Slashdot Mirror
Jobcentre Apologizes For Anti-Jedi Discrimination
An anonymous reader writes "Chris Jarvis, 31, is described as a Star Wars fan and member of the International Church of Jediism. Said church's intergalactic hoodie uniform is at odds with the strict doctrine of the Department for Work and Pensions, which may require Jobcentre 'customers' to remove crash helmets or hoods for 'security reasons.' Following his ejection, Jarvis filled out a complaint form and within three days got a written apology from branch boss Wendy Flewers. She said: 'We are committed to provide a customer service which embraces diversity and respects customers' religion.'"
"These are not the dorks you are looking for."
- None can love freedom heartily, but good men; the rest love not freedom, but license. -- John Milton
Neeeeerrrrrrrrdddd
Talking about 'religion' going to far... Maybe if leather jackets are allowed he should join the church of the Fonz...
For those who don't recognize the reference (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Father,_the_Son,_and_the_Holy_Fonz)
Unbelievably stupid indeed. I see Jedis take off their hoods all the time in the movies. Why can't he? The only force-user who's adamant about keeping his hood on is the Emperor, in which case you'd best throw this guy down a shaft now and save us all a lot of trouble.
Their may be a grammatical error, misspeling, or evn a typo in this post.
I am not the unbelievably stupid asshole you are looking for.
What's the point of having an Idle section if you never use it?
For some reason in the UK we have exceptions for certain laws if you are a member of a religion. For instance, if you are a Sikh you are allowed to use a motorbike without a helmet since you have a turban in the way (although to be honest, in that case your violation doesn't harm anyone else). In a more outrageous exception, churches are allowed, when choosing a candidate for a job, to discriminate against gays and in the Catholic church's case women. It's one rule for us, and another for them. As the gentleman in the article has demonstrated this is extremely silly. Who defines what a religion is?
I don't recall either Yoda or Luke wearing hooded garb. Not that the whole basis of this story isn't ridiculous, I'm merely saying it also appears Jediism is inauthentic.
No wonder people like this get the crap kicked out of them in school.
Does this mean I can carry a sword too!?
~Mekkah
Since when do Jedi have to wear hoodies with the hood up? There are numerous points in the movies where Jedi do not wear their hoods up, and numerous occasions where they even wearing a garment that has a hood at all. Clearly, mandatory hoodies is not one of the precepts of Jediism as it existed in the Galactic Republic/Empire.
This reminds me of all the rituals and requirements Catholics make up that was never mentioned in the Bible. But at least they can point at a section in the Bible that can be read to say that the church leaders are allowed to make this stuff up.. As far as I know, not only is there no such statement in Star Wars, Lucas is quite serious about restricting who is allowed to expand upon Star Wars. Is there some Expanded Universe novel in which the Hoodie Requirement is created?
So dude, I mean Mr. Jedi, put your hood down. You don't need it up to be a Jedi. Insisting on putting it up isn't holding fast to your religion, it's playing dress-up.
The enemies of Democracy are
Under the ADA, discrimination against retards is unlawful here too!
I've abandoned my search for truth; now I'm just looking for some useful delusions.
Star Wars and Jediism is accepted as a religion, but using marijuana for spiritual purposes is not accepted as a religion, even though the law permits the latter. :)
Don't get me wrong - I love Star Wars, but this whole situation makes me a bit bitter.
I generally hire staff that have an affinity for Star Wars - and at least one replica lightsaber. I also have systems named JEDI (Joint Enterprise Document Ifrastructre) and YODA (Your Online Document Archive) but do not insist on Jedi robes.
As it is, the guy was wearing a hoodie, not a Jedi robe.
Seems a bit extreme.
The Kai's Semi-Updated Website Thingy
...Jediism carries the same credibility as other religions directly based on science fiction stories. Just ask Tom Cruise.
I hate being bipolar; it's awesome!
My religion is based on cheesy pornos from the eighties. My dress code requires attractive secretaries to take their clothes OFF. Don't oppose my beliefs!
It is no longer politically correct to use the word retards. I think they are to be called Palin-Americans now.
Maybe he's Western Reformed Jedi instead of Eastern Orthodox Jedi.
Chris Jarvis, 31 year old Star Wars fan, finally gets laid and gets a life.
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
Had he been a real Jedi, he would have just waved his hand and said "You don't have to remove your hood", to which security would have said "You don't have to remove your hood" and waved him on through.
