galloway

My friend Robin posted a comment in response to my take on the British Airways ruling about the woman being asked to remove or cover up the cross emblem she was wearing. Robin quoted George Galloway’s response, and provided a story link where you can see the quote in full. As usual Galloway getting the facts wrong.

He said that this is very insensitive “at this sensitive time when blood is boiling everywhere, when women are being attacked in streets and mosques are being attacked and firebombed.” I’m not totally sure, unless you happen to be a politician pandering to a group of people, what mosques have to do with this whole thing. And of course that particular religion’s record on women’s rights is so well understood.

Galloway continues, “No Muslim would ever complain about a Christian wearing a cross.” Except, of course if they were in Saudi Arabia, or several other countries in that part of the world.

Another quote in that story:

John Andrews, communications officer for the Diocese of Bath and Wells, said: “I think BA are being extremely offensive to members of the Christian faith.”

He continued: “It would be a great shame if Christians are prevented from demonstrating their own faith. It is a basic human right.

Maybe, but as mentioned before it is quite possible and in fact maybe even preferable to show your Christianity by being a good Christian which does not involve displaying symbols of your belief. And another quote:

Anglican Communion press officer Canon James Rosenthal said crosses adorn churches around the world and “many Christians find wearing or carrying a cross something very important to them” [my emphasis].

So, then, carry the cross emblem – you don’t have to be displaying it.

On a lighter note, one commenter on the story’s website pointed out that if Jesus came back he might not want to see crosses everywhere, what with the associations for him and all.

Leave a Reply