"The European Court of Human Rights has today announced that it has rejected the applicants’ request in Eweida and Others v the United Kingdom for referral to the Grand Chamber. This means that the Chamber judgement is now final."But perhaps those ever-so-thoughtful 'Anglicans' who post and comment on that site (note the use there of the term 'swivel-eyed' - where have we come across that recently?) should reflect that any restrictions which employers, for reasons known to themselves, should seek to impose on the display of religious symbols should apply equally to those of other faith communities, despite their own requirements.
Surely, that would be equitable even to self-hating Christians, seemingly ashamed of their history and their heritage, who loudly extol the benefits of secularism à la française - or is it, more probably, à la Harman?
But should it be a matter for the secular courts, national or supranational, to decide what is or is not 'necessary' for Christian believers who, for whatever reason - admirable or, indeed, otherwise - seek to advertise their religious identity?
The ECHR Chamber decision is downloadable (as a pdf file) here