Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The woman asking at the job handled it appropriately. Obviously, it's something that some, possibly many, employees at that company discuss. IMHO, it's better that they ask people if they are interested in such topics than to possibly put the person in an awkward position later on.
Additionally, the OP handled it in the correct way. I do find it silly that the OP was so alarmed by it. People tend to talk about things they are passionate about with coworkers, be it football, food, children or religion.
If you were a vegan and a coworker invited you to a BBQ cookout, would you be offended? Especially if they said, "Ok, just thought I'd ask" once you declined the invitation?
"OMG, this person at work actually wanted to know if I'd participate in the slaughter and consumption of some innocent animal. I can't believe they'd be so brazen to invite me to such a barbaric ritual. It's just shocking."
Well, if you know about mezuzot, then perhaps you are Jewish, and perhaps she realizes this. It is amazing how ignorant some people in this country are about Jews and Judaism. It might really be that she is asking, "Is it going to make YOU, a Jew, uncomfortable if we talk about Christ, because we Christians here do that from time to time." She might really have been feeling awkward about being around a Jewish person, not know how to behave, wanted to know if their usual behavior might be interpreted as offensive towards YOU, if she thought you were Jewish.
She might turn out to be a very nice, considerate person, who just hasn't been around people who are different from her. Try to let it slide, and hope for the best. Meanwhile, start some kind of dated diary on your home computer, and log these incidents, in case this really is a hostile workplace. You may need it for evidence somewhere down the road, and these kind of records can be useful if you need them in the future.
I'm an atheist through and through, and my response still would have been similar to yours, so I think you hit it right on the head. I would have said "As long as I'm not expected to participate in the conversation, it doesn't bother me."
The Civil Rights Act provides for voluntary discussions of religion (among other things) on non-work time such as breaks, though some employers will not allow it and would probably lose in court if sued. Where someone crosses the line is forcing it upon others who are offended or felt they are being harassed. If 2-3 people are chatting in the break room about the latest service they went to there should be no problem, but if someone tries to convert a co-worker, or chastises them for not being religious and that co-worker asks them to stop, they had better stop or could be sued.
Far and away the best encapsulation of the roots of the problem so far; the difficulty beyond this point is that "getting in your face" under the pretext of Evangelism is central to a large contingent (and the most simplistic) of Christianity.
Freed from the imposition of religious dogma. the Bible itself can be studied infinitely; Steinbeck's East of Eden has endless parallels to the Bible, and Faulkner's Light in August is actually a Passion play. The problems arise when Loudmouth Billy-Bob (who done been borned agin) thrusts it under your nose and starts prattling about "Gawd's wunnerful plan fer yew", (Since a lot of the admittedly-Evangelical employers believe in strong management, and seek submissiveness in prospective employees, the two interests tend to coalesce,)
OK -- the rant is over; I have close relatives and friends who are both devout Christians and educated, polite, civil people. Some of them have borne and overcome personal hardships I fear I'll never have the courage to face. But the point remains that some of the central tenets of Fundamentalism open doors for an overbearing, force-minded personality. Saul of Tarsus was oppressor and tyrant, but an embrace of Christian dogma, and the opportunities for the power-brokerage he embraced, turned him into Saint Paul.
I hope that some of the more reserved, and respectful-of-education among the Christians here can address this point.
Last edited by 2nd trick op; 12-12-2013 at 04:41 PM..
Far and away the best encapsulation of the roots of the problem so far; the difficulty beyond this point is that "getting in your face" under the pretext of Evangelism is central to a large contingent (and the most simplistic) of Christianity.
Sure, you have some Christians who want to "get in your face" just as you have some atheists who want to "get in your face".
The woman in the OP's office asked a simple question and then respected the answer. If you feel that is "getting in your face", it sounds like you want drama.
But can you imagine someone popping her head into your cube on your first day and asking nervously whether you mind conversations about football?
"I hope you don't mind me asking a personal question but: do you think it's right for Mike Shanahan to bench RG3 for the rest of the season?"
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
