an ambivalent attitude that worries me most. WWJD? Well, he would definitely care. What you do next is then up for debate.
AFZ
I'm probably in danger of being hauled over the coals for crusading, but with between 250,000 and a million empty homes (depending on how empty a home has to be to be considered empty) there's a starter for the homelessness problem. At four per home, thats a million people with a roof over their heads (and thousands of decent jobs to make them habitable).
It's basic and I'm sure Jesus would support it.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
with between 250,000 and a million empty homes (depending on how empty a home has to be to be considered empty) there's a starter for the homelessness problem.
But it's only a starter. Once they're settled in, who pays the electric and gas bill? The heating bill? Who buys groceries? Who replaces the light bulbs when they burn out, to say nothing of the hot water heater when it conks, the windows if someone should throw a stone, etc.?
In short, the homeless need jobs that pay enough for them to support themselves on, and that support includes housing.
--------------------
"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
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Amanda B. Reckondwythe:
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
with between 250,000 and a million empty homes (depending on how empty a home has to be to be considered empty) there's a starter for the homelessness problem.
But it's only a starter. Once they're settled in, who pays the electric and gas bill? The heating bill? Who buys groceries? Who replaces the light bulbs when they burn out, to say nothing of the hot water heater when it conks, the windows if someone should throw a stone, etc.?
In short, the homeless need jobs that pay enough for them to support themselves on, and that support includes housing.
Is that a reason *not* to make a start? Would it, in short, discourage Christ? I think not. I'm sure He would pick up His chisels and saws and do some of the work Himself.
I expect He would also employ some of the homeless who have something like the right skills to join Him in the work.
--------------------
"He isn't Doctor Who, he's The Doctor"
(Paul Sinha, BBC)
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Amanda B. Reckondwythe
Dressed for Church
# 5521
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Sioni Sais:
Is that a reason *not* to make a start?
No.
quote:
I expect He would also employ some of the homeless who have something like the right skills to join Him in the work.
And pay them with . . . what? Money from the poor box?
--------------------
"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
|
|
Caissa
Shipmate
# 16710
|
Posted
WWJD when the society is so different 2000 years later is a mug's game at best. Striking is an active of solidarity for the greater good of your brothers and sisters.
Posts: 972 | From: Saint John, N.B. | Registered: Oct 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
WWJD when the society is so different 2000 years later is a mug's game at best.
Sort of. But any theology of 'modern Christianity' faces the same challenge.
quote:
Originally posted by Caissa:
Striking is an active of solidarity for the greater good of your brothers and sisters.
OK. And I agree. Why is this a good thing? Because an act of solidarity for one's brothers and sisters is in line with Jesus' teaching?
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Aravis
Shipmate
# 13824
|
Posted
I think Jesus would stand on a picket line protesting. Just then someone would walk past in despair because their hospital appointment had been cancelled. Jesus would heal them. The healed person is very happy. Organisers on both sides are not happy at all though find it hard to explain exactly why they are angry with Jesus.
Posts: 689 | From: S Wales | Registered: Jun 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
Would Jesus withdraw emergency cover?
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
Would Jesus withdraw emergency cover?
That question is really annoying. It's the media's fault, I suspect as this is how it's been reported. However it is not what is happening.
Most junior doctors are withdrawing their labour, having made arrangements with senior colleagues to ensure emergency cover will still exist at the usual level.
So the question is irrelevant.
Sorry, but the whole striking thing is a big wrench.
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Sioni Sais
Shipmate
# 5713
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
Would Jesus withdraw emergency cover?
That question is really annoying. It's the media's fault, I suspect as this is how it's been reported. However it is not what is happening.
Most junior doctors are withdrawing their labour, having made arrangements with senior colleagues to ensure emergency cover will still exist at the usual level.
So the question is irrelevant.
Sorry, but the whole striking thing is a big wrench.
AFZ
I'm not sure it's an entirely irrelevant question. Had the junior doctors not arranged for emergency cover, or had their senior colleagues decided not to provide it, then the situation would have been a lot more serious and the government may even have felt forced to negotiate. It would have been a far starker question and the current arrangements can be construed as the junior doctors weakening their own case.
Posts: 24276 | From: Newport, Wales | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Alan Cresswell
Mad Scientist 先生
# 31
|
Posted
The question shifts the focus onto implying that junior doctors don't care about their patients. Which is patently absurd, but framing the dispute just in terms of pay and not patient safety suits the government and their supporters in the media.
The consultants agreed to provide emergency cover. Which is a big statement of their support for their colleagues. They're prevented from coming out and joining the picket lines, but that doesn't mean they won't do what they can. Failure to get support from the rest of the NHS wouldn't result in the government starting negotiations, it would be the end of the strike because doctors wouldn't put lives at risk like that. The government can only be brought to the table if the whole NHS stands behind the junior doctors as much as the law allows.
