PDA

View Full Version : Star Wars Jediism Man thrown out job centre for hood



clacton0
2010-Mar-19, 03:19 PM
Has anyone seen this

Essex Southend Star Wars Jediism Man thrown out job centre for hood

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Zf3yuIK8k

A member of the International Church of Jediism has received an apology after being kicked out of a job centre.

The Jedi believer was asked to remove his hood and was thrown out when he refused to do so, he now intends to sue the job centre for discrimination despite receiving an apology.


What do you think?

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 06:23 PM
I think he's a self entitled twit who should get a big reality check in the mail.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-19, 06:42 PM
First get recognized as a religion. Then sue.

Not the other way around.

And don't sue on something that's demonstrably not canon for the religion.
Obi Wan removed his hood on going inside, so there's no ban in the religion on doing so.

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-19, 06:45 PM
I'd risk an infraction if I said what I think of the "jobseeker".

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 06:49 PM
And don't sue on something that's demonstrably not canon for the religion.
Obi Wan removed his hood on going inside, so there's no ban in the religion on doing so.

*rimshot*

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-19, 06:51 PM
And don't sue on something that's demonstrably not canon for the religion.
Obi Wan removed his hood on going inside, so there's no ban in the religion on doing so.
That's what I was thinking. Not just Obi Wan, but most of the others. I rarely remember the others wearing hoods.

ABR.
2010-Mar-19, 06:54 PM
Has it been established that he was truly Jedi(ist) and not a Jawaist?

Fazor
2010-Mar-19, 07:08 PM
I'm assuming "Job centre" is like a placement agency? (I can't watch the video link at the moment). Sounds like another moron out of touch with the way the real world works.

For starters, if the request to remove the hood had nothing to do with a purposeful attempt to suppress a particular religion, how is it religious discrimination? I have a feeling if I walked in wearing a hood just because I felt like it, I'd also be asked to remove it. Would have nothing to do with religion.

A religion and protection against religious persecution isn't the same as a license to do whatever you want because your religion says to. If it's a rule that's uniformly applied (ie no hoods) and lacking intent to target, say, Jediists, then it's not discrimination. At least, IMHO.

TheHalcyonYear
2010-Mar-19, 07:11 PM
My question is why should someone have asked him to remove his hood in the first place and why throw him out if he doesn't remove it?

If he was hurting no one, if he was behaving himself, why remove him from the office?

chrissy
2010-Mar-19, 07:13 PM
I think he's a self entitled twit who should get a big reality check in the mail.

Probably hoping to get a good giro payment more like. ;)

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-19, 07:17 PM
My question is why should someone have asked him to remove his hood in the first place and why throw him out if he doesn't remove it?

If he was hurting no one, if he was behaving himself, why remove him from the office?
That's a question the reporter should have asked.

I can only guess they have a policy, and that it might be in place for identification purposes. Imagine walking in wearing a ski mask or pantyhose over your head.

Anyway; Doesn't it seem more likely that it's the Sith that wear hoods all the time?

TheHalcyonYear
2010-Mar-19, 07:17 PM
Probably hoping to get a good giro payment more like. ;)
Wow, talk about elitist attitude. Would your attitude be the same if it were a Muslim they did this to? Oh wait, that may be too well "established", how about if he was Zoroastrian or a Pagan.

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-19, 07:32 PM
Wow, talk about elitist attitude. Would your attitude be the same if it were a Muslim they did this to? Oh wait, that may be too well "established", how about if he was Zoroastrian or a Pagan.
Is this one of your famous attempts at spotting double standards?


My question is why should someone have asked him to remove his hood in the first place and why throw him out if he doesn't remove it?

If he was hurting no one, if he was behaving himself, why remove him from the office?
He clearly wasn't behaving himself if he refused to remove his hood when asked.

The Job Centre has rules about dress code. Quite reasonable ones, given that it is quite intimidating to deal with "jobseekers" when they are concealing their faces.

TheHalcyonYear
2010-Mar-19, 07:37 PM
Is this one of your famous attempts at spotting double standards?

No, is this one of your famous attempts to be unreasonably sarcastic?

He clearly wasn't behaving himself if he refused to remove his hood when asked.


The Job Centre has rules about dress code. Quite reasonable ones, given that it is quite intimidating to deal with "jobseekers" when they are concealing their faces.
Then perhaps he should have been informed of the rules. It also means that any Muslim that wore the vale should have been asked to leave to. Would they have been treated like "nut cases" also?

TheHalcyonYear
2010-Mar-19, 07:40 PM
Is this one of your famous attempts at spotting double standards?

This is why I tend to walk out on these threads and on BAUT in general. The "consensus" is that the man was a fool. A post that asks a few intelligent questions is ridiculed rather than considered as a thoughtful group of people might do.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-19, 07:40 PM
My credit union has a prominently-placed sign announcing that they want you to remove sunglasses, hoods, etc., before entering their premises. This is so you can be identifiable to the cameras in case you rob the place, one assumes, and so you won't be mistaken as a person who wants to try. I don't remember, but I'm quite sure that the Department of Social and Health Services office also has a similar requirement, and for similar reasons. Yes, there are religions which prescribe head coverings. However, unless you're actually wearing a burqa, they seldom cover the face. I suspect it's the facial covering part that was the issue, and--as was pointed out--Obi Wan removed his hood indoors. In fact, as I recall, he mostly just used it, at least in the first movie, for hiding his face. And protecting it from the elements, which one assumes was not an issue here.

Tog
2010-Mar-19, 07:44 PM
For those that can't see this clip, it's about 10 minutes long, and the "hood" he refused to remove was a sweatshirt. Not a special item as other religions might have, but a simple hoodie.

