Schools And Human Rights

[Carrera]

Should Moslem women be allowed to wear a jilbab at school instead of the normal school uniforms?
Full story is below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4310545.stm

What happened was Denbigh High School became involved in a legal dispute when they banned Shabina Begum from wearing the full jilbab but a judge came to the decision the school had acted against her human rights. After the case, the girl stated:
"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."
The French attitude to all of this is that no veils, skull-caps or jilbabs are allowed to be worn in schools since French politicians decided there was a risk of immigrants, say, from Israel and Middle Eastern Arabic countries developing a distinct identity as they passed through the French school system. It was hoped all immigrants would identify culturally with France and French culture. There was also the point that France is now a secular country and promotes secular values within its society.
However, all immigrants to France are allowed to dress as they please outside of school and have the right to practise any religion they wish and the right to be protected from discrimination.
So, I just thought I'd ask how things stand in your own respective countries. Where would the ground lie in Australia or the U.S.A. and do you think schools should allow or prohibit ethnic religious expression?
Is there a case for arguing immigrants should be forced to conform with the society they migrate to or should we adopt a liberal stance and accept other peoples' values?
P.S. on a humorous note I was once kicked out of school for dressing as a hells angel.

 

[FredC]

Should Moslem women be allowed to wear a jilbab at school instead of the normal school uniforms?
Full story is below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4310545.stm

What happened was Denbigh High School became involved in a legal dispute when they banned Shabina Begum from wearing the full jilbab but a judge came to the decision the school had acted against her human rights. After the case, the girl stated:
"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."
The French attitude to all of this is that no veils, skull-caps or jilbabs are allowed to be worn in schools since French politicians decided there was a risk of immigrants, say, from Israel and Middle Eastern Arabic countries developing a distinct identity as they passed through the French school system. It was hoped all immigrants would identify culturally with France and French culture. There was also the point that France is now a secular country and promotes secular values within its society.
However, all immigrants to France are allowed to dress as they please outside of school and have the right to practise any religion they wish and the right to be protected from discrimination.
So, I just thought I'd ask how things stand in your own respective countries. Where would the ground lie in Australia or the U.S.A. and do you think schools should allow or prohibit ethnic religious expression?
Is there a case for arguing immigrants should be forced to conform with the society they migrate to or should we adopt a liberal stance and accept other peoples' values?
P.S. on a humorous note I was once kicked out of school for dressing as a hells angel.

What a crappy posting. Never give it a thought did you. The Black Country where you come from have got the worst and most boring dialect in the UK. And the most boring people to boot. Grow up, or stick to boring us to death with Socrates, you lot have always been centuries behind the times, hence Socrates.
Not a Hills Angel then?

 

[davidmc]

Should Moslem women be allowed to wear a jilbab at school instead of the normal school uniforms?
Full story is below:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/beds/bucks/herts/4310545.stm

What happened was Denbigh High School became involved in a legal dispute when they banned Shabina Begum from wearing the full jilbab but a judge came to the decision the school had acted against her human rights. After the case, the girl stated:
"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."
The French attitude to all of this is that no veils, skull-caps or jilbabs are allowed to be worn in schools since French politicians decided there was a risk of immigrants, say, from Israel and Middle Eastern Arabic countries developing a distinct identity as they passed through the French school system. It was hoped all immigrants would identify culturally with France and French culture. There was also the point that France is now a secular country and promotes secular values within its society.
However, all immigrants to France are allowed to dress as they please outside of school and have the right to practise any religion they wish and the right to be protected from discrimination.
So, I just thought I'd ask how things stand in your own respective countries. Where would the ground lie in Australia or the U.S.A. and do you think schools should allow or prohibit ethnic religious expression?
Is there a case for arguing immigrants should be forced to conform with the society they migrate to or should we adopt a liberal stance and accept other peoples' values?
P.S. on a humorous note I was once kicked out of school for dressing as a hells angel.

I happen to agree w/ the French on this one, assimilate or don't bother showing up on their doorstep. Is that too much to ask? As I have stated before, I see women driving around here w/ essentially blindfolds on & they want to have their ID's photo taken while wearing those repressive, ridiculous things. How the hell are we supposed to tell who the feck they are what w/ wearing a sheet on their heads

 

[MountainPro]

I see women driving around here w/ essentially blindfolds on & they want to have their ID's photo taken while wearing those repressive, ridiculous things.

in the free west, shouldnt people be allowed to wear what they want within reasonable and tasteful bounds?