It's not quite the same as this isn't a recognised religion.
Jediism was officially "recognised" as a religion back in 2001.
Maybe next time I will walk in on with a stupid hairdo and eyebrows,which is from hooliganism(a new religion)...and sue them for neglecting based on my religion
Why don't you create your own religion, where you establish as a basic tenet, the ability to discriminate against "the faithful", "the believers" etc. Then get a bunch of people to follow you and you actively discriminate. If they sue you for discrimination, you sue the government to get religious protection. Force them to confront their own inconsistent stand.
sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
My first choice for career was theology, and I have a Ph.D. in New Testament. So I've given this a bit of thought.
The problem is that, without these exceptions, you end up setting the disastrous precedent of the state defining what is an acceptable religious belief to hold. That's all very well and good when you happen to agree with the religious and cultural perspectives of the state--for example, from the sound of your posts, you seem to hold to "liberal democracy" (in the technical sense, not the pundit sense.) But what happens when George W. Bush takes over and he and the Republicans from the Bible Belt start defining what's acceptable religious belief?
The problem is that government doesn't have a very good record for being able to pick the side of the angels (anymore than religion does.) However, allowing freedom of religion--allowing religious groups the freedom to have mixed services, or women in the pulpit, or roller-skating as a religious service, or damned near anything so long as you can make some sort of argument that it serves a religious function--becomes the place where unpopular viewpoints can be expressed. It's worth remembering that all the humanist values that you hold dear... the rights of man, civil liberty, universal suffrage, the civil rights movement... were first nurtured in churches, at a time when these views were very unpopular.
So, my point is that granting special privileges to religious belief serves a useful social purpose. Yes, it's good for religious people (although I might argue how good it really is... religions tend to thrive on persecution.) But it's also good for society as a whole. Simply put, kill religious freedom is like eating your seed-corn.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
I'mm starting a nudist religion.
Then joining a snake handlers religion.
Then I 'mon, tues, weds, thrus is a sabbith so I can't work those days religion.
The Kruger Dunning explains most post on
Oh - that gives me an Idea. Can I create a Sith Religion and start a legal Crusade against the Jedi?
Membership would be a problem, since there are supposedly only "two at any time."
OTOH, those guys would probably be a lot more fun to party with.
Never confuse movement with action. --Hemingway
How sad, that someone is so stuck on an old movie they pretent its a religion.
Its not discriminating against religion, because much like all others, its made up!
i find it highly objectionable that my government's employment agency won't let me skin my victims and hang them on trees or spit acid in their faces
plus i am REQUIRED to fight with the alternate of my form to the death. the police should get this memo and stop harassing me in my lawful pursuit of my religion
intellectual property law is philosophically incoherent. it is your moral duty to ignore it or sabotage it
why he is looking for a job.
Or even needs one if he is a Jedi.
Probably.
As a regular meeting place for their religion basements shall become tax exempt property. Unlike Catholic Priests Jedi Masters can marry just so far none of them have met any girls.
What hospitable bill? I cleaned up after people who thought helmets are optional. Trust me. There is no hospital bill. The turban is a good thing however, it will keep the mess in. Makes it a bit easier for the person collecting the bits.
MMO Quests are like orgasms:
You may solo them, I prefer them in a group.
Hard to imagine why this guy is out of a job.
... people like me who have to work for a living in order to pay taxes so that shirkers like him can stay on the dole indefinitely without needing to make any effort to make themselves good prospects for employment.
Personally, I'd stop his unemployment benefit there and then because he's quite clearly not using it as stop-gap while he seriously looks for work... and wasting the time of Job Centre staff when there are more deserving people out there who are *DESPERATE* to get a job.
Sometimes I despair at people these days...
Gentoo Linux - another day, another USE flag.
No matter how much people can stretch the definition of freedom of religion, this dude is the fucking dumbest dork I've seen/heard of in a long time. Goddamit, it's even painful to think of this type of dorkiness.
Anyone else wonder why this guy is unemployeed????
I'mm starting a nudist religion.
No need to start one -- it already exists. Look up "Janism" and their Digambara monks. Senior monks wear no clothes and go around nude. "Digambara" means "clad in the sky" where the sky is your clothing. It's an old religion and is recognized as such by practically every official entity.
He can wear his entire costume, but if he wants to receive services from the job center, he'll also have to wear the same outfit to his actual job interview.
