Good Friday-who eats meat on this day?

[bradavon]

It used to be that way here, over a decade ago but many shops started to open on Sundays illegally, no one complained and in fact most liked it. So the law was changed.

I think it's madness personally, especially if you work in the week, it means you've only got one day to go to the shops. It seems very outdated to still close IMO. Christmas would seem an even more appropriate time to not open on Sundays. You'd think with the current financial crisis it would make even more sense to open Sundays.

Is Finland struggling too? Thanks btw.

[HungFist]

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that shops are closed on sundays. People in the business get some free time. Especially now that the economy is bad stores would be tempted to have less people work more and without any holidays.

[Yi-Long]

One of the many things that I LOVED about Hong Kong, was that shops are pretty much always open. Every day of the week, and untill 8-9 at night, or even longer (and obviously the 7-11, the McDonalds and the Circle-K are open 24/7).

Gawd I miss Hong Kong.

[bradavon]

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that shops are closed on sundays. People in the business get some free time.

They don't have to maintain the same staff 7 days a week. I presume staff rotate over here. In fact I'm sure they do.

Especially now that the economy is bad stores would be tempted to have less people work more and without any holidays.

That's not what happens here. Staff get rotated. Why without any holidays? Those who try and do that, would do it regardless of working all week or not.

One of the many things that I LOVED about Hong Kong, was that shops are pretty much always open.

That's not just HK but the Far East in general. It's the same in Thailand, Malaysia and Mainland China. I agree it is very handy but likewise it means "those" staff work very long hours.

It's an entirely different work ethic. They live to work in the Far East and we tend to work to live.

[HungFist]

Especially now that the economy is bad stores would be tempted to have less people work more and without any holidays.

That's not what happens here. Staff get rotated. Why without any holidays? Those who try and do that, would do it regardless of working all week or not.

I mean that with sundays ok it becomes easier to force people work more than the law allows. I don't know the situation in the UK, but I'd assume you've got a whole load of poor immigrants working 7 days a week for some less than honorable employer.

But then, of course there are many other businesses here where people do work on sundays. But it's double salary. Same in the UK?

[bradavon]

but I'd assume you've got a whole load of poor immigrants working 7 days a week for some less than honorable employer.

They're not going to adhere to the law anyway. Making it illegal in Finland to work 7 days a week isn't going to interfere with them as they'll force people to work 7 days a week anyway. I bet there are those who ignore the law and force people to work 7 days a week, just like there is here.

But then, of course there are many other businesses here where people do work on sundays.

I thought you said it was illegal?

But it's double salary. Same in the UK?

Is that a legal thing?

Here it's entirely up to the company. There is no legal thing to pay people more. Some pay double, some time and a half and some no difference at all.

Those are usually because it was agreed their working hours were on Sundays when they joined or they have some cheeky thing in their contract where if the company wishes to make you work Sundays/Out of hours "on occasion" they can.

[gasteropod]

At Next, on Sundays you got paid time and a quarter or something lol, but for new staff now it's just basic pay.

[HungFist]

Making it illegal in Finland to work 7 days a week isn't going to interfere with them as they'll force people to work 7 days a week anyway. I bet there are those who ignore the law and force people to work 7 days a week, just like there is here.

You can't force anyone to work in a store 7 days a week when the store is forced to be closed on sundays. Well, at least not as a clerk.

But I think the idea behind the law isn't so much about fighting criminality, but to keep up good tradition that people have holidays, free time and normal working hours.

I thought you said it was illegal?

I meant outside the retail business. Like restaurants and others.

Is that a legal thing?

Yes. Saturday is minimum +20%. Sunday is minimum +100%.

[bradavon]

At Next, on Sundays you got paid time and a quarter or something lol, but for new staff now it's just basic pay.

So you could have staff on less than people doing the same job? That's cheeky. I hate how companies do that.

