163
this post was submitted on 16 Feb 2024
163 points (92.7% liked)
World News
38188 readers
1978 users here now
A community for discussing events around the World
Rules:
-
Rule 1: posts have the following requirements:
- Post news articles only
- Video links are NOT articles and will be removed.
- Title must match the article headline
- Not United States Internal News
- Recent (Past 30 Days)
- Screenshots/links to other social media sites (Twitter/X/Facebook/Youtube/reddit, etc.) are explicitly forbidden, as are link shorteners.
-
Rule 2: Do not copy the entire article into your post. The key points in 1-2 paragraphs is allowed (even encouraged!), but large segments of articles posted in the body will result in the post being removed. If you have to stop and think "Is this fair use?", it probably isn't. Archive links, especially the ones created on link submission, are absolutely allowed but those that avoid paywalls are not.
-
Rule 3: Opinions articles, or Articles based on misinformation/propaganda may be removed. Sources that have a Low or Very Low factual reporting rating or MBFC Credibility Rating may be removed.
-
Rule 4: Posts or comments that are homophobic, transphobic, racist, sexist, anti-religious, or ableist will be removed. “Ironic” prejudice is just prejudiced.
-
Posts and comments must abide by the lemmy.world terms of service UPDATED AS OF 10/19
-
Rule 5: Keep it civil. It's OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It's NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
-
Rule 6: Memes, spam, other low effort posting, reposts, misinformation, advocating violence, off-topic, trolling, offensive, regarding the moderators or meta in content may be removed at any time.
-
Rule 7: We didn't USED to need a rule about how many posts one could make in a day, then someone posted NINETEEN articles in a single day. Not comments, FULL ARTICLES. If you're posting more than say, 10 or so, consider going outside and touching grass. We reserve the right to limit over-posting so a single user does not dominate the front page.
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
Lemmy World Partners
News [email protected]
Politics [email protected]
World Politics [email protected]
Recommendations
For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.
https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/
- Consider including the article’s mediabiasfactcheck.com/ link
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
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.
This is the patch
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.
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.
Yeah. Frank Castle beat the shit out of many an officer who tried to follow his path of vigilantism.
Near?
Beat?
Yes. SwiftKey is not always the most accurate.
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.
Sikh cops are allowed to wear turbans and it doesn't harm anyone when they do.
Maybe in Canada. But they certainly aren't in Norway
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.
You talking about the uniform caps, or just hats in general?
I consider caps to be hats, yes.
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
Why didn't you address their point? The flag has a cross on it
It's a part of our history, imagine that. Islam isn't
I see.
Well thanks for confirming some things I have always suspected about Christianity in general and European Christianity in particular.
"We can't allow distinctive religious or cultural symbols representing the state!"
"What about that one right there?"
"Well, obviously that one is allowed. It's a part of who we are!"
Emphasis on "we"
Uniform dress
By that logic, these officers are not able to function in their job. Or maybe it's just certain types of hats and scarves that are objectionable.
Any symbols other than the flag of the jurisdiction you’re serving should be forgone while wearing a uniform.
And insignia of course
This looks like some 4chan shit lmao
Ha, wow. Did not picture this ‘Star of David’ patch when I read the headline.
Are you fucking kidding me? Wooooow.
The truth is that they want him to remove it because it's extremely cringey.
It's a call for genocide...
Bruh
Take off every sihks turban then?
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.
What are you talking about, sikh cops are allowed to wear their turbans
He's suggesting that if person A needs to remove a star, person B could be forced to remove a turban
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. They are peace officers who if someone disagrees with, and they happen to be highly opinionated could ruin that person's life unfairly or even cause them harm.
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.
Tell them that not me, I'm just clarifying the comment
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
Feel free to come off aggressively, this is the internet. It's your right