Let's see how quickly he changes religions once he's declined for the first dozen jobs.
and that "Muslim" crack doesn't remind me of Obi-Wan much. Perhaps he's just a hoodie using his (unemployed) spare time to jerk everyone around?
"These are not the jobs you looking for"
Read radical news here
... than a "somebody really doesn't want to get a job and have to stop playing XBOX and WOW all day in his mum's basement" issue.
Prisencolinensinainciusol. Ol Rait!
Maybe joining one of these new pseudo-religious religions (wicca, jedi, LaVey-style Satanism, whatever) isn't such a great idea.
These sorts of religions aren't faiths. They're social playgrounds for bored agnostics and atheists who don't really believe in religion per se, but they miss the silly ritualism, dress codes, and liturgy. It furthers the notion that adhering to some form of religion is better than agnosticism, atheism, or just plain being honest about what you do or do not believe.
Freedom of religion is a great thing. So rather than fight for fake faith rights, maybe we should fight for the right for an atheist or strongly agnostic politician to not have to lie about being a Christian just to be electable.
I can't imagine why this guy is looking for a job. He obviously seems like a competent and well-balanced individual who would likely be a joy to work with.
31 years old and a Jedi ... why oh why would he need to be in a jobcentre?
I also wonder if he took the vow of celibacy - and whether it would make any difference.
Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
people are constantly robbing you...
Robber: "Well I originally was coming here looking for a job, and then thought to myself 'Wait a tick! Why don't I just take their money, that's way easier!'"
It is no longer politically correct to use the word retards. I think they are to be called Palin-Americans now.
You're thinking of the terms "hillbilly" and "trailer-trash". The politically correct term for Retard is still Republican.
XML is a known as a key material required to create SMD: Software of Mass Destruction
...disturbing.
Weaselmancer
rediculous.
Presumably there has been a schism, and the Jedis in the movies belong to a different sect that does not require headgear.
Much like the difference between Mennonite women and Baptist women - one requires headgear, one does not, but both are not only Christian but Protestant.
In Canada, if that person gets into an accident, my taxes are going to pay for his hospital bill. I'm all for saving lives, but I would rather prevent injury before it happens. In this case I worked goddamn hard for my money
The idea that you think this gives you the right to tell me how I should live my life is THE single primary reason that a nationalised health system is a bad idea.
Deleted
This is a legitimate concern (and you come back to it in a number of places in various ways) but it's been dealt with many times in the courts. The basic legal standard (IANAL, but I have made it my business to understand the law in this area) is that the state must show a compelling interest before it interferes with a religious practice. So, for example, the state has a compelling interest in protecting human life, so human sacrifice (and even animal sacrifice IIRC--there was a case in Florida) may be outlawed. The state has a compelling interest in the education of children, so they can require you to educate them. However, this interest has to be balanced agains the right of religious freedom. So, for example, the state can require me to educate my children, but it can't require them to say that they believe in evolution. Nor can the state require my children to say the pledge of allegiance (offensive to some Christians) in public schools. Nor can it require parochial schools to say the pledge. --because in those cases, the courts have found that the state interest is not compelling enough to override my religious freedom.
What little bit I've learned of law is that we laypeople tend to want to argue from principles to cases. Lawyers always argue from cases to principles. Reading some of the litigation in this area is *very* interesting. We geeks also tend to want Law to be clear cut, boolean, and algorithmic. It's rarely that simple. It's usually a lot more messy, and it's not always clear how a particular issue should be (or will be) decided.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
Perhaps he's a member of the Jedi-an Peoples front or the Peoples front of Jedi's :D
Show me one US university that does not accept African Americans or other minorities.
What about women? Is there still any retarded institution of such a kind?
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
As the US uninsured, uninsurable or bankrupt due to health bills?
I am sure they are loving it.
IANAL but write like a drunk one.
That was a little lame, there was a much better Jedi story last year: a Jedi master against the Tesco empire
Tesco said: "He hasn't been banned. Jedis are very welcome to shop in our stores although we would ask them to remove their hoods.
"Obi-Wan Kenobi, Yoda and Luke Skywalker all appeared hoodless without ever going over to the Dark Side and we are only aware of the Emperor as one who never removed his hood.
"If Jedi walk around our stores with their hoods on, they'll miss lots of special offers."
I am actually in favor of freedom "just 'cuz" in most cases. For example, i think that all marriage should be civil unions, purely contractual, and the state should get out of the "marriage" business--even though my personal conviction opposes homosexuality. I don't believe in prohibition of much of anything, including "drugs", and I believe in unlimited free speech. Not that I'm a libertarian... politically, I'm more of a pragmatist.
