The headline suggests that an athiest would be able to sue a church for displaying religious symbols because he finds them offensive. This may be an extreme case and like wise could be flipped around where any offensive posters or banners ect could be considered a liable cause for prosecution, by anybody. How do you prove someone is lying about what they find offensive?
While I understand the government wants a safe environment for all of us, it is reaching a point where people are being left feeling angry and frustrated because of the ridiculousness of some of these rules.
What is even more frustrating is that there are numerous cases recorded in the media where the innocent have been left charged as guilty because of these rules.
The woman sueing McDonnalds because her coffee was hot and there was no warning on the cup to indicate this has been hailed as a classic case of how thses rules and laws are getting out of hand. The stupid thing about this story, and many others is that common sense does not prevail and the law stands supreeme and the 'crook' wins.
I heard a story about a church, in need of repair. By law the church is allowed to bill the comunity. I don't know why, but the church focused on a particular household and gave them the repair bill. Even though the family did not attend that church, were of a different faith and did not have the money to pay they were still forced to pay. The result was poverty for the family.
Laws are supposed to protect the public and bussiness alike from unjust behaviour, however we see more and more, the baddies looking for loopholes and abusing the system and more and more laws giving them rights leaving the innocent treated like a criminal.
This is both true for the political realm and 'Health & Safety'.
What is going on?
No comments:
Post a Comment