When I worked at the police it was all formalised, everyone doing the same job got bade the same. I'm sure my current employers pay different rates, probably depending who shouts loudest.

You can't force anyone to work in a store 7 days a week when the store is forced to be closed on sundays. Well, at least not as a clerk.

I see what you're now saying. I meant back-store dodgy places. Over here yes you can have people working 7 days a week but there is so much legistation I doubt many managers would dare force it.

The UK isn't part of the working time directive though, so unlike say France there is nothing illegal with someone working 7 days a week, 10 hours a day, if they so wish. No doubt we will part of this directive at some point in the future.

But I think the idea behind the law isn't so much about fighting criminality, but to keep up good tradition that people have holidays, free time and normal working hours.

I'm sure it is. Shops here have shift patterns, so they can be open but it's not the same staff manning it.

Yes. Saturday is minimum +20%. Sunday is minimum +100%.

We should have that here but then you only have it as they considered extra non-working days. Here they're now considered normal working days, so it won't happen.

[Markgway]

I'm not a Christian so I don't observe Easter as such. I do celebrate Chocolate Egg day with a vengeance though.

My Mum's side of the family are Catholic so I knew about the no meat/eat fish thing but obviously it's not something I bother with.

In fact I'd be more likely to take a cheeseburger to a Catholic's house just to piss them off! lol

I was never baptised myself, not that it means anything. You can be baptised and still not a religious person.

[HungFist]

I'm not a Christian so I don't observe Easter as such. I do celebrate Chocolate Egg day with a vengeance though.

You're like the Japanese. Every christmas there 126 million christians in Japan

[grim_tales]

We just eat fish on Friday as it's healthier, and we try to eat less meat But our family aren't religious (I'm not, I'd say I'm atheist/agnostic). But like Mark I do celebrate Chocolate Egg Day

[bradavon]

I was never baptised myself, not that it means anything. You can be baptised and still not a religious person.

Of course it means something, it's important to your parents at the time.

You're like the Japanese. Every christmas there 126 million christians in Japan

That's the same in Thailand. They love the funness of Christmas, even though virtually none of them are remotely Christian.

[Yi-Long]

Well... what does a Christmas-tree and a fat jolly Santa Clause have to do with JC (not Jackie) being born!?

When I have a family of my own, with kids and stuff, I'll also celebrate Xmas... but obviously we couldn't care less about the religious side of it. It will just be about being together and enjoying the Xmas programming and the nice food etc.

[bradavon]

True but for Thais/Japanese, it's not "even" about that. It's about "following" the West.

[Yi-Long]

True but for Thais/Japanese, it's not "even" about that. It's about "following" the West.

Ofcourse, they just love the holiday for the 'romance' of it, through what they know about it from movies and such. It's is the most 'beautiful' holiday there is.

[Markgway]

I'm not a Christian so I don't observe Easter as such. I do celebrate Chocolate Egg day with a vengeance though.

You're like the Japanese. Every christmas there 126 million christians in Japan

Damn right. How else do you justify all the prezzies??

[Markgway]

I was never baptised myself, not that it means anything. You can be baptised and still not a religious person.

Of course it means something, it's important to your parents at the time.

So? That's their belief. Being baptised doesn't make you a Christian. Most people are brainwashed into it. Very few people who are not raised as religious chose to embrace religion as an adult. Why? Because it's obviously bollocks and a subjective examination of theology will tell you that. Even if I had been baptised I would not consider myself Christian now (though I might if I had been brainwashed by my parents) so I maintain being baptised doesn't mean anything beyond mere symbolism and a desire to keep one's child in the fold.

[bradavon]

That's strong.

Sure many religious people are religious because of their parents but they still freely choose to continue it as adults. Obviously in part because of the beliefs their parents instilled in them but partly because it's important to them. I don't see any harm in that and certainly wouldn't be so flippant to say it's obviously bollocks. If it brings happiness to a lot of people, does it matter if scientifically it may fall down?