But, if that cover was not available for practical reasons (eg: simply not enough consultants) then junior doctors would still be in A&E. And, if there was a major emergency incident (a severe motorway accident or something) then I can't imagine anything other than the junior doctors leaving their placards at the road side and getting themselves into A&E.
So, relevant or irrelevant are inappropriate terms to describe the question. It's a matter of journalistic accuracy, and as usual the right wing media are perfectly willing to sacrifice accuracy to make a point.
--------------------
Don't cling to a mistake just because you spent a lot of time making it.
Posts: 32413 | From: East Kilbride (Scotland) or 福島 | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Eirenist
Shipmate
# 13343
|
Posted
I only asked . . .
--------------------
'I think I think, therefore I think I am'
Posts: 486 | From: Darkest Metroland | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
mdijon
Shipmate
# 8520
|
Posted
Would Jesus strike... his wife? Only asking.
[ 24. April 2016, 10:00: Message edited by: mdijon ]
--------------------
mdijon nojidm uoɿıqɯ ɯqıɿou
ɯqıɿou uoɿıqɯ nojidm mdijon
Posts: 12277 | From: UK | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
alienfromzog
Ship's Alien
# 5327
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Eirenist:
I only asked . . .
![[Hot and Hormonal]](icon_redface.gif)
Sorry... Fwiw, I would say no. But you see my point?
AFZ
--------------------
Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not his own facts.
[Sen. D.P.Moynihan]
An Alien's View of Earth - my blog (or vanity exercise...)
Posts: 2150 | From: Zog, obviously! Straight past Alpha Centauri, 2nd planet on the left... | Registered: Dec 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
simontoad
Ship's Amphibian
# 18096
|
Posted
I think the question is not what would Jesus do, but what would you do, or what should you do in this situation as a person trying to live a faithful life.
--------------------
Human
Posts: 1571 | From: Romsey, Vic, AU | Registered: May 2014
| IP: Logged
|
|
Russ
Old salt
# 120
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by alienfromzog:
secondly, how people think Jesus' teaching applies to industrial disputes?
Seems to me that most industrial disputes amount to haggling over the price of labour.
Haggling over the price of goods is not unknown in the Middle East, and I suspect this was the case in Jesus' time also.
I'm not aware of any direct reference to this practice in the gospels. What we have is Jesus'teaching about "turning the other cheek" and His anger at the merchants and moneychangers turning His Father's house into a marketplace.
What I take from this is that haggling is fine as a sort of game, a ritual with well-understand rules. Fine if you can haggle and walk away without rancour. So you made a bit or lost a bit on the negotiations. OK to feel pleased or disappointed; not OK to hold a grudge about it. If you really feel that someone was out to swindle you, has wronged you, then maybe you should have turned that other cheek.
And that haggling is something profane, something of the world that shouldn't be distracting you from God.
So go ahead and strike. It's not a sin in itself. What is sinful is turning it into a crusade, putting your heart into it, kidding yourself that it's a moral issue. It's not, it"s a grubby little attempt to put more money into your pocket. That's not where your treasure should be. The people you're haggling with (striking against) are doing nothing wrong - you're no better than they are. And under no more or less obligation to give in for the sake of peace than you are. If you start hating them (or indeed hating the scabs and strikebreakers) then you're taking what you're doing too seriously.
Just my tuppenceworth...
--------------------
Wish everyone well; the enemy is not people, the enemy is wrong ideas
Posts: 3169 | From: rural Ireland | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Patdys
Iron Wannabe
RooK-Annoyer
# 9397
|
Posted
Hi AFZ,
It is an interesting question.
I think Jesus is a situational ethicist. I think the test is whether your action is consistent with...'Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your strength and with all your mind'; and, 'Love your neighbor as yourself.'
Bit like the doctrine of double effect. Intent is key.
However, I am also acutely aware we judge ourselves by our intent and others by their actions...
I wish you all well
--------------------
Marathon run. Next Dream. Australian this time.
Posts: 3511 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leorning Cniht
Shipmate
# 17564
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
Seems to me that most industrial disputes amount to haggling over the price of labour.
In the case of the current NHS dispute involving junior doctors, however, this isn't entirely true. There is a "price of labour" component, but as afz has explained, many of the complaints are to do with patient safety, rather than with lining doctors' pockets.
Other public servants are able to make similar arguments in employment disputes - that such and such a proposed policy will significantly worsen the service that they are supposed to provide.
Employees in the private economy don't have the same kind of argument available to them. They can, of course, make the case that they employer's proposed action is bad for the employer, but that's not the same.
There's an element of industrial action in the public sphere which is really political action, rather than a pure industrial dispute. That's what's at stake here.
[ 24. April 2016, 23:45: Message edited by: Leorning Cniht ]
Posts: 5026 | From: USA | Registered: Feb 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
