• yokonzo@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    9 months ago

    While I agree it shouldn’t be a big deal to have a star of David on your person. as an atheist if you wanna support your faith on your clothes, go nuts, it’s not hurting anyone. But this was already his employers policy and it’s a work uniform so for that reason alone it should be taken off.

      • doctortofu@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        92
        ·
        edit-2
        9 months ago

        Wow. Also, the obsession of morons with Punisher is just baffling. It’s not a very complicated story at all, and yet all these idiots just completely misunderstand it and proudly wear this mark because Frank Castle is cool and kills people…

        Screw the star of david, having a Punisher skull symbol anywere on or close to your damn uniform should be a fireable offense.

        • Drivebyhaiku@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          23
          ·
          9 months ago

          It is an odd adoption but the Punisher skull is a known alt-right symbol particularly amongst the “Three Percenters”, Proud boys and a certain age range of Neo Nazis.

          The alt right continuously does this thing where they adopt symbols to recognize each other in a pack but the shit they choose is purposefully ridiculous and childish so you sound like an absolute moron trying to explain to an authority that pepe the frog is actually potentially construable as sexual harassment in certain situations because it’s essentially a short hand for rape… It’s inane but it is very effective.

          Completely off topic but I gotta rant it out…

          There’s also this thing that the Canadian Conservatives are great at which is controlling the media coverage by lies of omission. My hometown had this whole “scandal” where someone’s mic was shut off during a town council for “bringing legitimate concerns about trans people.” and papers ran it like that… But what actually happened is the mic shutdown happened because the person in question kept using the mic to be vile about trans people on every open mic opportunity. Open mic portion regarding adding speed bumps : " nope I am gunna talk over the allotable time about pronoun policies in schools." Oh you want to talk about changes to funding structures of municipal trash collections? " Nope mic time to use the t-slur and rant more about woke teachers." One could pretend that they just don’t understand the basic Roberts rules of order but their aim is always to spin anything they can as oppression.

          They are doing the same here. The articles are not providing proper context that the patch is not just a Star of David patch… It’s a black and white version of the Israeli flag with the bars thay mark it as thus. It’s not depicting a specific religious stance, it’s depicting a political regime. But it creates a fine opportunity for religious bigots to banging the drum about headscarves and turbans and how we should strip government officials of their comfort for daring to have visible markers of their religious beliefs as though these are somehow the same.

          Like I get it. Not understanding what counts as hate speech or legitimate targets of criticism is probably very confusing and alarming when you feel like people shut you down at seemingly random … But they could just assuage their anxieties by just LEARNING the rules. Like we have actual laws about what counts here.

        • SeaJ@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          21
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Yeah. Frank Castle beat the shit out of many an officer who tried to follow his path of vigilantism.

        • BaardFigur@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          12
          arrow-down
          9
          ·
          edit-2
          9 months ago

          Allowing religious symbols on police uniforms opens up the gate for people wanting to wear hijabs with their police uniforms. Not a good idea. Being strict about all relgious symbols is a good idea. But I can agree on the Punisher symbol being extremely cringe, especially on a police uniform.

          • pewter@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            10
            ·
            9 months ago

            Allowing religious symbols on police uniforms opens up the gate for people wanting to wear hijabs with their police uniforms.

            Sikh cops are allowed to wear turbans and it doesn’t harm anyone when they do.

              • pewter@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                9 months ago

                Canada has at least one. America has them. Being able to see someone’s hair doesn’t really seem like a requirement for police officers. Back in the day, police officers all wore hats in the US anyways.

          • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            7
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            9 months ago

            What part of a police officer’s job is made impossible by wearing a scarf or a hat?

            The government should not be forbidding anyone’s religious practice. That being said, a patch on a uniform is not a religious obligation. Totally different category from a kippah, hijab, turban, ash, bindi, etc.

            • BaardFigur@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              7
              arrow-down
              6
              ·
              9 months ago

              What part of a police officer’s job is made impossible by wearing a scarf or a hat?

              Neutrality. A police officer should be enforcing the law, not representing a religion. Luckily religious symbols in the Norwegian police force is still illegal (including christian symbols). And it should remain that way in a secular state

              • afraid_of_zombies@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                4
                ·
                9 months ago

                Yeah this is the equality vs equity debate. Saying that you are banning all religious dress doesn’t weigh equally on Christians vs non-Christians. Additionally even when it would there are loopholes given. The NT endorses woman to grow their hair long. The various security forces of the world usually allow woman to do it. So even the argument that you are treating every religion the same doesn’t hold up.

                A turban is not endorsement of Sikhism. By banning mandatory religious garments you are just promising that the police do not reflect the demographics of the area. Which is not a great thing.

              • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                9 months ago

                That position requires a willful ignorance of the difference between a religious symbol and a religious practice.

                Do you really think it’s a coincidence that the law carves out a specific prohibition on religious practices that doesn’t affect Christians, the dominant religious group? Your flag has a cross on it.

                • BaardFigur@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  4
                  arrow-down
                  5
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  9 months ago

                  That position requires a willful ignorance of the difference between a religious symbol and a religious practice.

                  It’s not about you any more. You’re wearing a uniform, and religion is not a part of it. You’re representing the law, not yourself.

            • intensely_human@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              arrow-down
              4
              ·
              9 months ago

              What part of a police officer’s job is made impossible by wearing a scarf or a hat?

              Uniform dress

          • intensely_human@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            9 months ago

            Any symbols other than the flag of the jurisdiction you’re serving should be forgone while wearing a uniform.

      • Hubi@feddit.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        9 months ago

        The truth is that they want him to remove it because it’s extremely cringey.

      • gedaliyah@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        12
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        9 months ago

        A patch is not a religious obligation. If it were a kippah it’d be different.

        People should be allowed their religious freedom, but that doesn’t mean decorating their uniform however they want.

      • yokonzo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        9 months ago

        What are you talking about, sikh cops are allowed to wear their turbans

        • GBU_28@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          9 months ago

          He’s suggesting that if person A needs to remove a star, person B could be forced to remove a turban

          • yokonzo@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            16
            ·
            9 months ago

            This is the definition of false equivalence, that’s comparing two situations without considering their relative differences, leading to leaps in logic or inaccurate statements.

            Sikh head wraps are an extra article of clothing which is worn for religious purposes and is widely recognized as such. This patch, while worn for religious purposes also contains clear political messages, which is inappropriate for a police officer. A peace officer who if someone disagrees with could cause that person serious life complications.

            But disregarding that, and going back to my original statement, is not an extra accessory but a modification to the uniform, which is against the department’s policies. That is why this was acceptable to be made to be removed.

              • yokonzo@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                9 months ago

                No I realize that, sorry, i was posting this on your comment for context, as im sure they’ll check for replies at some point, sorry if I came off aggressively

                • GBU_28@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Feel free to come off aggressively, this is the internet. It’s your right