Muslim student loses legal challenge over school's 'prayer ban'

[pellinore]

A Muslim student has lost a legal challenge against a school previously dubbed Britain's strictest over its ban on "prayer rituals".

The pupil, who cannot be named for legal reasons, took the action against Michaela Community School in Brent, north London, claiming the policy "uniquely" affects her faith, with prayer one of its five pillars.

The High Court heard in January how she alleged the school's stance is "the kind of discrimination which makes religious minorities feel alienated from society".

Defending the policy, lawyers for the school argued it is "justified" and "proportionate" after it faced death and bomb threats linked to religious observance on site.

Muslim student loses legal challenge against Michaela Community School's 'prayer ban' | UK News | Sky News

Edited April 16 by pellinore

[Kittens Are Jerks]

If the student's religion is that important to her, she should transfer to a faith-based school. Boom! Problem solved.

[pellinore]

2 hours ago, Kittens Are Jerks said:

If the student's religion is that important to her, she should transfer to a faith-based school. Boom! Problem solved.

It's a pity all schools don't ban all religion. 

The school argued its prayer policy was justified after it faced death and bomb threats linked to religious observance on site.

The pupil, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told the court the policy had "fundamentally changed" how she felt "about being a Muslim in this country".

So perhaps she will leave the UK and go somewhere she feels more at home?

[Kittens Are Jerks]

23 minutes ago, pellinore said:

It's a pity all schools don't ban all religion.

I've no problem with faith-based schools, but all other schools must remain secular and not accommodate any religion. The school's headteacher was quite right in arguing the necessity and importance of an environment "where children of all races and religions can thrive".

28 minutes ago, pellinore said:

The pupil, who cannot be named for legal reasons, told the court the policy had "fundamentally changed" how she felt "about being a Muslim in this country".

How over-dramatic and disingenuous of her. She herself admitted that before the prayer policy was introduced, she believed prayer was not permitted at the school and that she made up for missed prayers when she got home. The new policy in no way affected any of that.

[pellinore]

On 4/16/2024 at 3:01 PM, Kittens Are Jerks said:

I've no problem with faith-based schools

I have. We are trying to educate children; how can we do that if we are also indoctrinating them with nonsensical two-thousand-year-old philosophies that serve no purpose other than causing division? Would you have no problem with children being taught Satanism or Scientology along with science?

[pellinore]

On 4/16/2024 at 3:01 PM, Kittens Are Jerks said:

She herself admitted that before the prayer policy was introduced, she believed prayer was not permitted at the school and that she made up for missed prayers when she got home. 

It was a test case. If the West insists the Islam religion and its rituals are nonsensical, they will have to admit the Christian religion and its rituals are also nonsensical. Anyway, it is all nonsensical. We have all moved on from 2000 years ago and don't believe nonsense.

[Kittens Are Jerks]

15 minutes ago, pellinore said:

I have. We are trying to educate children; how can we do that if we are also indoctrinating them with nonsensical two-thousand-year-old philosophies that serve no purpose other than causing division? Would you have no problem with children being taught Satanism or Scientology along with science?

I despise all religions, and whilst I would indeed have a problem with children being exposed to religious learning, I don't care enough to interfere with other people's choices — as long as they don't interfere with mine.

[Duke Wellington]

2 hours ago, pellinore said:

I have. We are trying to educate children; how can we do that if we are also indoctrinating them with nonsensical two-thousand-year-old philosophies that serve no purpose other than causing division? Would you have no problem with children being taught Satanism or Scientology along with science?

Religion is a protected characteristic.

If people follow a recognised religion it is their right to do so.

[itsnotoutthere]

 

[Kittens Are Jerks]

On 4/17/2024 at 5:55 PM, pellinore said:

I have. We are trying to educate children; how can we do that if we are also indoctrinating them with nonsensical two-thousand-year-old philosophies that serve no purpose other than causing division? Would you have no problem with children being taught Satanism or Scientology along with science?

In hindsight, the one thing I failed to address was the teaching of science along with religion. Members here who are religious can correct me if I'm wrong, but I don't think that an acceptance of religion necessarily means a total rejection of science. For some scientists, these worlds can co-exist. But that's all moot anyway, because ultimately, religious people have a right to faith-based schools, just as others have a right to fully secular ones.

Edited April 20 by Kittens Are Jerks
Minor edit.

[OpenMindedSceptic]

On 4/18/2024 at 1:17 AM, Duke Wellington said:

Religion is a protected characteristic.

If people follow a recognised religion it is their right to do so.

Yeah, about protected characteristics; they need to go.