[rant; religion] {faith is both a prison and an open hand}

[kaberett]

Content notes: evangelism, mention of non-current suicidality.

Proposition: I should be able to walk into my workplace without being fucking evangelised at. I expect it from the Jehovah's Witnesses (misc) and the Mormons (home of Creepy Sexy Jesus across the way from work); I don't bloody want it inside my department building.

It's the Christian Union's ~themed week~, you see, and it's entirely possible that I'd object less if it weren't such trite, shame-based theology. "I'm not that bad, so why do I need Jesus?" Oh, fuck off.

And fuck off even more for your reaction to "I'm queer, trans, and ex-Catholic; you don't want me" being "actually, yes we do". At which point (late, stressed, underslept) I snapped back that they didn't want me in any meaningful way that wouldn't render me suicidal, all while continuing to walk away, and I kind of hope it ruined her day, to be honest, because she fucking oughtn't get away with making my work space hostile to me and thinking that doing so is ~purely and wholly loving~, because it goddamn isn't.

(See, this is why I fall down on the Captain Awkward maxim that it's a potential red flag if people aren't kind and decent to everyone around them, because fuck that.)

Comments

[davidgillon]

If someone triggers significant personal discomfort (and it's clear she did even if the poor, sweet little evangelist would be probably horrified at that), I think you're perfectly entitled to react. And evangelical Christianity is such a damned minefield for people who aren't straight, cis and ablebodied (and some of them have damned peculiar views about Catholicism as well), that defensive reactions are practically mandatory. Even in my half-believing, still semi-Catholic state I've always found active evangelism damned creepy.

IOW, in this case I think your reaction's perfectly justifiable and the Captain's maxim is inadequate to the context. Hell, I've had people trying to help on the disability front I practically had to beat off with a stick, even though I'd told them they were actively endangering me (diving in front of me on a staircase to open a door I could perfectly well open myself).

And yes, evangelism shouldn't be allowed inside the workplace, I'm boggled that they're getting away with that. Public spaces on campus, yes, maybe, but inside departmental buildings is crossing out of 'student life' and into 'the day job' for a whole awful lot of people. Evangelism wouldn't be tolerated in any other workplace, campus shouldn't be different.

[azurelunatic]

My general position on it is, one does not have to be polite while one's human rights are being violated; one should not violate the human rights of others.

How can the CU get away with it?

[legionseagle]

I suspect they're getting away with it because University administrations still have folk memories of the time the Exeter Students Guild told the Exeter CU to disaffiliate, because it couldn't require its members to sign a statement of belief in a specific form and its officers to sign a still more restrictive statement of belief and still be affiliated to a body having an equal opportunities policy. So the CU brought judicial review proceedings against the Guild and the Archbishop of Canterbury weighed in most unhelpfully on the side of the CU.

Either that, or they're scared of the Daily Mail.

Re: How can the CU get away with it?

[el_staplador]

*still angry about the ABC*

*still angry about most of it, really*