1
   

Chiraq bans Muslim head scarves in State Schools

 
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Sep, 2005 03:41 pm
Eg the bits that read, "The SGP is a Dutch Christian party. Protestant of the most hardcore variety. No sports on Sunday. ... The SGP has had either 2 or 3 seats in parliament ever since the universal right to vote was given in Holland, in 1919. .. The SGP bases its point of view on phrases from the bible."
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Fri 9 Sep, 2005 03:48 pm
Sorry. So it discriminates against women?

Interesting...


Like I keep saying, a fundy is a fundy.

It doesn't seem to matter which brand of imaginary friend they say they like, it all seems to be the same can of beans when opened...
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 06:15 am
Some interesting points here.

I hope the SGP are deprived of funds until they stop discriminating against women. Is that an extreme right wing position?

Ms Bunny is it necessarily right wing to enforce a school dress code?

Thomas you make a fair point about nazi uniform being a threat. But in that case any nazi symbol, badge, slogan etc would be a threat. Ban those too? And how do you stop political groups taking on board pseudo-relgious identity to get round the ban?



Nimh, thanks for the translation.

( ps The girl barred from the school in Luton because she insisted on wearing a bourkha did quite well in her recent exams. The school used health and safety as the decisive factor to uphold the ban)
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 06:51 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Some interesting points here.

I hope the SGP are deprived of funds until they stop discriminating against women. Is that an extreme right wing position?

Ms Bunny is it necessarily right wing to enforce a school dress code?

Thomas you make a fair point about nazi uniform being a threat. But in that case any nazi symbol, badge, slogan etc would be a threat. Ban those too? And how do you stop political groups taking on board pseudo-relgious identity to get round the ban?

I have no idea.

In this case, it was the right wing trying to CREATE one where none had been before. As I said, there is no tradition of banning religious expression in our secular schools.



Nimh, thanks for the translation.

( ps The girl barred from the school in Luton because she insisted on wearing a bourkha did quite well in her recent exams. The school used health and safety as the decisive factor to uphold the ban)






I have no idea. In THIS case, as I said, it was the right wing trying to make a drama out of headscarves, where no drama had been. There IS no dress code banning religious bits and bobs:

dlowan wrote:
There is no tradition in Oz of not allowing people to wear religious stuff in state schools. Jews can wear yamulkas, catholics can wear crucifixes etc.

A couple of ultraright bright sparks in the federal (conservative) government tried to say that the wearing of head scarves was a "challenge" to Australia, and shouldn't be allowed.

The prime minister, most of the rest of the party and the opposition all scotched it immediately.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 11:33 am
ok bunny fair enough.

Let me ask the question another way.

If I support banning hijabs/prayer shawls/ostentatious crucifixs etc in state schools does that make me right wing?

I know you didnt infer anysuch thing, I would just like to know.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 03:20 pm
Not as far as I can see.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 05:02 pm
good thanks
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 09:10 pm
I have to go reread this thread. I don't remember my previous opinions on all this. I think I had instinctual opinions and overrid them, but not sure. And have read Reading Lolita in Tehran and Mughal Buffet since. Not that those are key works, but hey, I read them and they opened my eyes more, but to what end, re this thread, I don't know.
Back later.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 09:23 pm
Going on to review the thread, I think the first two pages of this one were superb.

Back later after more.
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Sat 10 Sep, 2005 09:42 pm
Ah, I see I said something once and was not engaged by others, perhaps for good reason. Hard to reread the whole thing without printing it out, for which I am disinclined, although I was interested in various posters' posts.

I'm still interested in the topic.
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 02:10 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
If I support banning hijabs/prayer shawls/ostentatious crucifixs etc in state schools does that make me right wing?

