Swiss win EU case - Muslim girls must swim with boys

Original post by nutz99

If their rules forbid swimming with other religions then that is explicitly racist!

Now then! It is religious discrimination, socially divisive and completely unacceptable but never racist. Following a religion is not conditional on being of a particular race, and vice versa..

Reply 142

nutz99

Original post by QE2

Again, someone comparing religious privilege to disability!
They are not the same thing. It is ridiculous to say "Well, he isn't swimming because he has cerebral palsy, so my children shouldn't have to because if they swim with boys, they will have sex".

I said nothing of the sort! Have you just had a mindf**k or something. The point I was making was that in most schools in most years there will be kids who are excused from swimming so it will be necessary to provide supervision for them. What has that got to do with religious privilege?

Reply 143

nutz99

Original post by Good bloke

Now then! It is religious discrimination, socially divisive and completely unacceptable but never racist. Following a religion is not conditional on being of a particular race, and vice versa..

In theory yes but in practice it seems that anything against Islam is racist....well so say the police and the PC brigade. But that is another story!

Reply 144

Cherub012

5

Will God not forgive them if they must follow the law no matter how much it contradicts with their religious beliefs?

It seems pretty easy for Muslims parents to let this slide ^^^

Reply 145

astutehirstute

11

Well you did call another poster who disagreed with you a moron! But you admit it was a mistake, so fair enough.

I totally understand where you are coming from, what is not to like about religious toleration? It is a core aspect of liberalism. Of western thought. Of western civilisation

But I explained how religiously intolerant Islam itself is to show just how incompatible the entire culture and civilisation is with western liberalism. Observant Muslims aren't just like us, with a different view on mixed bathing. They have totally incompatible beliefs and value systems to the post Christian, secular west.

They won't integrate, can't integrate, because to do so would be to negate everything they believe in.

It is noticeable how the people who really get this, on TSR, are those from Muslim traditions who have left the faith. Apostates. They understand and value what we western liberals take for granted. They see what is wonderful about liberalism and what will be lost if we revert to the religious superstition of our own pre Enlightenment history, which Islam is still subject to.

We have to stand up for secular freedoms, we have to defend them (all over again first it as against Christianity, in the eighteenth century, now it is Islam) by confronting this God ordained mumbo jumbo, saying we will not accept it, or we will be lost.

Reply 146

joe cooley

1

How many of the SJW valiantly defending the religious liberties of Muslims on this thread did the same for the baker in NI who refused to bake a pro-gay marriage cake because it went against their religious beliefs?

Yeah, as if.

Reply 147

And this is where your argument is flawed.
By "cater to such kids" you are actually talking about rescheduling the school timetable, which may require extra staff duties. It is certainly not "self-evidently easy" to do this.
The school went as far as providing a seperate changing area for the girls and allowing them to wear non-standard swimwear (a burkini), but this still did not satisy the demands of the parents, who wanted the swimming lesson schedule changed (which may not have been logistically possible).

The parents could not present a good reason for allowing their children to skip class. That is all. It's really not that difficult to grasp. (Illness or disability is a good reason).

If an astrologer told the school that their child would not be attending class "because Mercury is retrograde", would you expect them to be taken seriously?
Obviously not. So why any different with a different superstition?

Reply 148

So it is reasonable to provide segregated swimming if demanded by Muslims, but not if demanded by white supremacists (who don't want their kids swimming in the same water as non-whites, but are happy for them to otherwise interact at school)?

Care to justify that position?

Reply 149

username2965904

Personally I'd like to see swimming be single sex at younger ages, so that there is the option to swim nude, as boys apparently did many years ago, even in the US. Having experienced swimming without swimwear as an adult, it is much more comfortable.

Reply 150

Good bloke

It doesn't matter where they originally come from, nor what religion they follow. If they are seeking to segregate their children for reasons of superstitious belief they are obviously not integrated into western society.

Reply 151

Original post by Ladbants

The thing I don't understand is:
Gender segregated swimming is not going to harm anyone

It could easily harm the school (by incurring extra cost through the extra swimming sessions required) and therefore the pupils.

Mixed swimming is going to hurt Muslims and some other religious groups

No it isn't. Nothing will happen if Muslim girls swim in the same pool as boys.

So why not choose the option that satisfies everyone??

Because the correct option is the one that satisfies the law and education standards, not the fantasies of Bronze Age superstition.

Reply 152

Good bloke

So you would be happy if black people, disabled people or homosexuals were refused service by bakeries, restaurants and so on?

Reply 153

Original post by Ladbants

And these reasons are more important than people actually having to disobey the rules of their religion and being forced to swim with people of the opposite gender when they do not ageee with it?

Yep!
And it is not the children who have the issue, just their parents (who sound like they are looking for offence).
The children would certainly be more than happy to swim with everyone else if they hadn't been told by their parents that they must not.

Also worth bearing in mind why their parents don't want them to swim with boys. It's because if they do, they will be tempted to commit illicit sexual activity (they're like 10 or something)! Creepy much?

Reply 154

nutz99

Original post by KingHarold

Personally I'd like to see swimming be single sex at younger ages, so that there is the option to swim nude, as boys apparently did many years ago, even in the US. Having experienced swimming without swimwear as an adult, it is much more comfortable.

Seriously, with the number of perverts around nowadays that will never be an option.

I agree

However, I wonder if the ECHR would have made the same decision if it were the UK for example... For some reason I doubt it.

Reply 156

sleepysnooze

3

Original post by KingHarold

Personally I'd like to see swimming be single sex at younger ages, so that there is the option to swim nude, as boys apparently did many years ago, even in the US. Having experienced swimming without swimwear as an adult, it is much more comfortable.

why would you desire that?
that policy too will inevitably be compulsory nude swimming, not "the option"...
...which is creepy, right?

Reply 157

joe cooley

1

You did?

Ok, i'll take your word for it.

Well, i referred to SJW because they're the first to defend the backward cult of Islam and are prepared to jettison beliefs they claim to hold oh so dear.

Women's and gay rights are trumped by Islam in SJW world, just think gender segregated Labour party rally.

Pandering to Islam is a foolish,dangerous game, look at the results of such pandering in Rotherham.

Reply 158