Tattoo question

[MeekoBB]

Ye shall not make any cuttings in your flesh for the dead, nor imprint any marks upon you: I am the LORD.

I do intend on getting a tattoo at some point, but I would not place it where it would be inappropriate for work (such as exposed arms, chest, neck, face)

(the tat i want is going on my lower back.)

[vs-eh?]

I do intend on getting a tattoo at some point, but I would not place it where it would be inappropriate for work (such as exposed arms, chest, neck, face)

(the tat i want is going on my lower back.)

Ummm Beegs, I don't think God is specifying body placement here. You're probably a sinner for even thinking of it. Repent soon...

[Scaramedic]

Here we go again!!

I know we've had this discussion before. Actually, Christians believe Jesus brought a new covenant and the old rules were set aside. Christians don't sacrifice goats, can eat pork, cheeseburgers and never have to sit Shiv'ah.

Peace,

Marty

[spenac]

First off 2 Timothy 3:16 says all scripture inspired of God, it doesn't say just christian greek scriptures(new testament). If you read and study entire bible you will find it is in harmony from Genesis to Revelation. Yes changes occurred from Jesus but he even qouted Hebrew Scriptures(old testament).

Second many translations actually so no tattoos.

[web:2981e6bf1e]http://bible.cc/leviticus/19-28.htm[/web:2981e6bf1e]

[vs-eh?]

Here we go again!!

I know we've had this discussion before. Actually, Christians believe Jesus brought a new covenant and the old rules were set aside. Christians don't sacrifice goats, can eat pork, cheeseburgers and never have to sit Shiv'ah.

Peace,

Marty

So God, who's son is Jesus, but Jesus is also God...Anyway...

So God, somehow made a mistake in its initial rules. Amazing how an omniscience, omnipotenent, omnipresent being can simply "make an error". But then...

Meh...

[Scaramedic]

Technically it says "cutting" in every verse. A tattoo is actually a prick, I don't think the Bible mentions pricks.

Peace,

Marty

[spenac]

Enough religious lessons. I only mentioned the scripture to give the OP insight into why tattoos have been looked down on for so long.

I do highly suggest that anyone getting tattoos do so in places that will be covered at work.

Professionals need to carry themselves as such. If a patient is nervous about you based on your appearance you will find it tougher to gain their confidence, to have them view you as a professional, which can and will hurt your ability to treat as they will not speak as freely with you.

[spenac]

So God, who's son is Jesus, but Jesus is also God...Anyway...

So God, somehow made a mistake in its initial rules. Amazing how an omniscience, omnipotenent, omnipresent being can simply "make an error". But then...

Meh...

Completely wrong, easily disproved, God does not make mistakes, God and Jesus not one and same, but this is not a religion forum. See my last post as to reason for bringing in scriptures. Back to topic now.

[vs-eh?]

Enough religious lessons. I only mentioned the scripture to give the OP insight into why tattoos have been looked down on for so long.

I do highly suggest that anyone getting tattoos do so in places that will be covered at work.

Professionals need to carry themselves as such. If a patient is nervous about you based on your appearance you will find it tougher to gain their confidence, to have them view you as a professional, which can and will hurt your ability to treat as they will not speak as freely with you.

I think it's safe to say that body art has been around for far longer than today's dominating monotheistic religions...

http://magma.nationalgeographic.com/ngm/04...line_extra.html

But I digress...

It is totally based on where you work and what the culture/religion is (though I work in a vastly more multicultural/multireligious community then well, any of you). I have never heard of, nor seen an issue come up about piercings or tats. I have mentioned this before, I have 2 unconventional visible (though subtle) ear piercings that have probably been brought up a handful of times (and I can't honestly recall when the last time was).

A lot of my co-workers have visible tats and piercings that many of you would cringe at. The population that I serve (read the former) have no issue with it. I have never heard of an issue from my most "tatted" friends.

[Dustdevil]

...if anyone has the train of thought that a person who has tats is "disturbed" in some way only leads to the argument that these people need to have a much more open mind and not rely on reports from some study.

Oh, the irony!! That reminds me of a quote from George Carlin, who says, "Anybody who thinks profanity has lost its shock value just isn't using enough of it!"

Lone Star has it right. If you want people to recognise your right to wear a tat, then you are hypocritical to not recognise their right to judge you by the sign you choose to erect on yourself.

I have known employers that do not allow tattoos on the arms at all. Period. They are not covered by short sleeves, which are required during the summer. And they are not always covered by watches or bandages, which must be removed for proper hand and arm washing several times per shift. Therefore, prohibited.

If you're a female, you already face enough disadvantage in EMS without intentionally compounding it upon yourself like this. It's just stupid and immature. Who wants to hire stupid, immature people?

And, by the way, Chuck Norris has no tattoos. Nuff said. 8)