Sure religion brings violence but in more measure it brings happiness.

I do agree that those who don't believe still get married in a church etc... is hypocritical. My sister did and as far as I know she or her husband have no religious beliefs at all (not that they'd go as far to say they were atheists).

[Markgway]

That's strong.

The truth sometimes hurts. We don't question religion enough.

Sure many religious people are religious because of their parents

The vast majority surely?

but they still freely choose to continue it as adults.

By then the damage is done. How many children raised as non-religious do you expect choose to become religious as adults? Very few.

I don't see any harm in that and certainly wouldn't be so flippant to say it's obviously bollocks. If it brings happiness to a lot of people, does it matter if scientifically it may fall down?

Yes, because it's promoted as fact. They teach this shit in schools in some countries. If religion were treated as a set of fundamental principles or a guide on how best to live one's life that I could accept. But it's seen as much more than that and when fantasy is taken for reality it becomes dangerous. People even kill for it.

Sure religion brings violence but in more measure it brings happiness.

I don't believe that's justification enough (assuming that's even true). Knitting makes some people happy. I don't see any movement brewing to turn it into a religion.

I do agree that those who don't believe still get married in a church etc... is hypocritical. My sister did and as far as I know she or her husband have no religious beliefs at all (not that they'd go as far to say they were atheists).

It'd be a registry office for me, natch. Sometimes the couple gets married in a place of worship because one of the participants is religious.

[bradavon]

The truth sometimes hurts. We don't question religion enough.

We think we discuss it plenty. My point being you were overly strong not that what you said had no truth in it. You're basically saying millions of people are completely thick.

The vast majority surely?

I fail to see when they decide to carry it on as parents, it's such a bad thing. Parents always instil their beliefs in their kids.

You're a meat eater right? I wonder who brainwashed you and millions of other people into being happy to eat meat. Given a true choice much more people would be vegetarian. Subjective examination will show you the healthy option is to be vegetarian and slaughtering thousands of animals yearly isn't exactly humane.

Yes, because it's promoted as fact.

Only by strong believers which granted is many but there are just as many who would disagree.

Millions of people follow sport religiously, not saying a bad word about it when if you break it down it's just a form of entertainment, no less or more valid than music and movies but tell that to the media who give it equal room with actual news.

Besides you're missing my point. If it brings people happiness, let them have their beliefs.

People even kill for it.

And millions more wouldn't kill a fly, yet are deeply religious. My point, that it's unfair to only concentrate on the negatives of religion.

Like you I don't believe in formalised religion but I wouldn't be so callous as to say it's "obviously bollocks".

I don't believe that's justification enough (assuming that's even true). Knitting makes some people happy. I don't see any movement brewing to turn it into a religion.

What's the answer? Force millions of people to be unhappy and give up their beliefs? Significantly more people are religous and are harmless than are religious and are not.

Besides these people who murder for religion would just as likely do it anyway. Their personalities as such are easily ifluenced.

Sometimes the couple gets married in a place of worship because one of the participants is religious.

I can appreciate that one.

[gasteropod]

You're basically saying millions of people are completely thick.

Which is certainly not true, I'm not technically 'religious' as I don't follow any organised religion or anything, but I have built up my own beliefs over time through reading philosophy and stuff like quantum physics and chaos theory, and my own experiences through psychedelics and meditation. I can now understand how religion or faith can be a good thing, as I feel more comfortable about death and don't feel that all this is totally pointless.

[Markgway]

The truth sometimes hurts. We don't question religion enough.

We think we discuss it plenty.

Who is this "we" you speak for?

When I said "we" I was talking about society not this forum.

My point being you were overly strong not that what you said had no truth in it. You're basically saying millions of people are completely thick.

Even intelligent people are wrong sometimes. You can be a genius and an idiot from the same mind.

