Shirley Chaplin - The Fundamentals Of The Government's Case For The Mickey Mouse Court!

“In neither case is there any suggestion that the wearing of a visible cross or Crucifix was a generally recognized form of practising the Christian faith...”

“Where the individual in question is free to resign and seek employment elsewhere or practise their religion unfettered outside their employment, that is sufficient to guarantee their Article 9 rights in domestic law.”

Now. Consider the use of these arguments in the case of any religious minority. Well - can you spot any hint of a double standard?

Remember - we must not refer to the results of 'aggressive atheism' because apparently there ain't no such animal!

One side issue on the first point above is that if the wearing of crosses by non christians has diluted the effect - then seemingly Christians should be penalised for this!

So, years ago, I used to wear a small, unequivocal icthus on my lapel in a state school. By the logic used - then and now - this should be acceptable. (I'll wager that it wouldn't be!)

Remember when this was a free country?