 

[Carrera]

I'm kind of half-agreeing with both of you.
In a free country, people should be allowed to express themselves as they see fit. But I think the French do have a point about integrating foreign peoples. After all, when people migrate to other countries and grow up in a foreign environment, it's expected such people will be able to do well for themselves in the future.
I noticed that, unlike the U.K., French Moslems seem to adopt a certain French national identity and the Asian guys hang around with French teens e.t.c. French Asians speak French very well but I suppose they still keep their religious values and find a balance. In the U.K., liberalism seems to be leading to marginilization.
But I have mixed views on the topic and wondered what other folks were thinking.

in the free west, shouldnt people be allowed to wear what they want within reasonable and tasteful bounds?

 

[Carrera]

This story has apparently made the front page of the Daily Mail today and I flicked through the coverage briefly.
Firstly, I wasn't aware the school in question had a uniform policy. Had this been a case of a school where kids were allowed to arrive in casual clothes, I'd have concluded the girl was within her rights to wear whatever she wanted (uncluding a veil). But, in this case, the school is being told it doesn't have the right to force Moslems to conform with exisiting rules that apply to everybody else i.e. a school uniform.
Now here is a question I wish somebody in the legal profession might answer and it's a pretty obvious question:
The so-called English lawyer who apparently consulted Brussels over the dispute has ruled that the school doesn't have a right to impose dress standards as this is against European human rights legislation. My view is he's absolutely wrong.
If France (a leading European State) has just placed a ban on religious attire in all state schools, then according to this bufoon judge, France has acted illegally and we can, therefore, conclude that France must overturn its ruling as an E.U. member. Now, we all know there is no way that is going to happen.
Therefore, if France can legislate over such matters, I'm sure that one school in the U.K. must have a right to decide whether students can wear anything they like, or not as the case may be.
I think such lack of backbone as has been shown is doing the girl in question no favours at all since, in the real world, big companies are not going to hire people whose faces the customers can't see. Neither are companies likely to hire people with large earings or piercings in the wrong places and I think there are realities here we should learn to accept, the sooner the better.
Sorry for my rant, folks, but I had to get it out of my system and I think the question I made is resonable with regard to E.U. human rights.

 

[davidmc]

in the free west, shouldn't people be allowed to wear what they want within reasonable and tasteful bounds?

It's a matter of practicality over here as is everything. You get a driver's license, our primary source of I.D., & it must be definitive. wearing those "Camo"/"Represso" veil's-I don't care what they're called- anybody could say they were that person. Again, immigrate-assimilate or leave. Simple as that. I say "Bravo" to the French.

 

[FredC]

I'm kind of half-agreeing with both of you.
In a free country, people should be allowed to express themselves as they see fit. But I think the French do have a point about integrating foreign peoples. After all, when people migrate to other countries and grow up in a foreign environment, it's expected such people will be able to do well for themselves in the future.
I noticed that, unlike the U.K., French Moslems seem to adopt a certain French national identity and the Asian guys hang around with French teens e.t.c. French Asians speak French very well but I suppose they still keep their religious values and find a balance. In the U.K., liberalism seems to be leading to marginilization.
But I have mixed views on the topic and wondered what other folks were thinking.

Hold by here, are you talking about (French?) asians, or arabs, or both? They can both be Moslems.
The Moslem lads only hang around white teen girls because they are easy meat, and they won't be getting any sex from Moslem girls.

 

[MountainPro]

It's a matter of practicality over here as is everything..

america...land of the free or land of the practical?

not as free as you guys like to believe, my personal belief is live and let live.

i understand you concern though but surely freedom of choice should be for everyone. what is people objected to your religion and forced you to dress in a certain way.?

 

[FredC]

america...land of the free or land of the practical?

not as free as you guys like to believe, my personal belief is live and let live.

i understand you concern though but surely freedom of choice should be for everyone. what is people objected to your religion and forced you to dress in a certain way.?

