Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Muslim sues school for asking her not to wear burka on premises Watch

    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HabibSyed)
    So a regular women wearing regular cloths don't have to talk or engage with any men they don't wish to, but women in Burka's must engage with non-mahram men to show that their engaging with society? I don't get it? You make no sense. Why is it a problem if a women doesn't talk with certain people?
    You said westerners need to make more of an effort to interact with burqa & niqab wearers. I merely said that the same must surely also apply the other way. Do you claim otherwise?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    But in the article it says she has been picking her children up from the school and never had a problem with security and always lifted her veil to show her identity at the gates. Why now is there suddenly a problem?
    They may have had an incident that lead to a policy change.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    You are just making the assumption that everything is about money, it may be for non Muslims but for Muslims it's not. Her religious freedoms were violated and she is taking the appropriate action. The suing is more of a statement that organisations cannot just discriminate and make rules up on the spot.
    But this in no way restricts her freedom to practice her chosen religion.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    No, I don't want to cover my face so I mostly wear an abaya.
    So covering the face is not a religious requirement.
    In which case, why all the nonsense about "restricting religious freedom"?

    BTW, just because something is required by a particular religion, that doesn't mean that it must be allowed. Islam requires that fornicators be flogged with 100 lashes. Is this woman also suing the government for "restricting religious freedom" for preventing the carrying out of divinely decreed punishment on offenders?
    Bearing in mind that the flogging is a command from Allah but covering the face is not, if she isn't it would demonstrate a clear and self-serving hypocrisy.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HotDetermination)
    Just let dudes wear whatever they want! As a society, we value the expression of oneself so making this student remove their burka is going against everything we stand for. Let's not be so paranoid that we have to say that they are a risk to other students because you could say that about so many other things. Stairs are a risk: shall we ban them from schools as well?
    It wasn't a student, it was a visitor to the school.
    The issue is pretty simple - are visitors on school premises allowed to wear masks, or not?
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HotDetermination)
    I'm still going to say people should be allowed to wear the burka, despite the fact that it makes it difficult for people who are deaf or have hearing problems to converse with them.
    Of course people should be allowed to wear a burqa or niqab - except in situations where covering the face is restricted.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    But this in no way restricts her freedom to practice her chosen religion.
    It merely prevents her from wearing a mask on school premises.
    Do you think that visitors to schools should be allowed to weak masks?
    It's not a "mask" it's a traditional Islamic garment. She lifted her veil to prove her identity but now all of a sudden the school are making a fuss. I don't see what the problem is.

    (Original post by QE2)
    So covering the face is not a religious requirement.
    In which case, why all the nonsense about "restricting religious freedom"?

    BTW, just because something is required by a particular religion, that doesn't mean that it must be allowed. Islam requires that fornicators be flogged with 100 lashes. Is this woman also suing the government for "restricting religious freedom" for preventing the carrying out of divinely decreed punishment on offenders?
    Bearing in mind that the flogging is a command from Allah but covering the face is not, if she isn't it would demonstrate a clear and self-serving hypocrisy.
    State law takes precedence over religious law (in some countries) I will agree with that but there is no law saying you cannot cover your face. There are only laws preventing you from covering your face in a riot or something. Private companies are free to make their own rules but this school did not have any such rule in place. They allowed her for years to pick her child up in the burka but now suddenly it's a problem even though they didn't update their policy.

    Anyway the director of the school said they were looking to update the policy to include no face coverings so at least there won't be this confusion in the future.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    I know where you're going with this... The point is some Muslimahs do want to cover their face as part of their religion so the freedom of religion should allow that.
    So if some Muslimahs want to perform FGM on their daughters "as part of their religion", freedom of religion should allow that?

    "Freedom of religion" does not mean that people are allowed to do anything just because they claim that they are doing it because of religion.
    Offline

    11
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by HotDetermination)
    We value freedom as a society. If we deport them all, that would just make us hypocrites!
    But I value national security more than freedom, as does most people.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So if some Muslimahs want to perform FGM on their daughters "as part of their religion", freedom of religion should allow that?

    "Freedom of religion" does not mean that people are allowed to do anything just because they claim that they are doing it because of religion.
    This is pretty much why you were quoted in that other thread
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Adults are allowed to get all kinds of surgery done, I don't see why female circumcision should be any different.
    I think you've missed the point lol

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Adults are allowed to get all kinds of surgery done, I don't see why female circumcision should be any different.
    Are you serious?
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    Yes, if this is allowed



    (tattooed eyes)

    Then if an adult woman wants to have some kind of surgery done to her private region that is her decision. It doesn't harm anyone else remember, isn't that the western motto? It's ok as long as it doesn't harm anyone else?
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Adults are allowed to get all kinds of surgery done, I don't see why female circumcision should be any different.
    What... the f*ck.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So if some Muslimahs want to perform FGM on their daughters "as part of their religion", freedom of religion should allow that?

    "Freedom of religion" does not mean that people are allowed to do anything just because they claim that they are doing it because of religion.
    Oh boy you just opened another can of worms :lol: I'm so uncomfortable right now :lol:
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Yes, if this is allowed



    (tattooed eyes)

    Then if an adult woman wants to have some kind of surgery done to her private region that is her decision. It doesn't harm anyone else remember, isn't that the western motto? It's ok as long as it doesn't harm anyone else?
    Jesus Christ.

    You realise everyone is shocked because you are absolutely clueless on the matter. The whole uproar about FGM is because backwards creeps force their daughters to have the operation. Did you actually not read QE2's reply properly or is this just you trying the further that agenda of yours?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by QE2)
    So if some Muslimahs want to perform FGM on their daughters
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Adults are allowed to get all kinds of surgery done, I don't see why female circumcision should be any different.
    Just in case you can't be bothered to scroll up, I'll quote you in so that you can have another read.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Yes, if this is allowed



    (tattooed eyes)

    Then if an adult woman wants to have some kind of surgery done to her private region that is her decision. It doesn't harm anyone else remember, isn't that the western motto? It's ok as long as it doesn't harm anyone else?
    I don't think anyone has an issue with an adult woman choosing to do that, it's more about a child being forced to undergo it against their will obviously.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Moonstruck16)
    Jesus Christ.

    You realise everyone is shocked because you are absolutely clueless on the matter. The whole uproar about FGM is because backwards creeps force their daughters to have the operation. Did you actually not read QE2's reply properly or is this just you trying the further that agenda of yours?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Just to make it absolutely clear in case you're getting the wrong impression I do not support female circumcision at all. It's harmful and leads to problems but the argument here is if someone wants to do x and y do their bodies as an adult, why should they not be allowed to? If at the end of the day it is their body and they are harming nobody else.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by EternalLight)
    Then if an adult woman wants to have some kind of surgery done to her private region that is her decision. It doesn't harm anyone else remember, isn't that the western motto? It's ok as long as it doesn't harm anyone else?
    Nobody would choose to have FGM unless there were mentally deficient.
 
 
 
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: July 25, 2017
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Break up or unrequited love?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.