JW Chef Refuses to Cook Black Pudding

by cofty 109 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

• 

  dozy

  I would also say the employee should have covered up to the customer - told them there was no black pudding left but they could have double bacon or something instead. Then it would have been a none story.

  It's also puzzling why the JW would refuse to "make" (ie fry or grill , as the pudding would come pre-packed ) the black pudding but be happy to serve it. What's the difference ,exactly between grilling something and serving it? - it is still a means of transmitting blood to the purchaser. The Society , in its hugely complicated talmud of rules & regulations surrounding blood and blood products allows a nurse or doctor to administer a blood transfusion , if requested , which is surely a much more direct form of transmission.
• 

  konceptual99

  Maybe the dub should ask herself what would happen if the people stopped donating blood and all her products made from blood fractions ran out.

  Stupid hypocrite.
• 

  Xanthippe

  Mmm animal fat, blood and oatmeal, who could resist that.
• 

  St George of England

  As one commentator said

  "IT'S ONLY A BLOODY SAUSAGE!"

  George
• 

  snugglebunny

  I'm offended by people who eat bacon because bacon has red & white stripes.

  ..and this has nothing to do with Where's Wally..
• 

  bohm

  Have any of you guys thought the chef was simply objecting on culinary grounds because she thought the delicious dish of black pudding was best served uncooked?
• 

  Simon

  The evidence suggests a member of staff failed to follow their line manager's instructions and took an opportunity to slag them off to a customer.

  No, the evidence suggests that the fault was with the chef because the company fired her. That tells us something about who was doing what the company paid them to do.

  I don't think "blatantly lie to customers" should be on any companies operating procedures.

  Reverse it: suppose a JW was being asked to lie ... should they? If they said "I'm sorry, my convictions don't allow that" would *that* then be the right thing?

  The employee who told the truth is the one you want to keep!

  I've worked in companies where some JW has had to be excused from something on "religious grounds" that are completely invented. They make things up to suit themselves and take advantage of the threat of religious discrimination laws to threaten companies to get their way - when you hear "apparently he's a JW and they are not allowed to do work on a Saturday's so can't go on the rota that everyone else has to" you know someone is taking the piss.

  There is nothing about the JW religion that forbids the chef from doing her complete job, just her own desire to inconvenience someone who doesn't follow her own faith as happens so many time.
• 

  DogGone

  It's really simple. Objecting to who somebody is = bigotry. Objecting to what somebody does is not.
  

  We certainly disagree here, Cofty. I'll go with the dictionary definition and not the Cofty definition. It is why I gave the example of the gay pride parade (what someone does) over who they are (gay). Objecting to a gay pride parade is often bigotry, intolerance arising from the dislike of a group. It is not what you are objecting to, but why you are objecting that makes it bigotry. You can object to a parade because you hate the garbage, certainly not bigotry. If you object to a parade because you wish the gays would leave their gayness at home, well that is certainly bigotry.
  
  The attempts to limit accusations of directed bigotry, first to what someone is versus what they choose to be, and now to who someone is and not what they do, are not supported by any dictionary I've consulted.
  
  

  Those who want to wear a head covering like a turbin, a kippah, or a hijab do so.

  Yes but when you go to work your employer decides.

  Well, that is begging the question. Where I live, that is certainly not so.
  
• 

  DogGone

  No, the evidence suggests that the fault was with the chef because the company fired her. That tells us something about who was doing what the company paid them to do.
  

  I didn't know she was fired. That would indicate she wasn't doing what the company paid her to do and that she may not have had an understanding with her employer. Where did you find that out?
  
• 

  cofty

  I'll go with the dictionary definition and not the Cofty definition.

  My definition is identical to the dictionary.

  If you dislike somebody because of what they are that is bigotry

  If you object to what somebody does that isn't.

  Refusing to employ a JW because they are a JW is bigotry.

  Refusing to employ a JW because their religion prevents them fulfilling their job description isn't.

  Hating a muslim is bigotry

  Hating Islam isn't.

  etc. etc. etc.

  I don't think anybody got fired.