It also states in the clip that the guide book "recommends" wearing the hood in public. It didn't say it was required. The reason for this it to ward off bad energy.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-19, 08:00 PM
This is why I tend to walk out on these threads and on BAUT in general.
For some reason it doesn't take.


The thread is talking about a place where money are kept, which often has gang members come to get their unemployment money, in a country where a hoodie is part of some gang uniforms and a man in a hoodie who was refusing to comply with a dress code that is clearly posted at the entrance and which he had the opportunity to read every time he entered.


Then perhaps he should have been informed of the rules.
Ignorance of the law is not excuse for breaking it.

Refusing to comply with a posted dress code is not behaving oneself.

chrissy
2010-Mar-19, 08:07 PM
Wow, talk about elitist attitude. Would your attitude be the same if it were a Muslim they did this to? Oh wait, that may be too well "established", how about if he was Zoroastrian or a Pagan.

And what do you know about elitism THY? Let me continue by saying what do you know about me? In my beliefs?
He wore a hooded top that in the UK is classed as concealing his face and to a religion that isn't recognized as a proper religion.


No, is this one of your famous attempts to be unreasonably sarcastic?
I think you need to read your comment to me and think about pots and kettles.



This is why I tend to walk out on these threads and on BAUT in general. The "consensus" is that the man was a fool. A post that asks a few intelligent questions is ridiculed rather than considered as a thoughtful group of people might do.
My bold.

Hurricane is coming to mind right now, if this thread wan't to your taste then why post in it?

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-19, 08:13 PM
Wow, talk about elitist attitude.
For elitist attitude I'll note that he's wearing a hoodie over a football t-shirt, not a cloak over a tunic.
He can't be that serious about his religion if that's what he's claiming is religious garb.

Swift
2010-Mar-19, 08:16 PM
Wow, talk about elitist attitude. Would your attitude be the same if it were a Muslim they did this to? Oh wait, that may be too well "established", how about if he was Zoroastrian or a Pagan.
TheHalcyonYear,

You are taking a very benign thread and are turning it into a battle. Jediism is not a religion and so discussions of it are well within our rules. You are turning this into a discussion of religions, and such discussions are clearly not allowed by our rules.

Additionally, you are being very uncivil to your fellow members.

If you continue to derail this thread in these directions, you will be infracted.

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 08:16 PM
Henrik, for some people that is formal attire.

tdvance
2010-Mar-19, 08:20 PM
Has anyone seen this

Essex Southend Star Wars Jediism Man thrown out job centre for hood

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R3Zf3yuIK8k

A member of the International Church of Jediism has received an apology after being kicked out of a job centre.

The Jedi believer was asked to remove his hood and was thrown out when he refused to do so, he now intends to sue the job centre for discrimination despite receiving an apology.


What do you think?

silly---you want a job, and the message you send is "I think it's a costume party and I just want to play, not get down to work". What ever happened to Dress for Success? (i.e. dress for the job you want--within reason, if uniform required, you don't do a uniform for the interview, but clothing of the same "level" of dressiness--so even if applying for a theater job, unless it's a screen test or something, no jedi costume) Throwing him out might have been too much, but suing them for it is worse.

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-19, 08:24 PM
Aren't the Jedi also supposed to have thier lightsaber with them at all times too?

Where is his?

TheHalcyonYear
2010-Mar-19, 08:25 PM
And what do you know about elitism THY? Let me continue by saying what do you know about me? In my beliefs?

I know that if he was a Muslim that you would most likely not have made comments of the kind that you did.



He wore a hooded top that in the UK is classed as concealing his face and to a religion that isn't recognized as a proper religion.

So this gives you the right to make nasty comments about his religious beliefs???


I think you need to read your comment to me and think about pots and kettles.

I know what I wrote and I stand beside it. If you had made such a comment about a Jewish man wearing a yarmulke, it would have been a terrible thing to do. But because there aren't enough people who believe as this individual does, its OK to ridicule his beliefs. That disgusts me.





Hurricane is coming to mind right now, if this thread wan't to your taste then why post in it?
The same comes to mind each time I watch all the BAUT posters pile on someone who posts a point of view that they don't agree with. The truth of the matter is this: If one disagrees with a mainstream post, why post on it; if one disagrees with a post that goes against mainstream thought, pile on...

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-19, 08:28 PM
The thread is talking about a place where money are kept, which often has gang members come to get their unemployment money, in a country where a hoodie is part of some gang uniforms and a man in a hoodie who was refusing to comply with a dress code that is clearly posted at the entrance and which he had the opportunity to read every time he entered.
Yes.

Even when it's not as extreme as this, staff are aware that they are often the target of the jobseeker's resentment and hostility. If they can see the individual's face, they can at least see the clues when the individual is about to kick off.

Experience of that sort of thing gives one a sense of perspective - and a certain attitude towards those who think they should be treated differently just because they are Star Wars fans.

Swift
2010-Mar-19, 08:32 PM
I know that if he was a Muslim that you would most likely not have made comments of the kind that you did.

Out of the kindness of my heart, I will assume you had not scrolled down to see my warning before you responded to Chrissy's post. This is the end of this line of reasoning and this is the end of looking for insults where none exist. There will be no further warnings.

Buttercup
2010-Mar-19, 08:34 PM
I'm a member of:

http://templeofthejediorder.org/

:D

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-19, 08:39 PM
But because there aren't enough people who believe as this individual does, its OK to ridicule his beliefs. That disgusts me.
Nobody is picking up on your Muslim comments because everyone knows this is not the place to discuss religion, and Swift has posted a reminder of this fact.

Two points I will make that I believe are well within the rules:

1. Star Wars, and all source material relating to Jedi, was presented as fiction. It didn't even pretend to be more than pulp entertainment.