Mmmm. Could be the Jeans T-shirt, and Trainer manufacturing lobby are pressurising the Senate to make this method of dress uniform throughout the world compulsory, along with KFC and MacDonalds.
This attempt at worldwide brainwashing will only result in badly dressed, overweight persons. Next job. Send out those evangelists in their covered wagons, and burn all religious publications apart from Jewish ones.
Thongs and visible bra and spaghetti straps are out, and the same goes for mini skirts in public. Puritan. Armish, and Quaker dress codes are in.
Ergo the Jilhab is superb.

 

[jstraw]

The French have their collective head up their collective backside. Looks like the Brits are following their awful example. If you don't see that, you're a bigot. It'll creep onto our shores too...makes me sick.

Should the veil come down for the DL photo...yes. Should it come down when a cop has probable cause to check your I.D....yes...otherwise....pure bigotry...enforced assimilation...one step shy of ethnic cleansing. Screw that.

 

[snyper0311]

america...land of the free or land of the practical?

not as free as you guys like to believe, my personal belief is live and let live.

i understand you concern though but surely freedom of choice should be for everyone. what is people objected to your religion and forced you to dress in a certain way.?

The best thing about our country is that you are free! See, we have something called LAW. It's voted on by the people for the good of the people. Land of the free doesn't mean lawless or disreguard for the law. If the person wearing the veil is doing it for religious purposes, that's up to them, but if they want to be part of the greatest country in the world, they must abide by the laws that govern this great nation. If it means having a presentable ID Photo and being asked to remove the veil for ID purposes, then so be it. As has been said many times before on this site, "If you don't lvoe it, leave it!"

 

[mjw_byrne]

I think some of these posts might be missing the point. No-one objects to the girl's culture or how integrated she is, they object to the fact that she is wilfully violating the school's dress code. The issue isn't about forcing people to assimilate, it's about whether you can use religion as an excuse to get yourself exempted from the rules, i.e. that you must wear a uniform. I don't think holding a religious belief ought to get someone special treatment. Schools all over the world are packed with kids who think the uniform sucks but they are not "free" to turn up dressed as hell's angels. And if in following your religion you break the law (e.g. Leviticus in the OT, which states unequivocally that practicing homosexual men must be put to death), you will still get locked up. Developed, enlightened societies tolerate religious practice but they should not bend and break their rules to give anyone special treatment, religious or otherwise.

In the last UK census, enough people said they were "Jedi" to make it an officially recognised religion. So should schoolkids here now be allowed to turn up wearing a beige tunic, brown boots and a lightsaber? Actually, forget everything I've said, that would be awesome

 

[FredC]

It's a matter of practicality over here as is everything. You get a driver's license, our primary source of I.D., & it must be definitive. wearing those "Camo"/"Represso" veil's-I don't care what they're called- anybody could say they were that person. Again, immigrate-assimilate or leave. Simple as that. I say "Bravo" to the French.

Didn't Wunderpants George promise the Hispanics a free drivers license. What's wrong with all the other driving contraventions in place to arrest and prosecute the offenders. You're all mad mad mad mad. I'm surprised at you Dave.
Anyway the French won't win this one in the long run.

 

[davidmc]

Didn't Wunderpants George promise the Hispanics a free drivers license. What's wrong with all the other driving contraventions in place to arrest and prosecute the offenders. You're all mad mad mad mad. I'm surprised at you Dave.
Anyway the French won't win this one in the long run.

Veils accentuate differences. They stipulate; in effect "Look at me, I'm different & I don't mind being oppressed by a patriarchal religion." (just like christianity but moreso) It just shows me that they are simple (close)-minded. There must be a reason why they left their country. I wonder what it was . The hypocrits, if they were from saudi or some other muslim fundamentalist state weren't even allowed to go to school. So, in closing, I say to them "zip it !!!"-translation- shut up !!! or quit yer' bellyachin'

 

[davidmc]

Didn't Wunderpants George promise the Hispanics a free drivers license.

It is/was a vote-grabbing ploy, probably rubber stamped by Herr Karl Rove

 

[MountainPro]

The best thing about our country is that you are free! See, we have something called LAW...... they must abide by the laws that govern this great nation.it!"

so basically in america, your free as long as you abide your laws and give up your personal beliefs?

utter shite and you know it my friend.

as i said before, youre not as free as you think.