The problem is that governments have a habit of making stupid laws that offend people's religious beliefs. For example, consider the recent French law that forbade the wearing of the Burqa (and the ensuing riots.) We can say, "the government shouldn't tell you what to wear", but the reality is that governments *do* sometimes tell people what to wear. We can say, "the government can't tell you what to believe", but the reality is that the governments sometime *do* tell you what to believe. We can say, "the government can't tell you how to raise your children", but the reality is that governments sometimes *do* try to tell people how to raise their children. And in some cases, it's legitimate for the government to do these things.
However, when the behaviors that offend society arise from deeply held convictions, there are several factors that come into play.
Let it be said, however, that this is one right among many. In the United States, this is one clause of 1 of the 10 bills of rights. I wouldn't want to dispense with freedom of the press, or freedom of (secular) assembly, or due process, or even some of the unenumerated rights (e.g. the right to privacy.) It is a vital right, because it protects my right to be a free, moral, thinking, feeling, human being, judge of my own actions. I am very grateful I live in a country that has freedom of religion, and the minute the U.S. no longer has it I'll be looking to go somewhere that does.
"He who would learn astronomy, and other recondite arts, let him go elsewhere. " -- John Calvin, commenting on Genesis 1
If this was in the US, he should walk in with his hoodie, get told to take it off, then sue for unequal protection under the law. If there are exceptions made just for religion, and not just anyone that wants to wear headgear, then that person or group is receiving greater protections that I'm awarded. If freedom of religion demands the laws/rules accommodate headgear, then equal protection demands that rule apply to everyone, and not just those that claim some personal affiliation with some other group.
If equal protection doesn't apply, then we can just go back to separate but equal, as that's what we'd have if there was one rule for those of one faith, another for those of a different faith, and another for those of no faith.
Yes, headgear is a stupid point to fight about it over, but it doesn't matter how "little" it is, the law is equal or not.
Learn to love Alaska
"Quit being a bitch and pill me up"
Why is common sense called that if it's not common?
The New Labour religious hate laws that made this amusing story possible also grant the same privileges to Christian and Muslim fanatics. You can be sure the use they make of them will be a lot less chortlesome.
The whole point of this stunt is to show how ridiculous the current allowances for religion are.
If some bloke wants to go into the jobcentre with a simple hood up, he's not allowed to. If a muslim woman with only a small slit in a veil showing her eyes wants to go into that same place, she IS allowed to.
A seikh can carry a dagger in London. He can even carry one into a school. If I get caught with my leatherman supertool and can't convince a police officer that I have good excuse for having it, I face jail. People have been convicted for carrying a dangerous weapon for carrying these and Gerbers.
I can't fill up my motorcycle at most petrol stations without removing my helmet, even though I wear a flip face model (I can get in and out of the country wearing this, but that's another story). A woman in a full veil is allowed to.
So yes, the whole Jedi thing is silly - but getting the apology proves a point - we have one rule for the pious and another rule for the rest of us.
The hood stays up. The hood only goes down when you're ready to kick ass.
do you want an ass-kicking?
Guys, I am founding Zankensouki as a real-world religion. I must hereby be allowed to carry a bladed or pointed weapon (possibly a freaking huge one), which is the physical manifestation of my Zanpakutoh, at all times, in public. Only higher-ranking shinigami have the right to even ask me to relinquish it.
Now if you'll excuse me I have a plane to catch.
"When information is power, privacy is freedom" - Jah-Wren Ryel
I seem to remember there was a long discussion on this subject at the French Academie (the guy doing an Encyclopedia for the last 150 years)
After much discussion they proposed a non-politically correct definition :
Religion : a successful sect.
It takes 40+ muscles to frown, but only four to extend your arm and bitchslap the motherfucker
NERDS!
I'm fascinated by your set of ideas and would like to subscribe to your holy scripture.
This was clearly a test. If Jarvis were a true Jedi, his mind tricks would have worked just dandy on his coworkers, and no one would have questioned his wearing of the hood in the first place. Clearly, he's a pretender, just using the system to let him keep pretending. Similarly, I think high level Scientologists who can't fly or shoot mind bullets or whatever else they claim need to be exposed as pretenders. Science Fiction-based religions are hard enough to keep going, without fake followers adding to the problem.
-Dave Haynie