2. When I was teaching British Citizenship to asylum seekers, they got it that the laws of the land took precedence over their religious laws. Thinking about it, they could have made good BAUT members.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-19, 09:15 PM
I'm assuming "Job centre" is like a placement agency? (I can't watch the video link at the moment). Sounds like another moron out of touch with the way the real world works.
The main difference they are government run if the ones in the UK are similar to the ones here in Canada. I just use their online services so I can wear or not wear what I want.

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 09:24 PM
Ooops, excuse me, pardon me, excuse me.

Hey Hal, if I may?

If you need somebody to beat up on for being "insensitive" go get Orreman7 in the Nazca Lines Thread in the Conspiracy section.

The tired old saw of the locals couldn't have done it, had to have been an instellar civilization. (Well, they are South Americans after all!) If that's not bigoted I don't know what is.

Shoot, I'll hold your coat.

Swift
2010-Mar-19, 09:26 PM
To everyone other than THY,

OK, I've warned THY, now to everyone else. No more responses to her posts.

Thank you.

chrissy
2010-Mar-19, 09:32 PM
I'm assuming "Job centre" is like a placement agency? (I can't watch the video link at the moment). Sounds like another moron out of touch with the way the real world works.
The main difference they are government run if the ones in the UK are similar to the ones here in Canada. I just use their online services so I can wear or not wear what I want.

No you can't just go on line, he was there to sign on for his giro cheque. This you have to turn up in person and prove who you are. Going on line is for job searches etc.

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 09:35 PM
Giro check?

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-19, 09:39 PM
No you can't just go on line, he was there to sign on for his giro cheque. This you have to turn up in person and prove who you are. Going on line is for job searches etc.
Here the checks are either mailed or you receive the funds directly to your bank account. You can apply online for unemployment here.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-19, 09:40 PM
Giro check?
Probably unemployment or welfare, here they are called pogey.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-19, 09:42 PM
Giro check?
Post office check rather than bank check.

chrissy
2010-Mar-19, 09:42 PM
You can fill in forms but you have to go for interviews and when it comes to the cheques, you have to sign a form to confirm you are looking for work and show proof of this. The giro it then posted or the money is sent to your bank account.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-19, 09:46 PM
I did my interview over the phone, the person doing the interview was in Halifax about 5 hours away. The only reason I had the interview is because the company said I quit. I did not get it because they said I did not have reason enough to quit.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-19, 10:01 PM
Back on subject, the job center should have the right to ask for the person to remove the hood no matter the reason, it is their premises.

mike alexander
2010-Mar-19, 10:21 PM
The story is more a commentary on where people's minds can go when they are not looking than on sartorial individuality.

On the other hand, if the gent had pulled out a light saber and cut the desk in half I'd have let him keep the hood up.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-19, 10:46 PM
That's a question the reporter should have asked.

I can only guess they have a policy, and that it might be in place for identification purposes. Imagine walking in wearing a ski mask or pantyhose over your head.


In the narration, there was a brief mention that they require people to remove hoods for security purposes. They didn't go into detail about that, but as you and others have covered, things like this make it harder to identify a person. With his hood on, you couldn't see his face from the side at all.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-19, 10:58 PM
A religion and protection against religious persecution isn't the same as a license to do whatever you want because your religion says to. If it's a rule that's uniformly applied (ie no hoods) and lacking intent to target, say, Jediists, then it's not discrimination. At least, IMHO.

Right. He made a comment along the lines that people should be allowed to do what they want based on their religion. I would say that there should be significant limits to that. In this case, a hood is a safety issue and you wouldn't want anyone to be able to wear a hood in the building just by claiming they were a member of the Jedi religion.

By the way, unless the people admit it is a joke, it isn't clear to me why this shouldn't be considered a religion. But that doesn't mean they have a right to do whatever they want.

BigDon
2010-Mar-19, 11:13 PM
By the way, unless the people admit it is a joke, it isn't clear to me why this shouldn't be considered a religion.



:hand:

Dude, not everybody in the home audience feels like you do about that subject.

slang
2010-Mar-19, 11:26 PM
In the narration, there was a brief mention that they require people to remove hoods for security purposes. They don't go into detail about that, but as you and others have covered, things like this make it harder to identify a person. With his hood on, you couldn't see his face from the side at all.

Right. I've worked in government, and the threat to civil servants working in areas like welfare, unemployment and disability is very real, and mostly unrelated to religious issues. A small fraction of people having to rely on such programs are extremely frustrated by their situation (be it their own fault or someone else's), and unfortunately situations where violence was used against the government employees just doing their jobs are more numerous than they should be. IMHO it can be argued that this small subset of clients is more likely to act violently if they think they can get away with it, for example by not being recognizable on security videos. So if you are by such circumstances forced to implement a rule against hiding faces, it should apply to all, regardless of religious issues.


By the way, unless the people admit it is a joke, it isn't clear to me why this shouldn't be considered a religion. But that doesn't mean they have a right to do whatever they want.

IIRC it (jedi as religion) was first done as protest against a government census somewhere (Australia?), which included (mandatory) questions about one's religion. I'm pretty sure you already know that.. maybe others do not.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-20, 01:10 AM
So if you are by such circumstances forced to implement a rule against hiding faces, it should apply to all, regardless of religious issues.


Yes, I think we're in agreement: The religious issue shouldn't come into it. If there is a safety rule, it should apply to everyone. If people can easily claim exceptions, it isn't much use.



IIRC it (jedi as religion) was first done as protest against a government census somewhere (Australia?), which included (mandatory) questions about one's religion. I'm pretty sure you already know that.. maybe others do not.

Yes, but does that mean that nobody that claims to believe in it takes it seriously?

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-20, 01:20 AM
:hand:

Dude, not everybody in the home audience feels like you do about that subject.

No doubt. That gets into a subject that moves into uncomfortable rule territory here: What makes one belief system a religion and another not? I'm not going to get into it, but I will point out that on the video there was a person who claimed to seriously believe in a supernatural "force" and claimed to be a serious Jedi believer.