You're a meat eater right? I wonder who brainwashed you and millions of other people into being happy to eat meat. Given a true choice much more people would be vegetarian. Subjective examination will show you the healthy option is to be vegetarian and slaughtering thousands of animals yearly isn't exactly humane.

Not only is that entirely true but you've successfully argued my point for me. Thanks. 8)

My eating meat is probably my worst quality. And you're right if starting from scratch I wouldn't choose to do so. But it was instilled in me by my parents and by a society which by and large eats meat. The relgiious principle is the same. Very few adults would choose to follow something so blatantly ridiculous if they hadn't been brought up with it.

Only by strong believers which granted is many but there are just as many who would disagree.

You really think there are many religious people who would accept that their religious text is fantasy (but go along with it regardless)? It's true that the degree of fanaticism varies widely but you have to believe in the fundamentals (in Christianity: Jesus, etc) otherwise what's the point?

Millions of people follow sport religiously, not saying a bad word about it when if you break it down it's just a form of entertainment, no less or more valid than music and movies but tell that to the media who give it equal room with actual news.

I agree.

Besides you're missing my point. If it brings people happiness, let them have their beliefs.

But therein lies the problem. Believers see it as more than a belief or moral guideance. They treat it as fact, as though religious text is document. On the news tonight: Hindus persecuting Christians in India. Just one example in a never-ending struggle. The damage that religion does outweighs the dubious benefits that allow people to take comfort in what are frankly delusions and falsehoods.

And millions more wouldn't kill a fly, yet are deeply religious. My point, that it's unfair to only concentrate on the negatives of religion.

Does religion have positives? Yes. But there's nothing religion has to offer that a society with a strong moral fibre couldn't provide. Do you treat people well because of religion? Is your honesty and integrity owed to The Bible? No. Being a good or bad person doesn't depend on religion. But there's no denying that religion breeds an overwhelming amount of evil. Is it worth it? Is it worth the violence, oppression and hatred just so we can say "well those people are religious and good - so it must be OK"?

Like you I don't believe in formalised religion but I wouldn't be so callous as to say it's "obviously bollocks".

But it is. Why lie? It's not my place to make people feel better.

What's the answer? Force millions of people to be unhappy and give up their beliefs? Significantly more people are religous and are harmless than are religious and are not.

What is it about religion that makes people happy? Are people without religion miserable bastards?

Besides these people who murder for religion would just as likely do it anyway. Their personalities as such are easily ifluenced.

I'm not so sure. The power of religion is enormous when misused. THE MIST does a good job of making that (fairly obvious) point.

[grim_tales]

Doesn't sport have a place on the news as well? It's not as if it's "mixed in" with the other news, there's a seperate sports/entertainment news part.

[bradavon]

Doesn't sport have a place on the news as well?

Only when taken as a form of entertainment, in an entertainment segmant. It certainly doesn't deserve the pedestal people put on it. when taken out of context with other forms of entertainment.

It's not as if it's "mixed in" with the other news, there's a seperate sports/entertainment news part.

Entertainment gets mentioned briefly, whereas sport gets whole segments. The ratio is completely off.

Who is this "we" you speak for?

That should've said "We discuss it plenty". We being all of us on this forum. Region comes up all the time.

When I said "we" I was talking about society not this forum.

I knew .

My eating meat is probably my worst quality. And you're right if starting from scratch I wouldn't choose to do so. But it was instilled in me by my parents and by a society which by and large eats meat. The relgiious principle is the same. Very few adults would choose to follow something so blatantly ridiculous if they hadn't been brought up with it.

Of course in the case of meat, most know it's cruel but don't give a shit.

The damage that religion does outweighs the dubious benefits that allow people to take comfort in what are frankly delusions and falsehoods.

When it's the minority causing the troubles I'd disagree but we'll agree to disagree.

What is it about religion that makes people happy? Are people without religion miserable bastards?

That is a very simplistic approach. Of course not but likewise many who are religious, it brings them lots of happiness.