From: Blunderov (squooker@mweb.co.za)
Date: Tue Feb 10 2004 - 15:06:25 MST
Mermaid
Sent: 10 February 2004 11:13 AM
To: virus@lucifer.com
Subject: RE: virus: Re:terrorising air passengers..
[quote from: Blunderov on 2004-02-09 at 10:28:21] Yes I do believe I
am. Unless they express opinions which militate against the venture that
they have undertaken to foster, I can see no reason to preclude them
from expressing themselves as they see fit.
Presuming that the passengers were under no compulsion to comply with
the pilot's suggestion, it is not clear to me that the pilot had harmed
the airlines interests and, who knows, he may even have enhanced them.
[Mermaid]Ok. Here is another example. What about a visit to your
neighbourhood post office and the clerk behind the counter passes on
religious literature(say..passages from the koran that she finds
fascinating after her recent conversion) along with your book of stamps.
You dont know her. You are not a moslem. She is not doing it in her free
time, but slips it as its a splendid opportunity to spread her passion
during her work hours.
1.How would you react?
2.How would someone who is not you react?
3.How should the post office which pays her salary for her time spent
behind the counter to do her job react?
4.Do you also believe that stealing office stationery and supplies is
alright?
An employer pays an employee for his time and skill. One is hired for
one's time and one's abilities to add value to the employer's raw
resources. If a pilot's actions/words loses an airline customers, it
most definitely interferes with the airline's ability to do business
profitably. It is no more about rights, but it becomes an issue of
abused resources by the employee. Just my two cents.
[Blunderov] Yes well, I am having second thoughts. Jake's point about
the captive audience is very salient.
But to answer your questions...
1. This sort of thing does happen to me quite often actually. Apparently
my appearance is that of an obviously lost soul. Misdirected but
redeemable you can see them thinking. (It used to work quite well in the
mating game too; sadly, those days are probably gone forever.) But the
post office clerk in your example would not offend me.
2. Hard to say. I have never heard anyone complain about such a thing.
Well maybe once. My daughter claimed to have a teacher of the 'born
again' variety who was convinced that bar codes were the mark of the
devil. Her credibility with the pupils was not enhanced by her frequent
utterances to this effect.
(It is just possible other people would be less inclined to be as
gleeful at the sight of the faithful making idiots of themselves as I
might be.)
3. I suppose it depends where the post office is. Round these parts post
offices, and indeed many other offices, frequently have little notices
to effect that Jesus is a jolly good thing festooned about their
workspaces. Often these blandishments are accompanied by pictures of
fluffy kittens and rotund children. Sunsets too, are by no means
uncommon in these tableux.
(I have never been into an Islamic shop without there being at least one
verse from the Koran, lavishly framed and prominently displayed. I think
that perhaps you are not even allowed to have a shop if you do not have
a blessing from the Islamic equivalent of the Beth Din but this is just
a guess.)
It seems to me that a postmaster might easily decide to let sleeping
dogs lie. A thoughtful postmaster might conclude that comparatively
little harm is being occasioned compared to the high dudgeon that might
follow a ban. True, if there were any actual complaints he might feel
compelled to have a reluctant word.
4. With regard to office supplies and stationary I am proud to say that
I do not think it is OK to steal them.
Whether it is ethical to use the companies time to further ones own
personal agenda is a horse of a different colour. In the case we are
considering, the clerk passes on her message simultaneously with the
book of stamps; it is not clear to me that, under these circumstances,
she has embezzled any company time at all.
But what if she did use some company time for her own purposes? For my
part, the perfect postmaster would only concern himself as to whether
she had completed the work required of her. To claim that she could, in
theory, have accomplished more if she had devoted the whole of her
attention to her task is, to my mind, insufficient. I think she could
only reasonably be critcised on the basis of a concrete example of a
shortcoming.
I see that the French have ratified a ban on religious emblems and I do
feel a bit conflicted about it.
On the one hand I am happy to see religion driven a little further out
of places of learning and on the other I can't help feeling that it is a
bit oppressive to censor personal clothing.
I would be much happier if everyone became persuaded by the sheer force
of reason that they had no more need for these artifacts.
Best Regards.
--- To unsubscribe from the Virus list go to <http://www.lucifer.com/cgi-bin/virus-l>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 10 2004 - 15:10:01 MST