Is he lying? I don't know. But, in this case, I think it is (or should be) a side issue to the safety concern. It's too bad they didn't discuss that side of it more in the video.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-20, 01:23 AM
... What do you think?
Well, first off, for some reason I'm not surprised about where the man was.


I think he's a self entitled twit who should get a big reality check in the mail.
Yup, and the job center director should get a raise.

My religion forbids me from working at all and demands I live solely from government subsidies and various support payments. My brothers in faith are always astounded when people don't understand us.

Luckly I'm a heretic.

BigDon
2010-Mar-20, 02:00 AM
No doubt. That gets into a subject that moves into uncomfortable rule territory here: What makes one belief system a religion and another not? I'm not going to get into it, but I will point out that on the video there was a person who claimed to seriously believe in a supernatural "force" and claimed to be a serious Jedi believer.

Is he lying? I don't know. But, in this case, I think it is (or should be) a side issue to the safety concern. It's too bad they didn't discuss that side of it more in the video.

Considering the context, I'd say it was a safe bet this individual doesn't believe in anything. You need some form of culture, other than mere existance, to have a belief system.

SkepticJ
2010-Mar-20, 02:03 AM
He has pop culture.

novaderrik
2010-Mar-20, 02:10 AM
i wonder if the guy tried the Jedi mind trick on the person that told him to remove the hood..

Swift
2010-Mar-20, 02:37 AM
i wonder if the guy tried the Jedi mind trick on the person that told him to remove the hood..
:lol:
This is not the hood you want removed.

Guess the fact that it didn't work proves he is not a Jedi.

novaderrik
2010-Mar-20, 03:50 AM
:lol:
This is not the hood you want removed.

Guess the fact that it didn't work proves he is not a Jedi.
or maybe the people in that office are all Hutts..

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-20, 11:59 AM
And for people whose religion forbids them to show their face in public there are side rooms where it can be done with a staff member of the appropriate gender present for positive identification.
This was not an option hoodie-guy took.

Tinaa
2010-Mar-20, 02:12 PM
In my local Social Security (SS) office, a security guard searches your purse or backpack when you go in. It sort of caught me off guard. Is that common in other SS offices around the US?

Gillianren
2010-Mar-20, 06:08 PM
Not here. We have a very friendly security guard who helps little old ladies use the "take-a-number" machine, which has several options. They have a sign up that they can, I believe, and I'm also fairly sure they have a sign telling you not to cover your face, though I don't know for sure. What I do know is that a sign along those lines is up at my mother's office back in California (welfare)--and there's a metal detector which I had to go through even to get up to my mom's office when I was on the list.

tdvance
2010-Mar-20, 06:09 PM
Well, first off, for some reason I'm not surprised about where the man was.


Yup, and the job center director should get a raise.

My religion forbids me from working at all and demands I live solely from government subsidies and various support payments. My brothers in faith are always astounded when people don't understand us.

Luckly I'm a heretic.


ah, but if the govt. refuses to give you the support payments, it's YOU who goes to wherever you go (to the accounting dept.?) when you die for violating the dictum :) so not their problem.

tdvance
2010-Mar-20, 06:12 PM
A kind-of funny anecdote from a Reader's Digest issue several decades ago, related to the topic: kid goes to college (hmm...I guess that means it was in Campus Comedy) it's a religious-affiliated school that requires attendance to sunday morning services, but you are excused if you put on your application you are of some other religion. So, the kid put down "sun worshipper" figuring nobody could check he's going to his "church" or anything. The first Sunday morning of the semester, the RA knocks on his door at 4:30am and says, "sunrise in 30 minutes---let's go!"

Gillianren
2010-Mar-20, 07:07 PM
A kind-of funny anecdote from a Reader's Digest issue several decades ago, related to the topic: kid goes to college (hmm...I guess that means it was in Campus Comedy) it's a religious-affiliated school that requires attendance to sunday morning services, but you are excused if you put on your application you are of some other religion. So, the kid put down "sun worshipper" figuring nobody could check he's going to his "church" or anything. The first Sunday morning of the semester, the RA knocks on his door at 4:30am and says, "sunrise in 30 minutes---let's go!"

There are several reasons that "solution" wouldn't be acceptable, not least that there's no particular reason a sun worshiper would have to worship sunrise; is not sunset also sacred? Or even noon?

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-20, 07:11 PM
I'd go for noon:)

novaderrik
2010-Mar-20, 07:17 PM
There are several reasons that "solution" wouldn't be acceptable, not least that there's no particular reason a sun worshiper would have to worship sunrise; is not sunset also sacred? Or even noon?
or just the sun in general..

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-20, 07:34 PM
Being Readers' Digest I'm guessing it's supposed to be some sort of "Ha, Ha. That'll teach him to go to church like real people" moral.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-20, 07:46 PM
... it's YOU who goes to wherever you go ... when you die for violating the dictum :) so not their problem.
Well, like I said, I'm a heretic against my own faith, so I don't mind working.


... kid goes to college ... put down "sun worshipper" ...
Maybe he should have chosen something more typical to college, like some cult that sacrifices virgins. Since a terminal sacrifice would be against the law, he could say it's his faith to at least sacrifice their virginity. ;)

Drunk Vegan
2010-Mar-20, 09:22 PM
"You don't need to see my ID and social security card." *waves hand*

"I don't need to see your ID and social security card."

pzkpfw
2010-Mar-20, 09:54 PM
I have to take my motorcycle helmet off when I go into a bank, a shop, and usually even when going in to pay for petrol I've put in the bike.

Some riders get very "anti" about this; sometimes the sort of riders who treat being a "biker" as something akin to how this fellow presumably takes his Jediism; and sometimes the sort of rider who sees it as an affront to his or her personal liberty. They get all "boycott the <brand> station on <name of street> 'cos they made me take my helmet off!!!".

