Ellinas wrote: A female teacher having only her eyes exposed in a European primary school could cause many problems to the young students.
at least half of whom would like to see a lot more of her
au1929 wrote: Jesus was illiterate???
If one believes the Gospels, he was not.
Read Luke 2:46, for example.
Ellinas wrote:I don't have a problem with the use of religious symbols by students therefore I don't support the French law.
However I believe teachers must not wear religious symbols that belong to minority religions. A teacher is a person who shapes characters, so teachers must be forced by law not to wear Muslim symbols in countries where Christianity is the main religion or the opposite. At a Christian country people grew up under some specific standards - Especially in the schools were we have to do with young people we have to be more cautious. A female teacher having only her eyes exposed in a European primary school could cause many problems to the young students.
This is an old saying that fits the situation
"When in Rome do as the Romans do."
Steve 41oo wrote:Ellinas wrote: A female teacher having only her eyes exposed in a European primary school could cause many problems to the young students.
at least half of whom would like to see a lot more of her
[Which reminds me on recreation time in my therapy: my social worker was a nun and we liked playing table tennis with her: she used not only to put away her veil and capuche then, but gathered up her clothes, really high up I mean ...
(I didn't play table tennis in those days, watching it was better. :wink:)]
Francis wrote:au1929 wrote: Jesus was illiterate???
If one believes the Gospels, he was not.
Read Luke 2:46, for example.
It's an ancient practice - at least until the late medieval times - that some orators hold a blank document and "read" from it in this way; giving oracles in the antique periods for instance, or re-telling the bible and other legends in the medieval ages. (Not everywhere people had the chance to watch the Bayeux Tapestry :wink: )
Walter Hinteler wrote:Steve 41oo wrote:Ellinas wrote: A female teacher having only her eyes exposed in a European primary school could cause many problems to the young students.
at least half of whom would like to see a lot more of her
[Which reminds me on recreation time in my therapy: my social worker was a nun and we liked playing table tennis with her: she used not only to put away her veil and capuche then, but gathered up her clothes, really high up I mean ...
(I didn't play table tennis in those days, watching it was better. :wink:)]
well the therapy in all its forms clearly turned you into the well rounded individual of today. Round of applause please for bare headed table tennis playing nuns
What does Luke 2:46 have to do with literacy?
meanwhile the row over the BA employee who wants to wear a small Christian cross at the check in desk is escalating here. MPs are boycotting BA. The Archbishop of Canterbury says nothing, but the Archbishop of York says its an outrage that she should be banned from wearing it openly...(Muslim and Sihk employees can wear hijab/turbans).
BA say religious symbols should not be worn openly except when its not practical to wear them under clothing.
They are too tolerant imo. NO outward displays of religious affiliation should be worn.
Steve 41oo wrote:meanwhile the row over the BA employee who wants to wear a small Christian cross at the check in desk is escalating here. MPs are boycotting BA. The Archbishop of Canterbury says nothing, but the Archbishop of York says its an outrage that she should be banned from wearing it openly...(Muslim and Sihk employees can wear hijab/turbans).
BA say religious symbols should not be worn openly except when its not practical to wear them under clothing.
They are too tolerant imo. NO outward displays of religious affiliation should be worn.
But there's a difference. Religious symbols aren't the same as mandated religious clothing. One is optional and the latter isn't.
Raul-7 wrote:But there's a difference. Religious symbols aren't the same as mandated religious clothing. One is optional and the latter isn't.
So a Christian woman in Saudi Arabia must wear the veil? This is madness. NO overtly religious clothing, it deeply offends my secularity.
Raul-7 wrote:Steve 41oo wrote:meanwhile the row over the BA employee who wants to wear a small Christian cross at the check in desk is escalating here. MPs are boycotting BA. The Archbishop of Canterbury says nothing, but the Archbishop of York says its an outrage that she should be banned from wearing it openly...(Muslim and Sihk employees can wear hijab/turbans).
BA say religious symbols should not be worn openly except when its not practical to wear them under clothing.
They are too tolerant imo. NO outward displays of religious affiliation should be worn.
But there's a difference. Religious symbols aren't the same as mandated religious clothing. One is optional and the latter isn't.
The muslim burqua is not mandated. It's a matter of personal choice.
Sikhs can wear turbans, Jews yarmulkes, and bhuddists can shave their heads. No problem.
But no-one should hide their face. Not here.
Face-hiders should go to Yemen or somewhere where they would fit better into society.
even in our small city , we have a fair number of muslims - several hundreds , i would say . they have built quite a beautiful mosque within the last few years .
many are students at our university and a fair number are post-graduate students that come with their families . others are on the teaching staff of the university or are medical doctors , and others are successful business people .
these muslims come from many different countries and i have noticed that some women are wearing veils - some a little more "severe" than others . however i have not seen a single "full-face" cover .
i'm sure these people are observant muslims , but they don't seem to think wearing a "full face" cover is a requirement to be an observant muslim .
i suppose i could compare it to the dresses worn by catholic nuns over the last fifty years or so .
since we have a catholic hospital in our town , we have many catholic nursing sisters also . while 50 years ago , they usually wore their long dresses and had their hair hidden , now it is almost impossible to tell them apart from other nursing sisters .
we have a small retirement home for catholic nursing sisters on our street , and even the retired sisters who grew up under the "old regime" simply wear a modest dress and a small cap that shows their hair .
i'm reasonably sure that many more muslim women , given half a chance , will happily give up their "full face" cover over time .
hbg
I didn't mean the Burqa, that's the tradition of the bedouin women. But I meant the Hijab.
Raul-7 wrote:I didn't mean the Burqa, that's the tradition of the bedouin women. But I meant the Hijab.
I've got no problem with the hijab.
http://www.google.com/search?sourceid=navclient&aq=t&ie=UTF-8&rls=SUNA,SUNA:2005-44,SUNA:en&q=hijab+pictures
but I don't like the full-face cover.
Raul-7 wrote:I didn't mean the Burqa, that's the tradition of the bedouin women. But I meant the Hijab.
Where in the Koran or associated writings does it stipulate that a woman must wear the hijab?
The fact is it doesnt.
But the issue is taken up by political islamists who like nothing better than to turn scarf wearing into a matter of principle.
They force women to cover up, and they want to force the rest of society to accept it.
[At my local petrol station there is a sign on the door saying 'No Helmets or Hoods'. Clearly the manager didnt have the balls to mention veils.]
Hey check this
Veiled woman teacher sacked, in Yorkshire.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/bradford/6179842.stm
This seems quite fair. She couldnt do her job properly because of the ridiculous clothing she insisted on wearing. Children's education is more important than upsetting the finer religious sensibilities of those who seem to go out of their way to have them upset. This woman got the job by deception in any case, she never wore the veil at the interview. But there will no doubt be a chorus of complaints from certain Muslim groups. [The real irony is it was a
Church of England school! What chance a Roman Catholic getting a job in a madrassa in Pakistan
]
Are madrasses regular schools? (Btw: a Protestant wouldn't get -easily- a job at a Catholic school here; a Catholic never one at one at an Evangelical grammar school - no matter what she/he wears.)
(On the other hand, Catholic and Evangelical religion [classes, we have that here in Germany] are taught in Muslim grammar school in my native town [it's in the castel we pass from/to the airport, you know that, Steve] by Catholic and Protestant priest, and the majority of teachers - including the headmaster - are Christians. It's the biggest Muslin [boarding] grammar school in Germany. :wink: )
