Jesus replaced with a Gregg's sausage roll.

By the same token it is perfectly OK to mock the food that can be purchased in Greggs, although some on here are defending it and claim it is manna for the poor.

but I do try to live by Christian values and would never knowingly or deliberately say or do something to cause hurt to another.

I'm afraid you have misunderstood Christian values gillybob.

Annie your comparison between reactions from Christian, Jew and Muslims is a good one. Some of each would be very upset, some sad that others knew so little about their religion and some would just shrug knowing that we all have the right to be offended. That is part of free speech.

Christians can do whatever they like about Gregg's (as long as it's legal). They can be upset, boycott Gregg's or stand outside and preach until they are moved on. What they cannot expect to do is insist that their devotional and ritual observances are practiced according to their belief of what is right, nor can they expect them not to be mocked.

With regard to maw's post, I have two questions:

1. What does "shaming a religion" mean, if anything?

2. If one thinks spirituality is silly why shouldn't one say so? (please read that carefully before 'going off on one'; it does not say that I think spirituality is silly, it merely asks why, if one did, one shouldn't be free to express that opinion).

Seriously, for both questions (a) because I can't imagine a religion or atheism being shamed, and (b) because if someone thinks atheism is silly they are, quite rightly, perfectly free to say so.

If the instruction about not shaming really meant that one shouldn't try and shame a person because of their religion, than why doesn't it say that? And I don't think there is a satisfactory answer to my second question that doesn't say a person is free to think something silly and to say so. Do people really not get the idea about religious ideas and associated subjects like spirituality not having special status above criticism? Or are they just refusing the accept that as reasonable?

Some religious ideas are (and many more have been historically) not just silly but revolting.

Nothing to forgive Gilly x

Forgive me Annie I am not mocking in the slightest.

As you know I am not a practising Christian, in that I don't go to church or understand the bible, but I do try to live by Christian values and would never knowingly or deliberately say or do something to cause hurt to another.

I doubt that whoever at Greggs decided that putting the silly sausage roll in the manger was a good idea, would have considered that some people may have been highly offended. They probably just thought of it as a silly idea of a joke and not intended to attack the Christian religion.

I had decided to leave the discussion until the post from the moderator. Would it be acceptable if a moderator did this on a political thread in place of May or Corbyn? My life was not dedicated to either of these , it was to the Christ Child

Gilly, it is placing the sausage roll in place of The Christ Child that has hurt. Just as a sausage roll in place of a painting of Moses on the mountain receiving the Ten Commandments would distress those of the Jewish faith and they certaintly wouldn't take the risk of placing a sausage roll in a Mosque in a painting or photograph , why is the Christ Child so easy to mock

I think this discussion has gone round in circles - some people are offended, some are amused and some are on the fence. Can we draw a line under it? Let’s all agree to disagree and disagree to part as they say.

There are lovely people in this forum, both of faith and no faith, a few are not lovely people. I understand the explanation Cari has given but it should have been given at the time. The hurt has been done and like the written word cannot be undone. Terri has said what is true

I have just discovered that Stollen is supposed to represent the baby Jesus wrapped in swaddling cloths. Is that so very different to a sausage roll?

I'm finding it very hard to see how a sausage roll can cause so much upset.

What gives anyone the right to pronounce 'Shame on you' on these threads?

It's an awful thing to say to anyone.

Poor Cari

GRANSNET HEAD OFFICE - As arbitrators, my understanding is that you are supposed to be impartial. You post an anagram of sausage roll, which is old hat, Baggs had already pipped you at the post there. My comments are not about the rights and wrongs of the issue under discussion but the inappropriateness of your posting. Most of us know that there is one poster on this thread who has recently suffered a heartbreaking berevement, you will also no doubt appreciate that she takes comfort from her religion, particularly at a time when her feelings are so raw, your crassness here is a betrayal to that person who draws much support from the friends she has here on GN. Your crassness does you no favours, particularly when you can be so partisan in pulling threads and deleting certain comments. Shame on you!

There is a long tradition in art of placing objects in situations that people might find challenging. Perhaps the advertising staff at Greggs have a frustrated artist on their staff. Maybe Magritte's The Son of Man gave them the idea?

Actually as far as I am aware the general public have completely forgotten about this - it seems to only be kept going on forums like this (I don't "do" twitter so it may be on there - it certainly isn't appearing on any of the Facebook pages I visit)

X posts CariGransnet, but far more likely they viewed it as an amusing ‘puff’ for their own best seller.The people who come up with these advertising and marketing ideas are usually only thinking of the client, and don’t give much thought to the wider implications.

Think I will move on from GN , I cannot cope with betrayal of trust, never have been able to.

Thank you for your apology CariGransnet , sadly you have taken my trust in the fairness of moderators away

I am surprised that CariGransnet appears to be adding fuel to the fire, definitely not what mods are for!

Well said btw Maw ( and yes, Annie didn’t mean her post for your comment.

Good point maw. I think that sums up my thoughts exactly.

Maw my love not you. I am surprised a moderator has become involved in this discussion, I thought moderators were to be fair and posting something to amuse the atheists here is not what I thought moderators would do, I would feel the same if a moderator had posted something which supported those of us who think mocking the Christ Child is wrong.

I don’t think that the sausage roll is about shaming religion is it? The debate is about the special rights or not of religion to be exempt from being made fun of and criticised - and especially when they are past masters of the art of judging and shaming those they do not agree with themselves. Reaping and sowing comes to mind