Whatever.

Me, I just think it's polite to follow the rules of the establishment I'm at, and while it's a hassle to the helmet off (especially when getting petrol as I'm obviously only pausing in the middle of a ride) I can see why the folk want to see my face.

I know that I am not a criminal or trouble-maker... but how do they know that?

And why should they have to wait and see me start causing trouble? By then it's too late to kindly ask me to take my helmet off. "Certainly sir, I'll hand over the content of the cash register, but first, could you please take your helmet off and smile for camera?".

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-20, 09:59 PM
I know that I am not a criminal or trouble-maker... but how do they know that?
Exactly.

This Jedi - individual - is living demonstration of the lack of minimal empathy.

The Backroad Astronomer
2010-Mar-20, 10:03 PM
Right now I am thinking inviting the stig from Top Gear to a job placement agency would be a good way to find out his id, yet he does need a job or unemployment benefits.

tdvance
2010-Mar-20, 10:16 PM
There are several reasons that "solution" wouldn't be acceptable, not least that there's no particular reason a sun worshiper would have to worship sunrise; is not sunset also sacred? Or even noon?

since it's a private college---it's acceptable! The kid tried to pull one on the college, the RA called his bluff and had a little fun at his expense.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-20, 11:12 PM
since it's a private college---it's acceptable! The kid tried to pull one on the college, the RA called his bluff and had a little fun at his expense.

He couldn't have known it was a bluff, though, and he couldn't have known the exact practices of that "belief." Private colleges don't get to force people to follow their religious beliefs in the way someone not of that faith decides.

slang
2010-Mar-20, 11:18 PM
[...] So, the kid put down "sun worshipper" figuring nobody could check he's going to his "church" or anything. The first Sunday morning of the semester, the RA knocks on his door at 4:30am and says, "sunrise in 30 minutes---let's go!"

Ra (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ra)!? Really? I guess he took a personal interest in his worshipers.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-21, 12:06 AM
Considering the context, I'd say it was a safe bet this individual doesn't believe in anything.


Perhaps, or perhaps not. There have been people here that have presented bizarre ideas that I thought must be a joke, but eventually accepted they really did believe it. (This is mostly from the ATM and CT forums, of course).



You need some form of culture, other than mere existance, to have a belief system.

Apparently, there is a culture behind this.

But, again, I don't think it should matter: If somebody comes in with a claim like this, and if it is a security issue, they should be told that. They should not be told something like "I don't believe you, so it's not acceptable," but "For general security, that's not acceptable." If they are willing to go along with alternative options that would be agreeable to the security staff, good. Failing that, they should be told to leave and that should be the end of it.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-21, 12:14 AM
Well then, let's start up a new "religion" based on Landru from Star Trek TOS "The Return of the Archons."

Everybody will run around saying only nice things to each other, just like the BAUT mods want it. Then we get to party every once in a while.

Won't that be nice?

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-21, 12:25 AM
Well then, let's start up a new "religion" based on Landru from Star Trek TOS "The Return of the Archons."

Everybody will run around saying only nice things to each other, just like the BAUT mods want it. Then we get to party every once in a while.

Won't that be nice?

As long as a group can get others to join without coercion (unlike the mind control on that episode), why not?

But it shouldn't be relevant to security in an office. For instance, "partying" would be no excuse for bad behavior.

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-21, 12:29 AM
... "partying" would be no excuse for bad behavior.
You have obviously not seen the episode. :lol:

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-21, 12:39 AM
You have obviously not seen the episode. :lol:

I've seen it several times. You just aren't understanding my point: People can come up with whatever religion they want, but that doesn't give them the right to do anything they want.

A story about mind controlled people and what they do during "festival" is not relevant.

antoniseb
2010-Mar-21, 12:52 AM
Well then, let's start up a new "religion" based on Landru from Star Trek TOS "The Return of the Archons."

Everybody will run around saying only nice things to each other, just like the BAUT mods want it. Then we get to party every once in a while.

Won't that be nice?
I am personally inviting you to leave this forum, and find your place somewhere that has rules more to your taste.

tdvance
2010-Mar-21, 01:47 AM
He couldn't have known it was a bluff, though, and he couldn't have known the exact practices of that "belief." Private colleges don't get to force people to follow their religious beliefs in the way someone not of that faith decides.

now *I'm* the mathematician :) of course, he couldn't have known it---lots of things I don't know, but I know, if you know what I mean. To illustrate with a Larry Niven example, Beowulf Shaeffer was blackmailed into a dangerous mission, but was given the chance to outfit his own spaceship. So he made one heavily armed that would go very fast. Govt. agent Sigmund comes up to him in a bar and says, perfect ship to run away, and then sell to someone wanting to make war--so I planted a bomb in it and if you don't return in a week....boom. Now, if I'm wrong about your intentions, take a lie detector test (in future, presume they are very reliable) and you get to punch me in the nose. He wasn't wrong.

It's fiction---but it mirrors reality. When a college kid in the US in the (then) 20th century puts "sun worshiper" (doesn't even name a specific sun-worshiping congregation--and the only sun worshiping place *I* have ever seen was: 1. not in the US, 2. not used for that for many centuries 3. a tourist attraction) down to apply for exemption from mandatory church services, you are willing to bet a punch in the nose it's a bluff---and you'll win the bet. hence, while I don't know (in the prove him guilty in a court of law sense) he's not for real, I *know* he isn't.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-21, 05:56 AM
It's fiction---but it mirrors reality. When a college kid in the US in the (then) 20th century puts "sun worshiper" (doesn't even name a specific sun-worshiping congregation--and the only sun worshiping place *I* have ever seen was: 1. not in the US, 2. not used for that for many centuries 3. a tourist attraction) down to apply for exemption from mandatory church services, you are willing to bet a punch in the nose it's a bluff---and you'll win the bet. hence, while I don't know (in the prove him guilty in a court of law sense) he's not for real, I *know* he isn't.