Fact: ONLY americans believe that thier country is the greatest (what ever that means) and ONLY americans believe that thier country is the free-est in the world.

if your work sent you to a muslim country such as Saudi, and when you arrived you were told to remove your Holy Cross, and start wareing the local clothing and to grow a thick beard asap...this is because you must fit in with the popluation here and not show any signs of chritianity since this is a muslim country...and then to be told you are living in the greatest and free-est society in the world....would you agree..

thats what Muslims face in America.

 

[mjw_byrne]

so basically in america, your free as long as you abide your laws and give up your personal beliefs?

It's not a question of having to give up one's personal beliefs just because you are in a different country, it's about not being able to use religion as an excuse to break the rules. With Shabina Begum, it's very simple: the school's rules say "you will dress in a certain manner". She says, "I am a Muslim, so I don't have to follow that rule". Now if you are a goth and you want to wear black lipstick and have purple hair, or you are a fascist and you want to have a swastika shaved into your head, or you are a nudist and you don't want to wear anything at all - tough. Either you follow the dress code or you find another school. So why should Muslims be any different? Why should religious beliefs be taken more seriously than any other beliefs in a secular state like France? It would be different in a theocracy, but thankfully theocracies are few and far between in the developed world.

 

[jstraw]

It's not a question of having to give up one's personal beliefs just because you are in a different country, it's about not being able to use religion as an excuse to break the rules. With Shabina Begum, it's very simple: the school's rules say "you will dress in a certain manner". She says, "I am a Muslim, so I don't have to follow that rule". Now if you are a goth and you want to wear black lipstick and have purple hair, or you are a fascist and you want to have a swastika shaved into your head, or you are a nudist and you don't want to wear anything at all - tough. Either you follow the dress code or you find another school. So why should Muslims be any different? Why should religious beliefs be taken more seriously than any other beliefs in a secular state like France? It would be different in a theocracy, but thankfully theocracies are few and far between in the developed world.

Fortunately I live in America where the Constitution is at least supposed to protect people from such idiocy and bigotry. See, here...you can't HAVE such a rule in a public institution such as a school if it violates the First Amendment which enjoins the gov't from any actions *respecting* religion. If the court finds that the rule was designed with repressing the religious expression in mind, and doesn't just *happen* to affect Muslims as it affects Goths then no go...

You can't even have a dress code that says...say, no full length garments or no head coverings that doesn't even mention specific religious garb if it can be demonstrated to the court that the intent and effect is specific to religious practitioners.

I say fortunately because this conversation demonstrates why the founders were so careful to protect us all from xenophobia and the tyranny of the majority.

You people spouting all this love it or leave it...go back to where you came from **** FORTUNATELY do not have the last word.

Bigots and idiots.

 

[mjw_byrne]

Fortunately I live in America where the Constitution is at least supposed to protect people from such idiocy and bigotry. See, here...you can't HAVE such a rule in a public institution such as a school if it violates the First Amendment which enjoins the gov't from any actions *respecting* religion. If the court finds that the rule was designed with repressing the religious expression in mind, and doesn't just *happen* to affect Muslims as it affects Goths then no go...

You can't even have a dress code that says...say, no full length garments or no head coverings that doesn't even mention specific religious garb if it can be demonstrated to the court that the intent and effect is specific to religious practitioners.

I say fortunately because this conversation demonstrates why the founders were so careful to protect us all from xenophobia and the tyranny of the majority.

You people spouting all this love it or leave it...go back to where you came from **** FORTUNATELY do not have the last word.

Bigots and idiots.

It's nothing to do with stifling religious expression though, that's the point. France doesn't want to stop the girl wearing a jilbab in the street or at home, but who is she to turn up at a school with a dress code and refuse to obey it? If you can get yourself excepted from the rules based on religious belief, where does it stop? Suppose someone starts a religion involving heroin use or human sacrifice - are authorities supposed to let it pass as "freedom of religious expression"? Of course not. Of course people should be allowed to practice and express their beliefs, as long as they can abide by the same rules that bind everyone else.

Now in this case it probably wouldn't have hurt the school to just let the girl wear the damn thing, but as soon as people can just magically gain extra rights simply by being religious, you've got a slippy slope. France is (at least in theory) a secular state, so if its message to its people is, "You are free to practice whatever religion you like, but it will get you absolutely no special treatment or extra protection from the law", I for one have no problem with that.