Except when it does, and the display of crosses is forbidden under Sharia. In a country already struggling with the consequences of enabling creeping Sharia, and of a broader campaign of reckless multiculturalist social engineering, further concessions must be resisted. Those aspects of the issue must not be left out of the discussion, as they are here.
Williams is quite correct, however, that no one in British society ought to be treating the cross as something offensive. On so many levels, that is not in keeping with British tradition, culture, or civil society, and banning the display of crosses to avoid causing “offense” would simply validate the notion that going up the wall over a cross is somehow justified. That would set an awful precedent.
“Archbishop of Canterbury: wearing a cross does not offend non-Christians,” by John-Paul Ford Rojas for the Telegraph, March 16:
In a candid interview Dr Rowan Williams said he did not believe that Christianity was losing the battle against secularisation in Britain but said that the arguments were being clouded by ‘dim-witted prejudice.’
“What I think slightly shadows the whole thing is this sense that there are an awful lot of people now of a certain generation who don’t really know how religion works, let alone Christianity in particular, and that leads to confusions, sensitivities in the wrong areas – ‘does wearing a cross offend people who have no faith or non-Christians?’ well I don’t think it does.
“But people worry that it will. That is partly because there is a slight tone deafness about how religious belief works.
“I think there is also a lot of ignorance and rather dim-witted prejudice about the visible manifestations of Christianity, which sometimes clouds the discussion.”…
It is not simply ignorance, however. Some people do know exactly what they want and exactly what they are doing, and they are finding common cause against Christianity in public life. The multiculturalist double standard in British society invites Sharia to fill the vacuum.