Enjoy your First Amendment case.

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-22, 04:55 PM
1. Star Wars, and all source material relating to Jedi, was presented as fiction. It didn't even pretend to be more than pulp entertainment.
Thanks for that point. I felt that religion, and things like this were different, but I couldn't put my finger on it.

BigDon
2010-Mar-22, 06:40 PM
Enjoy your First Amendment case.

Some things to consider Gillian. :)

Think about a 14 year old telling you he's a Jedi. Got that mental picture? Hard to take serious now, isn't it? Soooo, adding 4 years to the same person means I have to take him serious now?

Think about all those guys you've met who had no compelling reason to terminate childhood. 26 on paper, 16 mentally. If this guy's on the dole, he's in his Mom's basement. Resorts to lies, movie plots, and poutyness when somebody tells him "no"?

He has few of the things, other than anatomical, than say "manhood" to the casual observer.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-22, 07:04 PM
The case Gillianren was referring to was the sun worshiper and the idea that you can force someone to attend church on a Sunday or else force him to get up at sunrise on Sunday because "you" decide that that's when he's supposed to worship. Weekly worship is far from universal amongst religions.

Incidentally, isn't mandatory church service in itself a First Amendment violation?

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-22, 07:11 PM
Thanks for that point. I felt that religion, and things like this were different, but I couldn't put my finger on it.

This is what one of the Jedi sites (http://www.jedichurch.org/jedi-doctrine.html)says about that:


The force has always existed and always will.

Our faith in the force existed well before the fictional Star Wars movies brought popular recognition to the terminology and concepts that our members always innately held, but had difficultly describing in a shared forum.

I'll point out that there is another religion that was started by a science fiction and fantasy writer. I have no doubt there are very strong believers in that religion.

Van Rijn
2010-Mar-22, 07:15 PM
Incidentally, isn't mandatory church service in itself a First Amendment violation?

It depends. Is it a private religious school?

Gillianren
2010-Mar-22, 07:27 PM
Some things to consider Gillian. :)

Think about a 14 year old telling you he's a Jedi. Got that mental picture? Hard to take serious now, isn't it? Soooo, adding 4 years to the same person means I have to take him serious now?

Think about all those guys you've met who had no compelling reason to terminate childhood. 26 on paper, 16 mentally. If this guy's on the dole, he's in his Mom's basement. Resorts to lies, movie plots, and poutyness when somebody tells him "no"?

He has few of the things, other than anatomical, than say "manhood" to the casual observer.

That's charming, but it still doesn't mean the RA knows how his religious rituals are practiced and can inflict his beliefs as to what they are on the kid. Which, again, is the case I'm talking about. Now, the US Supreme Court has a complicated history with freedom of religion cases, which means that the Jedi claimant would still have to obey reasonable rules--my Druid friends don't get to sacrifice anybody. However, the "sun worshiper" kid does get to complain if he's being told how to worship whether he's a real sun worshiper or not. Telling him otherwise is a clear violation of his First Amendment right.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-22, 09:52 PM
Now, the US Supreme Court has a complicated history with freedom of religion cases, which means that the Jedi claimant would still have to obey reasonable rules--my Druid friends don't get to sacrifice anybody.
I'll note that the US Supreme Court has no relevance in the Jedi claimant's case as he's British, and assume you meant in case someone made the same claim in the US.

tdvance
2010-Mar-22, 10:13 PM
The case Gillianren was referring to was the sun worshiper and the idea that you can force someone to attend church on a Sunday or else force him to get up at sunrise on Sunday because "you" decide that that's when he's supposed to worship. Weekly worship is far from universal amongst religions.

Incidentally, isn't mandatory church service in itself a First Amendment violation?

If the government does it---yes. If it's a condition of attending a private college, no. The Constitution only limits the government (mostly federal, but some limitations for state and local too).

J Riff
2010-Mar-22, 10:35 PM
I worked a few days for the Gummint here in Canada, at the polls for the provincial elections, and we were instructed on how to deal w/ people with face or head coverings, they must take them off at least long enough to be matched with their picture ID.
In banks here there are signs - remove hat and sunglasses, so when I go in I do this, stare at the camera, and put them back on. No trouble so far.
What is weird are the new rules for driver's licence or other govt. ID> All day long you hear 'No smiling' as people line up for their photo.
I smiled the first two times and they insisted on re-taking the shot. As a result, the worlds tiniest attempt at a smile at the corner of the mouth has made my DL photo resemble an evil vampire.

tdvance
2010-Mar-22, 11:53 PM
I think the "no smiling" rule has something to do with, wearing the expression you "normally" wear so that you can be spotted in a crowd quickly from picture in hand by the guy who's about to arrest you for something :) (with automatic facial recognition software, having an expression in picture similar to your "usual" one is even more important, given how bird-brained computers are).

Gillianren
2010-Mar-22, 11:58 PM
I'll note that the US Supreme Court has no relevance in the Jedi claimant's case as he's British, and assume you meant in case someone made the same claim in the US.

That's what I meant, yes. It would only be possible as a First Amendment case, which is how I got to this, were it in the United States.

slang
2010-Mar-23, 12:24 AM
That's charming, but it still doesn't mean the RA knows how his religious rituals are practiced and can inflict his beliefs as to what they are on the kid.

Ok, I was joking when I referred to RA as Ra the Sun God. What does RA mean in the context of this discussion? It doesn't seem to be a common abbreviation. Or just not common enough for me to quickly find it.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-23, 12:37 AM
Residence Assistant. That's what they called the student in charge of a dorm or section thereof at my alma mater. Which is entertaining to watch but harrowing to be.

