School forces girls to wear head scarves

[danielf]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Not all regard it as compulsory, in fact to do so may stray close to idolatry worship. The cross symbol should not really be seen a neccessity to Christians however I understand that if a school chooses to have it as part of their symbol or logo then yes of course it should be worn by all pupils.

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...

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

whilst the head-scarf is an interpretation (imo) of modesty, which is regarded as a requirement in the Q'uran.

Which means that it defiantly has religious overtones, as opposed to 'simply being part of the uniform' like the chap being interviewed tried to say.

[Russ]

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...

Wearing a sign (or logo) on the uniform and wearing a seperate item of clothing are 2 different things. If for example the muslim school insisted all pupils have a badge or logo with a veil on it or some other symbol of Islam then I'd say they are perfectly within their rights.

The logo identifies which school the pupil is part of. The veil or scarf doesn't.

[TheDaddy]

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...

Do they force them, my son is allowed to wear any type of dark blue jumper we choose within reason, not just the official school one's.

[danielf]

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Do they force them, my son is allowed to wear any type of dark blue jumper we choose within reason, not just the official school one's.

So there's no compulsory logo (on any garment)? (Thankfully, I never had to wear a school uniform, so I'm blissfully ignorant here)?

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?

And that is where the problem arises.

The cross is recognised as a symbol of Christianity because Jesus died upon it.

The head-scarf is an individual's/imam's/family's interpretation of what "modesty" is - if the majority of Muslim women in this country do not wear head-scarves, how can it be stated that this is "widely recognised as a symbol of the Muslim faith".

In France, only 20% of Muslim woman wear head-scarves, and from my personal experience (living in Leeds, working in Bradford, daughter at Uni in Leicester) that correlates in the UK - not exactly a majority, is it?
http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=article&id=542

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by danielf

So there's no compulsory logo (on any garment)? (Thankfully, I never had to wear a school uniform, so I'm blissfully ignorant here)?

I am not saying that, all I am saying is that from my experience the logo is not compulsory.

[hatedbythemail]

Originally Posted by Russ D

Wearing a sign (or logo) on the uniform and wearing a seperate item of clothing are 2 different things. If for example the muslim school insisted all pupils have a badge or logo with a veil on it or some other symbol of Islam then I'd say they are perfectly within their rights.

The logo identifies which school the pupil is part of. The veil or scarf doesn't.

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?

---------- Post added at 15:34 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I am not saying that, all I am saying is that from my experience the logo is not compulsory.

if its sewn into a shirt or blazer its fairly compulsory ;-)

---------- Post added at 15:35 ---------- Previous post was at 15:34 ----------

Originally Posted by foreverwar

And that is where the problem arises.

The cross is recognised as a symbol of Christianity because Jesus died upon it.

The head-scarf is an individual's/imam's/family's interpretation of what "modesty" is - if the majority of Muslim women in this country do not wear head-scarves, how can it be stated that this is "widely recognised as a symbol of the Muslim faith".

In France, only 20% of Muslim woman wear head-scarves, and from my personal experience (living in Leeds, working in Bradford, daughter at Uni in Leicester) that correlates in the UK - not exactly a majority, is it?
http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=article&id=542

so its part of the uniform then? so why the fuss?

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

I am not saying that, all I am saying is that from my experience the logo is not compulsory.

My son is at a CofE High School - the logo'ed items are preferred, but not compulsory (but the replacement item must be close to the same "uniform" colour).

We don't buy the school jumper because it is acrylic, feels awful, and stretches out of shape - an equivalent one of the same colour is acceptable.

[TheDaddy]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

tosh.
---------- Post added at 15:34 ---------- Previous post was at 15:33 ----------

if its sewn into a shirt or blazer its fairly compulsory ;-)

For instance my son has two official school jumpers with school logo's on, he also has another with no logo at all on it, all conform to the uniform criteria.

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.

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.

[Russ]

Originally Posted by hatedbythemail

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?

You've missed the point entirely. Of course you can have a school symbol without its chosen faith being represented on it. What I'm trying to say is whatever logo the school chooses is something I believe all pupils should wear, whether religious symbol attached or not. It identifies which school the pupil comes from.

I don't see why a school should make a pupil wear an extra item of uniform in order for them to comply with its faith - and that would be my position had it been a Christian, Muslim, Catholic or Sikh school.

[Saaf_laandon_mo]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

<my bad> for not being clear - more about the cross being recognised as a symbol of faith, whilst the head-scarf is an interpretation (imo) of modesty, which is regarded as a requirement in the Q'uran.

Its the wearing of the veil (i.e full niqaab) that is a case of wider interpretation and how far one wants to define modestly covering up the body. This is where the interpreation regarding covering oneself modesty comes most into play.

Most scholars and followers of Islam would agree - Id say over 90% - (whether they wear it or not) that the covering of the head (wearing of the hijaab) is seen as being a necessity for muslim women under Islam. i.e the minimum requirement when displaying modesty, and is seen as a requirement for women to don.Whether they choose to follow that or not is up to them.
I have yet to meet a muslim woman who doesn't share this view (whether they wear it or not)

Originally Posted by Saaf_laandon_mo

Its the wearing of the veil (i.e full niqaab) that is a case of wider interpretation and how far one wants to define modestly covering up the body.

Most scholars and followers of Islam would agree - Id say over 90% - (whether they wear it or not) that the covering of the head (wearing of the hijaab) is seen as being a necessity for muslim women. Whether they choose to follow that or not is up to them.

So it is optional for one group of people, but compulsory for pupils??

btw, from the teachersnet web site
http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/management/atoz/u/uniform/
The DfES does not consider it appropriate that any pupil should be disciplined for non-compliance with a school uniform policy, which results from them having to adhere to a particular cultural, race or religious dress code.


hbtm, I didn't understand your reply - what was this in reference to?
"so its part of the uniform then? so why the fuss?"
when I had said
"The head-scarf is an individual's/imam's/family's interpretation of what "modesty" is - if the majority of Muslim women in this country do not wear head-scarves, how can it be stated that this is "widely recognised as a symbol of the Muslim faith".

In France, only 20% of Muslim woman wear head-scarves, and from my personal experience (living in Leeds, working in Bradford, daughter at Uni in Leicester) that correlates in the UK - not exactly a majority, is it?
http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=article&id=542"

Don't see the connection :-(

[danielf]

Originally Posted by foreverwar

And that is where the problem arises.

The cross is recognised as a symbol of Christianity because Jesus died upon it.

The head-scarf is an individual's/imam's/family's interpretation of what "modesty" is - if the majority of Muslim women in this country do not wear head-scarves, how can it be stated that this is "widely recognised as a symbol of the Muslim faith".

In France, only 20% of Muslim woman wear head-scarves, and from my personal experience (living in Leeds, working in Bradford, daughter at Uni in Leicester) that correlates in the UK - not exactly a majority, is it?
http://islamlib.com/en/page.php?page=article&id=542

Ok then, but if the headscarf is not a symbol of the Muslim faith, then why is it problematic in this case? Because it is optional? So is wearing a cross around your neck, or on your breast. I would think that it is problematic, precisely because it is preceived by some as a symbol of the Muslim faith. Now, presumably, people disagree with pupils being forced to wear religious symbols, in which case it could be argued that the same would apply to logos with a cross? (Mind you, I'd prefer the absence of any religious reference)