France unveils 'secular charter' for all schools

[tay]

Another question that crossed my mind. I'd been reading that some women with hair loss for whatever reason, whether cancer or otherwise, would rather cover their head with a veil that with a whig, no religious intent at all.

.

Covering their head or face? There is a difference......................



Birmingham college bans the burka


Face-covering religious veils, including Muslim burkas and niqabs have been banned

Religious veils have been banned at Birmingham Metropolitan College for ‘security’ reasons, provoking anger among Muslim students and staff.

As the niqab veil leaves only a small gap for the eyes, college management has deemed it a risk, stating that individuals should be ‘easily identifiable at all times’ so that all students can study in a ‘safe and welcoming learning environment’. Other clothing to be removed on the college grounds includes hoodies, hats and caps.

The ban has sent shockwaves around the Muslim community, with one 17-year-old girl calling the decision ‘discriminatory’ and ‘disgusting’. Another student explained that she and her Muslim peers had offered to show their faces to security men so that their IDs could be checked, but that her suggestion had been rejected.

more


http://www.independent.co.uk/student/news/birmingham-college-bans-the-burka-8807148.html

 

[Machjo]

I can agree with banning niqab and burqa, but that's a different matter. The hijab merely covers the head. Big deal.

Besides, now it seems Idle No More has jumed into this debate too:

Idle No More contre la Charte | Autochtones : hier, aujourd’hui, demain | Radio-Canada.ca

Good points they make. How do 'Quebec values' and indigenous rights harmonize, seeing that even the French and the English are immigrants compared to indigenous peoples?

 

[55Mercury]

So I guess now it will be illegal when entering a Royal Canadian Legion in Quebec (if there are any - I have no idea) to remove your hat because there is a picture of the Queen on the wall, because after all she is the head of the Anglican Church!

lol them social nazis got their work cut out for them!

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

So I guess now it will be illegal when entering a Royal Canadian Legion in Quebec (if there are any - I have no idea) to remove your hat because there is a picture of the Queen on the wall, because after all she is the head of the Anglican Church!

lol them social nazis got their work cut out for them!

Ummm. . . who cares?

 

[petros]

Can I still wear my faerie hair clips? What about my Peter PAN artsy fartsy art shirt?

 

[55Mercury]

Ummm. . . who cares?

um.... I dunno. what's the text color ( < I kin speak murkin) for rhetoric hyperbole?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

um.... I dunno. what's the text color ( < I kin speak murkin) for rhetoric hyperbole?

Yep. I envy France. If this is their biggest problem, they're in great shape!

 

[WLDB]

So I guess now it will be illegal when entering a Royal Canadian Legion in Quebec (if there are any - I have no idea) to remove your hat because there is a picture of the Queen on the wall, because after all she is the head of the Anglican Church!

lol them social nazis got their work cut out for them!

I wouldnt mind getting rid of those pictures. I imagine they are rare in Quebec anyway with or without this charter.

Can I still wear my faerie hair clips? What about my Peter PAN artsy fartsy art shirt?

They probably were already not allowed to wear those things at work. You cant here at most work places.

The government is the employwer, but the government is also supposed to represent all Quebecers, not just those who identify with a cross on the flag.

Are you suggesting they change the flag?

 

[Machjo]

Are you suggesting they change the flag?

No more than I'm suggesting that they remove the crucifix from the wall of the National Assemblyor from Mount Royal. However, if they can have a crucifix on their flag, on the wall of the National Assembly's blue room (where the depbates happen) and on Mount Royal (public property), then certainly it would be a little two-faced to then say one cannot wear a hijab or turban for the sake of secular values. Again, face coverings are an exception except maybe in some medical or other special cases I can't even immagine. But certainly head covering should be no issue if you can have cruficifixes all over the government.