Drunk Vegan
2010-Mar-23, 03:28 AM
I think the "no smiling" rule has something to do with, wearing the expression you "normally" wear so that you can be spotted in a crowd quickly from picture in hand by the guy who's about to arrest you for something :) (with automatic facial recognition software, having an expression in picture similar to your "usual" one is even more important, given how bird-brained computers are).

If you ask me it has less to do with facial recognition and more to do with the fact that "No Smiling" is an official DMV policy.. if you were in a good mood when you came in, you won't be by the time you leave!

mugaliens
2010-Mar-23, 08:26 AM
"No Smiling" is an official DMV policy.. if you were in a good mood when you came in, you won't be by the time you leave!

I heard the same, to which I said, "Ain't gonna stop, so please take the picture!"

She did.

slang
2010-Mar-23, 11:29 AM
Thanks, Gillian. Not a function we're familiar with here. Then again we don't really have such dorms here for students (at least not for the regular schools and universities).

NEOWatcher
2010-Mar-23, 01:09 PM
This is what one of the Jedi sites (http://www.jedichurch.org/jedi-doctrine.html)says about that:
They describe thier religion in a very vague manner that can apply to almost any religion. It's hard to tell how thier's distinguishes itself other than the wording they use which comes straight out of the movie.

The demographics page (http://www.jedichurch.org/webapps/site/4448/60453/vote/voter-demographics.html) says quite a bit too. Especially when you question how there can be so many members born before 1890, and break down what different religions they belong to.

And then thiers industry... most are in:
Education: (I wonder how many students answered this)
Unemployed:
Other:

But; the most relevent statement on thier site to this story is this:

The Jedi church has no official doctrine or scripture.
So; wearing a hood is not an official part of the Jedi.
(Interesting that the Jedi Doctrine starts of by saying there is none)

Gillianren
2010-Mar-23, 06:16 PM
Thanks, Gillian. Not a function we're familiar with here. Then again we don't really have such dorms here for students (at least not for the regular schools and universities).

Here in the US, traveling a long distance to get your education is not unusual. In fact, the first college I went to was a community college--for a two-year degree--and they had dorms because they took in students from as much as a hundred miles away. Low population density on the Olympic Peninsula, you see.

mike alexander
2010-Mar-23, 08:27 PM
They describe thier religion in a very vague manner that can apply to almost any religion. It's hard to tell how thier's distinguishes itself other than the wording they use which comes straight out of the movie.

The demographics page (http://www.jedichurch.org/webapps/site/4448/60453/vote/voter-demographics.html) says quite a bit too. Especially when you question how there can be so many members born before 1890, and break down what different religions they belong to.

And then thiers industry... most are in:
Education: (I wonder how many students answered this)
Unemployed:
Other:

But; the most relevent statement on thier site to this story is this:

So; wearing a hood is not an official part of the Jedi.
(Interesting that the Jedi Doctrine starts of by saying there is none)

(Waves hand)
*There is no Jedi Doctrine*

kleindoofy
2010-Mar-23, 08:43 PM
(Waves hand)
*There is no Jedi Doctrine*
Well then, be the first on your block to write the sacred Book of Jedi.

Just think, you could be the first Jedi Ecclesiae Reverenabili Kapucica (= JERK).

Lots of money, lots of followers, and you get to make it all up. Cool.

Make it Jedi doctrine that they have to wear their hoods under the shower. Ohh, the fun. ;)

slang
2010-Mar-24, 12:44 AM
Here in the US, traveling a long distance to get your education is not unusual. In fact, the first college I went to was a community college--for a two-year degree--and they had dorms because they took in students from as much as a hundred miles away. Low population density on the Olympic Peninsula, you see.

A hundred miles away isn't an exception here either, but housing facilities is different. Students rent a room somewhere in the city, or a room made available by the university in some way, but it doesn't come close to the "dorm" idea as I understand it, it's much more individual. [/hijack]

tdvance
2010-Mar-24, 06:21 PM
Dorms are a way of keeping kids close to classes---they're not full-blown apartments---there used to be something called a "dorm mother" which explains the philosophy: the dorms act "almost" like parents. Depending on the university, you may be allowed to live off campus (undergrad school, Shenandoah University, did, grad school was UVA---allowed for all 2nd year undergrads and above and all grads---and about half of undergrads and almost all grads took the off-campus option to get away from the rules and regs, trading for a somewhat higher rent).

captain swoop
2010-Mar-24, 06:56 PM
In the UK Universities have 'Halls of residence' which are rooms for students owned by the Uni, usualy single or double occupancy 'bed sitting rooms' with common areas or the students find their own rented place. Some of the 'Old' University Towns like Durham have most of the houses in the centre of the old city around the Uni given over to rented student letting. It can cause problems in some areas as there are no 'regular' residents in entire streets and areas.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-24, 07:01 PM
At my sister's alma mater, freshmen were required to live in dorms. Since mine had such a large population of returning students--people not fresh out of high school, often substantially above "college age"--that simply wasn't feasible. Some of the dorms were traditional, but most of them were arranged more like apartments. I had a full kitchen, for example, which I shared with the three or four (depending on apartment) people in our apartment. I referred to it to someone this weekend as "starter independence."

captain swoop
2010-Mar-24, 08:58 PM
At Durham 'Freshers' have to spend their first year in Halls. My Brother got a room in the Castle (http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/11/Durham_castle.jpg). overlooking the Cathedral. It belongs to the University. You have to dress in a Gown for evening meal in the great hall. It's like something from harry potter.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-24, 09:39 PM
In Denmark, students typically live in small cheap apartments built under rules that gives some tax breaks providing only students are allowed, which makes them fairly cheap. Typically has one room and a bathroom/shower with a closet and a kitchen common to several apartments, the one I lived in had two big kitchens for 26 apartments, the number will vary.
In our kitchens we chose to have a weekly rota for who was responsible for reminding the others to wash up after themselves, and there were two dinner clubs where people got together and has a rota where each would cook dinner for everyone.
"Starter independence" is definitely a good word for this arrangement, and if you have a good mix of people from different years and thus ages, you have natural mentoring in this for people who didn't learn anything from home.