Well, it still makes you a narrow-minded wannabe petty tyrant, but not a right wing one, I can reassure you. Smile
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 02:18 am
Makes him? Laughing
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 02:32 am
"Shows that he is" may have been a better way to say it, but I wanted to err on the polite side. Smile

Steve, what is your wife saying about this? She is a teacher -- would she have a problem with head scarfs in her class? (I have a funny feeling I already asked this earlier in this thread.)
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 08:09 am
My friend Thomas writes :-

"Well, it still makes you a narrow-minded wannabe petty tyrant, but not a right wing one "

Smile Smile which i am still chuckling at

And I might say am am PROUD to be a narrow minded wannabe petty tyrant ..... Smile

Mrs Steve teaches religious education correct. And being the narrow minded tyrant that I am, I have told her, and she agrees with me, being a tyrant, that head scarves SHOULD BE BANNED, ESPECIALLY FOR BOYS.


Smile

(if there is room in this post for a serious comment, Ros thinks there must be some rules to school dress code but determining exactly where that lies in particular hajib for girls is above her pay grade)
0 Replies
 
Thomas
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 11:34 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Mrs Steve teaches religious education correct. And being the narrow minded tyrant that I am, I have told her, and she agrees with me, being a tyrant, that head scarves SHOULD BE BANNED, ESPECIALLY FOR BOYS.

Sounds like her alright. Smile Please say hello to her from me.

Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
(if there is room in this post for a serious comment, Ros thinks there must be some rules to school dress code but determining exactly where that lies in particular hajib for girls is above her pay grade)

They need to change that pay grade, for though her opinion is still a liiiiiitle bit tyrannic, it's much better than what you currently seem to have in Britain. In exchange, I'll give the two of you that Islamist suicide students who drive hijacked cars into school buildings ought to get a failing grade.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Sun 11 Sep, 2005 11:49 am
thanks will pass that on!
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 06:04 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Let me ask the question another way.

If I support banning hijabs/prayer shawls/ostentatious crucifixs etc in state schools does that make me right wing?

I dont think its a left-wing versus right-wing thing. If anything, this is one of those subjects that seems to have "crossed over" from left to right, as some subjects appear to do (and vice versa). It is a subject that pits you against me though, which should make you tremble in insecurity and shake in self-doubt, obviously Razz
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 12 Sep, 2005 12:39 pm
well of course nimh

but we just won the Ashes NO WORRIES
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Sep, 2005 10:38 am
fbaezer wrote:

The swastika, instead, is a symbol of hatred, racism and death.
..........I returned to class and we discussed about the meaning of the swastika and nazism.



the swastika is purely a religious symbol, as much any other you mentioned.

it was used though, by the nazis as "a symbol of hatred, racism and death" though. they also screwed up the symbol, in that they made the arms of the swastika point in the reverse direction and made the whole symbol rest on its "points" instead of its base.


its perfectly alright to discuss the meaning of swastika AND nazism, but wrong to connect the two and say that the swastika was ALWAYS a symbol of nazism. thats just what those silly germans/neo-nazis, thought/think.


people should know better.
0 Replies
 
brahmin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 14 Sep, 2005 10:42 am
comming back to the orighinal question -

no i dont think any government should have a say as to what students should wear to school. saying that wearing a scarf or a turban is offensive is to misinterpret/suspect the (most likely) perfectly harmless intentions of the wearer.


tell me - do those people who wear a cross do so cos they look down upon people of other faiths?? i dont think so at all.

on the other hand its perfectly possible for someone NOT to betray his/her religion, for example by wearing a scarf, and be very intolerant of others. and thats the issue that needs to be addressed.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

700 Inconsistencies in the Bible - Discussion by onevoice
Why do we deliberately fool ourselves? - Discussion by coincidence
Spirituality - Question by Miller
Oneness vs. Trinity - Discussion by Arella Mae
give you chills - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence for Evolution! - Discussion by Bartikus
Evidence of God! - Discussion by Bartikus
One World Order?! - Discussion by Bartikus
God loves us all....!? - Discussion by Bartikus
The Preambles to Our States - Discussion by Charli
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 8.88 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 08:35:51