Quote:
Originally Posted by danielf
I think HTBM raises an interesting point then. If a Christian school can force all pupils to wear a sign on their uniform that is widely recognised as a symbol of Christianity, then why can't a Muslim school force all pupils to wear a garment as part of their uniform that is widely recognised as a symbol of the Muslim faith?
Edit: I actually thought I replied to Chris...
|
I think I introduced the idea of crosses earlier, and I said at the time it wasn't an exact analogy ... it turns out it's rather less exact than I'd hoped.
As Foreverwar pointed out, the cross is a symbol of the religion. There is no obligation, or suggestion, or interpretation of scripture that says it must be worn.
The headscarf, on the other hand, is an expression of a particular interpretation of morality. The cross does not imply a moral stance, the headscarf does.
Once upon a time the cross may have been worn specifically as a symbol of allegiance, but (sadly) these days it's an item of jewellery and, in the case of these school uniforms, a quasi-heraldic device, and cannot by any reasonable person be taken as a statement of the morals or beliefs of the one wearing it.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HBTM
tosh. you can have a school logo without christian symbolism, indeed a number of c of e schools do that. its not just identifying the school but the school's affiliation to a particular faith. a veil is hardly a symbol of islam in the same way the cross is a a christian symbol - it is the iconic symbol of christianity.what would your position be if the headscarf had the school logo on it to help identify the school?
|
Now you're the one with the faulty analogy. If you're talking about iconic symbols, the Islamic school should have a crescent in its logo and be satisifed with that.