Swiss win EU case - Muslim girls must swim with boys

Scroll to see replies

But you have failed to tell us what other classes would teach them to swim.

You said it yes, but you are wrong as I have explained above. Either the school needs to find supervision for them, or they have to stay at home. Not the case for your two scenarios. They will not partake in normal class because of a made up reason that is not in fact socially acceptable.

Reply 82

hassassin04

Then the whole discussion should be about compulsory schooling and not swimming classes in particular. I do not have a strong stance whether it is a good thing or a bad thing. The point of these news is that muslims yet again do not want to assimilate and are rejecting very basic western values by favouring segregation.
Public school is not really an argument though , how do you even know that those parents are actually paying taxes in the first place? Maybe they live on benefits. In any case , assuming that everyone pays taxes , why should THEY get special arrangements? Because religious views are above non-religious views?

Reply 83

gman999

Original post by Mr Moon Man

Good, it's them who have to follow our rules, not the the other way round.

You'd let your shy, self concious 10 year old daughter swim with other boys? you have no shame or self respect.

Reply 84

Good bloke

Only if catering to their beliefs is limited to allowing to believe what they like and giving them free rein to pursue those beliefs in private (within the law).

Reply 85

QE2

You are entirely wrong here.
Never head of the term "in loco parentis"?

Reply 86

QE2

Original post by cbreef

What I'm saying... is that if the Quran/Hadith say that this stuff is forbidden, but the ECHR says "screw it you're doing it anyway" then it's not fit for purpose.

The Quran/hadith say is is permitted to beat a disobedient wife, to keep slaves and to use female slaves for sex (under certain conditions). The ECHR says "screw you, you can't do that".

Is the ECHR still "not fit for purpose".

In the real world, evidence-based, rational thought trumps Bronze Age superstition and medieval tradition.

Reply 87

yudothis

Yes, a canteen that cannot make two meals one of which is vegetarian? Lel.

And yes, supervision, or who looks after the child when they cannot be in their normal class? And they are supposed to split the entire class by gender just because of two girls' parents? Or do you suggest they do it on their own at another time? As your stupid I have class at 10am and you at 2pm suggests.

Reply 88

QE2

You are losing sight of the principle by concentrating on individual detail.
Parents must have good reason for witholding their children from mandatory classes. That is the law, and a reasonable one. These parents broke that law. End of story. You are just getting excited because the parents happen to be Muslims and their unacceptable reason is religious superstition, so for some reason best known to yourself you seem to think that this allows the parents special priviledge to break the law.
That's not how society works.

Reply 89

astutehirstute

We do have a problem. And we are sleep walking into a religiously segregated society because of the complacent and naive views of people like you.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/10790441/Guide-to-school-Islamisation-by-ringleader-of-Trojan-Horse-plot.html

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/11457650/No-new-faith-schools-unless-they-tackle-segregation-Commission.html

Reply 90

QE2

Original post by Good bloke

Can you tell us of another exercise that teaches young people how to save their own lives if they fall into deep water?

Yes.
Prayer!

Reply 91

_Fergo

Original post by cbreef

What I'm saying... is that if the Quran/Hadith say that this stuff is forbidden, but the ECHR says "screw it you're doing it anyway" then it's not fit for purpose.

Why not? You're assuming the Quran/Hadith is all-accurate and must be 100% respected. Well, no.

Reply 92

yudothis

Are you suggesting sending pre-teens of to free period without supervision?

For 12 year olds?

No idea about pacifists, if it is true then It is a similar type of a nonsense as allowing muslims to skip classes. Vegeterianism is a different story as people can not like meat just due to the taste. Same argument for having not just one option for the meal.

And even then the argument with muslims is not quite the same. Their "requests" are not just personal preferences but have further implications- children do not integrate.

Reply 95

QE2

But 2pm on Friday is already taken by another group. In fact, the pool schedule is full for the whole week.

And they would be missing science on Friday at 2pm. How do they make that up? They can't do it on Mon at 10 because all the science teachers are teaching other classes, so their science suffers and they miss out on their dream of becoming doctors, fall into depression and become radicalised online, ending up as jihadi brides in Syria.
In fact, there isn't a free teacher to supervise these girls at 10 on Mon, so the school has to employ agency staff for a couple of hours, which means that there isn't enough money left to provide after-school tuition for children from underprivileged backgrounds so instead of bringing their education up to speed after school, they are hanging out down the rec, getting addicted to meth and getting pregnant.

See what you've done? Are you happy now?

Reply 96

QE2

So the children of white supremacists who don't want their kids swimming with blacks and Asians should be catered for?

Idiot!

Reply 97

QE2

Wrong again. The school is legally in loco parentis.
"It allows institutions such as colleges and schools to act in the best interests of the students as they see fit" - Law.com

Reply 98

Good bloke

It is amazing how people lose sight of the fact that unfettered liberalism is also called anarchy.

Reply 99

QE2

You are arguing that the school should make special provision so the parents can circumvent the law, for the sole reason of religious priviledge.
Why do you think that this should be the case?