They are close to the universities but normally not on campus and living in one isn't regulated more than living in any other place.
Freshmen are considered adult enough to look after themselves and don't have any strange rules forced on them, so the concept of an RA is rather foreign to me.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-24, 10:28 PM
Senior year, we didn't talk to ours much. The one we had junior year was about my age, and we would just hang out a lot. We were in the same class, too. However, about the only time we ever needed his authority was when we were getting a roommate kicked out. Other than that, what we mostly needed RAs for was to make the freshmen be quiet at 2 AM.

slang
2010-Mar-24, 10:46 PM
Here, when students go to universities and such, say age 17, 18 and up, the most common housing is renting a room. It is very common that the rooms for rent are in a normal house, with slight changes to accommodate several single individuals sharing a house rather than a family living there. And that's it. You're on your own. Better learn to cook, or hope that a house mate knows. There's nobody around as leader or hand-holder.

Things like cooking, cleaning, paying the phone bill, etc etc are all organized in some way, but it can differ per house. Usually students will somehow work together to get things done, but not always. You're on your own, better learn to make it work by working together.

Of course, most go home every weekend with a large bag full of clothes to be washed by mommy. Some lucky ones have a dad that occasionally secretly shoves a bottle of wine in their weekend bag ("don't tell mom, she'll throw a hissy fit!"). RIP dad.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-25, 01:08 AM
Here, when students go to universities and such, say age 17, 18 and up, the most common housing is renting a room. It is very common that the rooms for rent are in a normal house, with slight changes to accommodate several single individuals sharing a house rather than a family living there. And that's it. You're on your own. Better learn to cook, or hope that a house mate knows. There's nobody around as leader or hand-holder.

Ha. Our RA, junior year, came over and ate our food.


Of course, most go home every weekend with a large bag full of clothes to be washed by mommy. Some lucky ones have a dad that occasionally secretly shoves a bottle of wine in their weekend bag ("don't tell mom, she'll throw a hissy fit!"). RIP dad.

Going home every weekend was a little cost-prohibitive for a lot of us. We had a laundry room. It was, however, true that any time any of us were going somewhere which didn't require hoarding quarters to do laundry, we'd take laundry with us. On the other hand, I was washing my own clothes long before leaving home, just in Mom's appliances.

TJMac
2010-Mar-28, 08:25 PM
I am reminded of a favorite quote from a TV series character. (That 70's Show)

The father of the teenagers was fond of stating his preference of using a boot on someones backside.

I'm thinking this Jedi guy needs a little of THAT. Hopefully, if this threatened lawsuit goes forth, there is a judge that will simply ask the fellow to approach the bench, sans hood, and then reach over and give him a good whack with the gavel.

I think I would pay to see that. :lol:

TJ

Paul Beardsley
2010-Mar-28, 08:38 PM
I'm thinking this Jedi guy needs a little of THAT. Hopefully, if this threatened lawsuit goes forth, there is a judge that will simply ask the fellow to approach the bench, sans hood, and then reach over and give him a good whack with the gavel.
If that happened, you'd know you were in a parallel world where the Right Thing routinely happened.

Gillianren
2010-Mar-28, 09:13 PM
Yup. Corporal punishment--that makes people less stupid.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Mar-28, 10:30 PM
An assault charge wouldn't look good on the judge's record and he'd know it would likely stick, so that's probably the last thing likely to happen.

tdvance
2010-Mar-31, 04:10 AM
yeah--judges can be held responsible for conduct in the courtroom---but we can dream. It's why Dirty Harry was so popular---people wish the police could do what he did to the thugs. "I'm all broken up over his civil rights".

Gillianren
2010-Mar-31, 06:00 AM
Yes, and Dirty Harry never got the wrong person. So that's another way it's not at all like the Real World.

DonM435
2010-Apr-02, 11:43 PM
silly---you want a job, and the message you send is "I think it's a costume party and I just want to play, not get down to work". What ever happened to Dress for Success? (i.e. dress for the job you want--within reason, if uniform required, you don't do a uniform for the interview, but clothing of the same "level" of dressiness--so even if applying for a theater job, unless it's a screen test or something, no jedi costume) Throwing him out might have been too much, but suing them for it is worse.

A good point. How'd you feel if you were working to find jobs for people and had to send ol' Jedi Master to an interview with IBM? Don't waste your time: concentrate your energy on the polite people wearing their best clothes. :eh:

HenrikOlsen
2010-Apr-06, 01:38 AM
silly---you want a job, and the message you send is "I think it's a costume party and I just want to play, not get down to work".
Actually I got the impression he was there to collect his disability benefits, not to get a job.

captain swoop
2010-Apr-06, 01:48 PM
You don't collect any benefits from a Job centre. It's where you go once a fortnight to sign a form that says you are actively seeking work in order to continue claiming your 'Jobseekers Allowance'
Every few months you go in for a 'review' They look at what steps you have taken to find work.
When I was Contracting a few years ago I used to sign on between Contracts.

HenrikOlsen
2010-Apr-06, 09:00 PM
Ok, I didn't know that bit. I just got that impression from the way his crutch and limp was visually emphasized in the newsclip.

slang
2010-Apr-07, 07:47 AM
Ok, I didn't know that bit. I just got that impression from the way his crutch and limp was visually emphasized in the newsclip.

Old clone-war wound. "Don't mention the war!"