RedM Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Oops In retrospect, perhaps I should have attended senior school... Nah! They're just full of old people. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marc_p Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 She's a bit chubby isn't she. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 One minute it's wearing bangles to school and the next it's a lackadaisical approach to spelling. No wonder this country/forum/skier is going downhill. I like to slip the odd one in, and then see who is paying attention to what I say. Thanks Martin, it means a lot. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Wasn't a christian child/teacher banned from wearing a cross? If so this is plainly double standards in a christian country. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mike Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 PC gone mad again? .. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted July 29, 2008 Author Share Posted July 29, 2008 Kara = Dagger You say dagger, I say sword - reckon the school will have to give everyone the right underwear and a wooden comb now too? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 .. Dude! You like nearly reposted yourself! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Everyone involved in this case should be lined up and shot for public pleasure A complete waste of money, the school should have expelled her before it got this far. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 You say dagger, I say sword - There's a huge difference. This one time, at Ninja camp..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted July 29, 2008 Author Share Posted July 29, 2008 Wasn't a christian child/teacher banned from wearing a cross? If so this is plainly double standards in a christian country. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551391/School-ban-for-crosses-but-not-Muslim-lockets.html And hot cross buns were banned in schools too I think. I like hot cross buns. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kosmic Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Kara=bangle not dagger/sword, thats kirpan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 The late, great Bill Hicks on the subject of religious pendants: A lot of Christians wear crosses around their necks. You think when Jesus comes back he ever wants to see a f**king cross? It's like going up to Jackie Onassis wearing a rifle pendant. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Charlotte Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Wasn't a christian child/teacher banned from wearing a cross? If so this is plainly double standards in a christian country. I thought that was an air hostess..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wez Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/1551391/School-ban-for-crosses-but-not-Muslim-lockets.html And hot cross buns were banned in schools too I think. I like hot cross buns. The UK PC crowd have gone mad http://women.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/women/families/article738220.ece Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
michael Posted July 29, 2008 Author Share Posted July 29, 2008 I thought that was an air hostess..... It seems it was, British Airways. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest sunnyG83 Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Kara=bangle not dagger/sword, thats kirpan whoops yeah that one Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Supradan Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wales/7529694.stm My main concern is at how much this must have cost the school to fight in court, what will the pupils have to do without just so this one person can wear a bangle? If I was in charge of the world (one day!) then I'd ban all religious tokens of this type, religion is a mental / spiritual thing, you shouldn't need trinkets, churches, gold candlesticks or fancy hats to believe in these things, just a slightly needy nature, an inability to think for yourself and an interest in fictional matters. Thoughts? What we get for having a bunch of pansy do gooders in power!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gaz1 Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 such a frustrating country we live in:rolleyes: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
carl0s Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 We need Mustafa Kemal Atatürk. The Decree on dress targeted the religious insignia used outside times of worship. Kemal passed a series of laws beginning from 1923, especially the Hat Law of 1925 which introduced the use of Western style hats instead of the fez, and the Law Relating to Prohibited Garments of 1934, which emphasized the need to wear modern suits instead of antiquated religion-based clothing such as the veil and turban. The guidelines for the proper dressing of students and state employees (public space controlled by state) was passed during his lifetime. Mustafa Kemal regarded the fez (in Turkish "fes", which Sultan Mahmud II had originally introduced to the Ottoman Empire's dress code in 1826) as a symbol of oriental backwardness and banned it. He encouraged the Turks to wear modern European attire.[80] He was determined to force the abandonment of the sartorial traditions of the Middle East and finalize a series of dress reforms, which were originally started by Mahmud II.[80] Mustafa Kemal first made the hat compulsory to the civil servants.[80] After most of the relatively better educated civil servants adopted the hat with their own free will, in 1925 Mustafa Kemal wore his "Panama hat" during a public appearance in Kastamonu, one of the most conservative towns in Anatolia, to explain that the hat was the headgear of civilized nations. Even though he personally promoted modern dress on women, he never made specific reference to women’s clothing in the law. In the social conditions of the 1920s and 1930s, he believed that women would adapt to the new way with their own will. He was frequently photographed on public business with his wife Lâtife Uşaklıgil, who originally covered her head in accordance with Islamic tradition, but then threw off the hijab and urged Turkish women to do the same.[81]. He was also frequently photographed on public business with women wearing modern clothes. But it was Atatürk's adopted daughters like Sabiha Gökçen and Afet İnan who provided the real role model for the Turkish women of the future. He wrote: "The religious covering of women will not cause difficulty ... This simple style [of headcovering] is not in conflict with the morals and manners of our society."[82] Atatürk thought that Islam was an obstacle to progress and went a long way to ridding Turkey of its legacy. So, Atatürk banned beards, turbans and the hijab and ordered everyone to wear European dress. He replaced Ottoman history based on ossified notions such as 'religious community' with a more rational understanding of national history. "There is only one civilisation", he declared, the European civilisation. And a secularist society must "imitate it in all respects". Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danny_silva Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 we all know that each country as there own rules.. and i think that it is right to people to move to another country looking for a better life!!(my case) now what i dont agree is people coming in to other countries and do not respect those rules... if the goverment did send them back to there original country after not respecting it, it would be alot easier and nicer to live!! no bullsh*t nothing!! or you live following the rules or go back!! it has been said before, if we went to there country we HAD to go with there rules and no questions!! other thing that really p*sses me off is, if you have a group of kids(15,16.... years of age) they know exackly what they are doing and if they decide to attack someone and that person tries to fight back, he will be called the criminal while they all get away with it... it is bad!! how is this world going to end up?? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RedM Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest suprakings Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 If we went to live in their country Thats a bit silly, just because she/her family are not white does that not make UK their country? Seriously!! As for the case, yes I do agree its a little over the top, considering the fact that sikh people have to follow 5 K's, one of them being they must carry a dagger, another something about oversized underwear etc.. Some people just want to waste the countrys time & money fighting silly cases like this. If she had not worn that bangle it would not have made her any more sikh or pulled her away from her religion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pete Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 My main concern is at how much this must have cost the school to fight in court, Thoughts? If that's your main concern then you've not got much to worry about. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Whoa betide the next school that tries to tell a youngster off for wearing a St Christopher. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gazboy Posted July 29, 2008 Share Posted July 29, 2008 Jingle jangle bingle bangle this verdict is all f*cked up from any angle. The Judiciary of this country really is something else isn't it. They should have told her to f*ck off. Court time is valuable and b*llocks like this just takes up time from more worthy and needing cases. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.