Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

French court rules on Sikh boys


  • Please log in to reply
30 replies to this topic

#1    Talon

Talon

    UM Chess Tournament Champion 2005

  • Member
  • 15,003 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Paisley, Scotland

  • Life, Death, Anime inbetween

Posted 22 October 2004 - 04:56 PM

French court rules on Sikh boys
By Caroline Wyatt
BBC correspondent in Paris  


A French administrative court has ruled on an appeal brought by three Sikh boys who have been excluded from classes for wearing the under-turban.
However, it referred the matter back to the boys' school, and said the issue should be resolved by further mediation between the school and its pupils.

France introduced its new law banning the wearing of all religious symbols from state schools from September.

France's small Sikh community says the under-turban is a valid compromise.

They say the boys should not be excluded.

Muslim pupils have also been affected, with at least five girls now expelled for wearing the Islamic headscarf.

Dialogue

The administrative court has been careful not to set a legal precedent that might give Muslim pupils their own grounds for appeal.

It said the school that had excluded the Sikh boys from classes for wearing the under-turban should continue its dialogue with them within the next 15 days.

Other schools in Paris have accepted Sikh pupils wearing only a discreet under-turban.


But that option was rejected by the Louise Michel school, which argued that there could not be different rules for different religions, and that the law must apply equally to all.

The French authorities admit that when the law was drafted, nobody consulted France's small Sikh community.

The law itself was aimed primarily at removing the Islamic headscarf from schools, thanks to French fear of a growing strain of Islamic fundamentalism among a minority of young Muslims in the country.

This week, at least seven girls have been expelled from their schools for refusing to remove the Islamic headscarf or hijab in class - and some are threatening to bring their own legal appeal against their expulsion.


Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/1/hi/worl...ope/3943733.stm

QUOTE
But that option was rejected by the Louise Michel school, which argued that there could not be different rules for different religions, and that the law must apply equally to all.


I agree, if these pupils don't want to follow the law they can go to a Sikh or Islamic country respectively and wear their turbans or headscarfs.

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -Plato

#2    Lottie

Lottie

    The Nappy Ninja !!

  • Member
  • 7,516 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • "I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me." - Noel Coward

Posted 22 October 2004 - 05:22 PM

France are doing themselves no favours. However this is the law and these people need to abide by it. If they don't like it they can go back to their respective countries.


#3    The Russian Hare

The Russian Hare

    Silent assassin

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,033 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The Hare's Lair

  • Boat Tailed & Hollow Pointed

Posted 22 October 2004 - 05:22 PM

I see no legitimate reason to forbid Muslims and Sikhs from wearing religious head coverings. Over here there would be serious constitutional issues with a law like that.

I plead the Fifth, but if you get pushy with me I'll plead the Second. Posted Image

#4    Talon

Talon

    UM Chess Tournament Champion 2005

  • Member
  • 15,003 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Paisley, Scotland

  • Life, Death, Anime inbetween

Posted 22 October 2004 - 05:41 PM

QUOTE
I see no legitimate reason to forbid Muslims and Sikhs from wearing religious head coverings. Over here there would be serious constitutional issues with a law like that.


Nothing to do with attacking people's rights, they've banned all religions from schools, its just the Muslims and Shiks who beleive they should be a special case and not have to abid by it.

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -Plato

#5    zephyr

zephyr

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2004

Posted 23 October 2004 - 07:54 AM

The new law is a flagrant violation of basic human rights whistling2.gif These people are French Lottie, unless you propose that they also take the right of living in their own country away from them  ohmy.gif


#6    AztecInca

AztecInca

    Martian

  • Member
  • 9,013 posts
  • Joined:13 Apr 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

  • All it takes for evil to triumph, is for good people to do nothing.

Posted 23 October 2004 - 10:33 AM

The law is the law, no matter how wrong it is, these people need to abide by it if they wish to reside in this country, but I hope they put up as much of a fight as possible since this law is a disgrace.
France aren`t doing themselves any favours with this law as lottie said.


#7    Lottie

Lottie

    The Nappy Ninja !!

  • Member
  • 7,516 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • "I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me." - Noel Coward

Posted 23 October 2004 - 10:47 AM

QUOTE(zephyr @ Oct 23 2004, 08:54 AM)
The new law is a flagrant violation of basic human rights whistling2.gif These people are French Lottie, unless you propose that they also take the right of living in their own country away from them† ohmy.gif

View Post



This is the law. Whether these people are French citizens or not they have to abide by this. If they are not prepared to abide by it then they need to find some other country where they are allowed to practice their religion freely.
I never said this was right. I actually said that France are doing themselves no favours by doing this but that is the way it is.
Religion does nothing more than create huge divides with civilisation, it is politics. I can totally understand the French in this aspect. If certain people were not so fantatical about this then there would not be an issue.Certain religions have shown us that people even in this day and age are so fantatical and so brainwashed by religion that they will live and die for it and predjudice evryone else around them. This is not the way the western civilisation exists.
  In England there is a phrase, a stupid one at that but it comes in nicely now...Like it or lump it. Its that simple.

Edited by Lottie, 23 October 2004 - 11:05 AM.


