Religion trumps chronology in death
Register | Edit Profile | Subscriptions | Forum Rules | Log In | RSS Feed
 Stuk  Top half 27 Apr 18 3.09pm |
  |
|---|---|
|
A coroner in London has been told that she is unlawful for dealing with her cases on a chronological basis. She's been told that Jewish and Muslim deaths must take priority.
Optimistic as ever |
|
 Alert a moderator to this post |
  |
| CambridgeEagle Sydenham 27 Apr 18 3.21pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
A coroner in London has been told that she is unlawful for dealing with her cases on a chronological basis. She's been told that Jewish and Muslim deaths must take priority. In fairness, if someone has a good reason for an inquiry to be held sooner, then I don't see why that shouldn't be permitted. Seems a bit lazy and jobsworthy to just do things in the order the come in irrespective of need or preference. As long as everyone has the right to ask for reasonable expediency I don't see the problem, and I agree she shouldn't have been so rigid and dogmatic.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Apr 18 3.25pm |
 |
|---|---|
|
This is a secular country. What the feck is going on? Our judicially is completely cucked. Fining girls for rap lyrics and forcing priorities for coroners based upon beliefs in fairy tales.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 27 Apr 18 3.27pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
In fairness, if someone has a good reason for an inquiry to be held sooner, then I don't see why that shouldn't be permitted. Seems a bit lazy and jobsworthy to just do things in the order the come in irrespective of need or preference. As long as everyone has the right to ask for reasonable expediency I don't see the problem, and I agree she shouldn't have been so rigid and dogmatic. It should be you who writes to the families telling them that it's ok that their loved one is seen later because you think someone's particular religious belief is more important than their beliefs or lack of one. I know what my reply to you would be.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 27 Apr 18 3.37pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
In fairness, if someone has a good reason for an inquiry to be held sooner, then I don't see why that shouldn't be permitted. Seems a bit lazy and jobsworthy to just do things in the order the come in irrespective of need or preference. As long as everyone has the right to ask for reasonable expediency I don't see the problem, and I agree she shouldn't have been so rigid and dogmatic. Religion isn't a good reason. Isn't burying/cremating someone about closure? Why should one set of people have to wait longer because they don't believe in fairy stories? Or the right fairy stories?
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Badger11 Beckenham 27 Apr 18 3.46pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
A coroner in London has been told that she is unlawful for dealing with her cases on a chronological basis. She's been told that Jewish and Muslim deaths must take priority. I don't agree with this. So she was discriminatory for telling people they should wait their turn. The courts solution is to allow people of certain faiths to queue jump and that's not discriminatory? Anyone who has a loved one that dies and it needs to be investigated wants this done as quickly as possible. Why should a secular person be discriminated against in favour of a religious group? The only queue jumping should be where the authorities have asked for it e.g. the police believe someone has been murdered and they need to get an investigation started.
One more point |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Hrolf The Ganger 27 Apr 18 3.53pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by CambridgeEagle
In fairness, if someone has a good reason for an inquiry to be held sooner, then I don't see why that shouldn't be permitted. Seems a bit lazy and jobsworthy to just do things in the order the come in irrespective of need or preference. As long as everyone has the right to ask for reasonable expediency I don't see the problem, and I agree she shouldn't have been so rigid and dogmatic. You have finally lost it.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| martin2412 Living The Dream 27 Apr 18 4.49pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Simple - If you're terminally ill, become a Muslim.
|
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Mr_Gristle In the land of Whelk Eaters 02 May 18 8.56pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Stuk
Religion isn't a good reason. Isn't burying/cremating someone about closure? Why should one set of people have to wait longer because they don't believe in fairy stories? Or the right fairy stories? Absolutely. Doing cases in date order - unless the judicial system has an interest - surely is the only way? Bloody monotheists.
Well I think Simon's head is large; always involved in espionage. (Name that tune) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stuk Top half 02 May 18 11.00pm |
|
|---|---|
|
Originally posted by Mr_Gristle
Absolutely. Doing cases in date order - unless the judicial system has an interest - surely is the only way? Bloody monotheists. She has been done for "discrimination" for not discriminating. It's properly f***ed up. You want it expedited you hire a private one, at your expenses.
Optimistic as ever |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| Stirlingsays 03 May 18 1.17am |
|
|---|---|
|
It's like an April fool's story....A dark thought tells me that possibly the reason no decision makers are prepared to put an end to this ridiculous criticism is because they don't wish to be identified as the person who says 'this is nonsense'. Similar to the fear of criticizing sections of communities that we saw with institutions over the rape of working class vulnerable girls.
'Who are you and how did you get in here? I'm a locksmith. And, I'm a locksmith.' (Leslie Nielsen) |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
| topcat Holmesdale / Surbiton 03 May 18 10.45am |
|
|---|---|
|
Under Jewish and Islamic law, bodies must be buried on the day of death or as soon as possible afterwards. Which is what was happening. This case has nothing to do with the rights of the dead but Ms Van Der Zyl and The Board of Deputies of British Jews wanting preferential treatment for Jews. Not content with (ridiculously) winning their case, they want the coroner to resign for doing her job. I am starting a new religion which only belief is that when I die The Board of Deputies of British Jews have to pay for my funeral and wake. For them not to would be against my human rights.
It's 106 miles to Chicago, we got a full tank of gas, half a pack of cigarettes, it's dark... and we're wearing sunglasses. |
|
| Alert a moderator to this post |
|
Login / Register
All images and text on this site are copyright © 1999-2023 The Holmesdale Online, unless otherwise stated.
Web Design by Guntrisoft Ltd.