#8    zephyr

zephyr

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2004

Posted 23 October 2004 - 04:23 PM

My goodness, this reasoning sounds so familiar rolleyes.gif  "Dress and do things the way WE think you should do or else..." ohmy.gif  I would not get home sick anywhere if everyone thought like that thumbsup.gif


#9    Talon

Talon

    UM Chess Tournament Champion 2005

  • Member
  • 15,003 posts
  • Joined:29 Jan 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Paisley, Scotland

  • Life, Death, Anime inbetween

Posted 23 October 2004 - 05:11 PM

QUOTE
The new law is a flagrant violation of basic human rights  These people are French Lottie, unless you propose that they also take the right of living in their own country away from them 


Bugger all to do with human rights, and I couldn't give a stuff about their citizenship. When their parents/grandparents moved to France they agreed to live by the laws of the FRENCH, in the country of the FRENCH, and abide by what the FRENCH felt was acceptable or not in their own country. They choose to move to the Frenchís country, the French didnít choose to move to theirs. The Christians abide by the rule, the Jews abide the rule. If these second or third generations can't abide by the rule then they should maybe go back to the country their parents/grandparents fled if they which of course donít carry out any 'violation of basic human rights', see how great things are. Maybe doing that would make them learn some gratitude to western culture and practices.

"Wise men talk because they have something to say; fools, because they have to say something." -Plato

#10    zephyr

zephyr

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 888 posts
  • Joined:19 Sep 2004

Posted 24 October 2004 - 09:56 AM

These poor girls have no choice but to obide by ugly rules! The fact that people are forced to obide by certain rules dont change the fact that those laws might be in violation of their human rights, and these new laws violate women's freedom to dress as they like, unless of course you believe that these rights dont apply to Muslim women!
Well, when the French moved to north African countries, they took their own laws at gun point with them and forced the natives to submit or face torture and death!


#11    Lottie

Lottie

    The Nappy Ninja !!

  • Member
  • 7,516 posts
  • Joined:13 Oct 2003
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:London

  • "I like long walks, especially when they are taken by people who annoy me." - Noel Coward

Posted 24 October 2004 - 10:03 AM

QUOTE
these new laws violate women's freedom to dress as they like, unless of course you believe that these rights dont apply to Muslim women!


Oh and as if Muslim women have any rights whatsoever! I don't believe for one moment that they actually like wearing the attire thay do. I do not believe its a choice they themselves would make. Its all forced upon them by religion. I am sure that the minority of these women would like nothing more than to dress as normal westerners but they are dictated to and opressed by others and their human rights viloated because their right to choose has been taken away. All in the name of religion!


#12    bathory

bathory

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,302 posts
  • Joined:20 Nov 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 24 October 2004 - 10:41 AM

the list of basic human rights keeps getting longer


#13    Asterix

Asterix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2004

  • By Belenos and Toutatis!

Posted 24 October 2004 - 10:56 AM

The basic problem regarding this controversial law is that not only it forbids something as basic as the freedom to choose your own clothing (as long as it's not violating the public nudity laws, and it's not) but that it helds different interpretation depending on religion-a serious offense against freedom and human rights. Meaning, that it's ok to wear a scarf if you're a christian woman, and it's ok to wear a cross neckless if you're muslim, but not other way around. I wonder, is it ok to wear a scarf if you're a muslim but a man?

Plus the fact that if you're a christian you can wear a cross inside your clothing and nobody notices, while a muslim woman can't wear her scarf this way. When this law was made, it was made with a christian mentality, clearly.

It's just not fair, pure and simple..

As for statements like "The law it's the law, obey or leave", these sound bit too much like KKK legislation to me.  disgust.gif

Posted Image
There are two kinds of idiots - those who don't take action because they have received a threat, and those who think they are taking action because they have issued a threat.
Paulo Coelho

#14    bathory

bathory

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,302 posts
  • Joined:20 Nov 2003
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Australia

Posted 24 October 2004 - 11:21 AM

and you know what? i say tough sh**, thats what the majority want. To compare it to the views of the KKK is rediculous, what the law wants is for no overt religious symoblism in public schools, it doesn't infringe upon other groups outside of the government, hell nuns have to go without the penguin hats if i remember correctly

Edited by bathory, 24 October 2004 - 11:24 AM.


#15    Asterix

Asterix

    Astral Projection

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 670 posts
  • Joined:12 Jul 2004

  • By Belenos and Toutatis!

Posted 24 October 2004 - 12:58 PM

QUOTE(bathory @ Oct 24 2004, 02:21 PM)
and you know what? i say tough sh**, thats what the majority want. To compare it to the views of the KKK is rediculous, what the law wants is for no overt religious symoblism in public schools, it doesn't infringe upon other groups outside of the government, hell nuns have to go without the penguin hats if i remember correctly

View Post



One of the definition lines of "Democracy" is:
The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community

The phrase "tough sh**, thats what the majority want" has nothing to do with real democracy. In addition, it's not rediculous at all to compare it with KKK (albeit, in a metaphoric and pointing way-I'm not saying the french society or goverment in its total has anything common). My point of comparison was that it touches a "holier than thou" approach, a modus operandi that reminds *insert missisipi accent here* "The good Lawd has sent his son, his only son to save us good hard-working white folks from the savages"

Posted Image
There are two kinds of idiots - those who don't take action because they have received a threat, and those who think they are taking action because they have issued a threat.
Paulo Coelho




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users