Help Sitemap Home Skip Navigation Contact Us Disability Statement


Only some beliefs count

Premium Article !

Your account has been frozen. For your available options click the below button.

Options

Premium Article !

To read this article in full you must have registered and have a Premium Content Subscription with the The Scotsman site.

Subscribe

Registered Article !

To read this article in full you must be registered with the site.

Sign In
Register
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image
Click on thumbnail to view image

Published Date: 31 July 2008
Whether it's bangles at school or crosses in the workplace, sexual orientation regulations or human embryology, the case involving a Sikh schoolgirl (your report, 30 July) brings into focus yet again the situation whereby some people's beliefs are deemed to be worthy of special treatment under UK law just because those beliefs are grounded in religion. We all hold passionate beliefs and deep convictions, but only those who claim "it's my religion" have their beliefs g
We need an explanation from government and the courts as to why they hold belief in a god in higher esteem than any other kind of passionately held belief. This is all the more urgent since, as a result of the Sikh schoolgirl case, every other girl in that school has now become a victim of discrimination on grounds of belief, even though wearing a bangle might be every bit as important to them as it is to Ms Singh.

ALISTAIR McBAY

National Secular Society

Atholl Crescent, Edinburgh



The full article contains 168 words and appears in The Scotsman newspaper.
Page 1 of 1

  • Last Updated: 30 July 2008 8:24 PM
  • Source: The Scotsman
  • Location: Edinburgh
 
1

Colin Wilson,

Aberdeen. 31/07/2008 06:27:23
That's absolutely right. The response to "it's my religion" ought to be "so what"?
2

WJohn,

Wonderland 31/07/2008 09:23:24
The 2001 census reveals that 390,000 people across England and Wales are devoted followers of the Jedi "faith" made famous by the blockbuster films.

Say no more.
3

Upbeat,

31/07/2008 10:12:14
The wonder is that this matter was permitted to escalate so far that it took High Court Justices to "draw the line in the sand" around it.

Modern life is full of such stupidity. Where in previous eras those with a grievance would have been quietly summoned around a table to sort it out, now we have a legal framework, most of which is so opaque that no one understands it at all. Too much modern law is so poorly drafted that the precise intention in Law is never clear. In the UK for a deacde legislation has been enacted by a Government elected with a crushing majority. This has led to a disregard for proper debate, and the 'rubber stamping" of legislative measures that required proper scrutiny. The safeguards were further undermined by the deliberate emascualtion of the House of Lords. While the person responsible for all this muddle now struts the international stage , as some kind of celebrity superstar, mere mortals are left to pick up and carry the can .

Clearly it is quite daft that the matter of wearing 'bangles' at school should have required high court intervention. It is even more daft that the British still cannot see that trivial matters should be resolved face to face immediately by those concernned, so that as swiftly as practical a satisfactory behavioural compromise can be agreed.
4

G,

dundy 31/07/2008 10:20:02
The school was dense beyond belief...their "special" treatment of this girl was stupid...removing her from normal classes put her but keeping her in school was wishy wasy and poorly thought through....if they had stuck to their guns and said no jewellery and forced her to seek another school then their stance wuold have been creditible...
5

Miss H,

31/07/2008 12:21:04
Perhaps the real issue is why the school banned girls from wearing bangles in the first place. I agree with having a uniform but banning jewellery seems to me to be taking it too far.

It may be a minor issue but the exercise of arbitrary power for so sensible purpose whether by a school or any other institution should be resisted. So well done to the girl who did, whatever her motivation was.

6

zeno,

www.thinkhumanism.com 31/07/2008 12:27:13
The full judgment can be read here: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/Admin/2008/1865.html

I've not been able to read all of it yet, but health and safety did form part of the case by the LEA. Probably worth reading the whole thing to get a good understanding of what the issues are actually are.
7

A McBay,

Edinburgh 31/07/2008 12:32:11
A gremlin has messed up the online version of this letter. Where the frst para ends, it should go on to say:

"...graced with privileged treatment. It seems the religious are as quick to demand exemptions from anti-discrimination law as they are to demand that no-one discriminates against them"
8

Miss H,

31/07/2008 12:57:48
7 Hmm. having read it briefly, what happened to this girl seems outrageous. Talk about making a mountain out of a molehill!

I find this section actually quite chilling:

Upon her return to school, the claimant was interviewed by Miss Rosser and she was told that she would be permitted to attend the school wearing her Kara but only on the condition that she would be taught in isolation and that she would be kept socially segregated from other pupils. Miss Rosser explained this in a letter to the claimant's parents of 12 July 2007. The segregation was strictly enforced and she was even accompanied to the toilet by a member of staff, who waited outside.

This was a girl who had a good academic record and had been a prefect. I find it hard to believe that things could have been allowed to escalate to that extent because she wore a bangle. Obviously something else must have been going on in this school. But surely the school’s management policy should have been focussed on damping down any problems about race and religion and so on, not exacerbating them.
9

saneatheist,

Bixter 31/07/2008 18:14:43
So now we have a situation where 599 girls are being discriminated against, by not being able to wear jewelry, I wonder what their reaction will be towards the "special" pupil? It's utter madness.
10

Moscow,

01/08/2008 17:50:07
The teaching unions in Britain are the most extreme in the world, if they could ban a Sikh bangle, with its associations with military sacrifice for King and Country, they could ban anything, they therefore needed to find a school which was habitually in breach of its obligations under the Race Relations Act.

Rhondda Cynon Taf Council found it difficult to fund a school which was breaking the law, that was one of the problems the council had.

The Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000 made a requirement for institutions, including schools, to have Race Equality Policies in place by the end of May 2002. An audit of Aberdare Girls’ School that took place in May 2007 identified that the school did not have a Race Equality Policy, in terms of the requirement of the Race Relations (Amendment) Act 2000, in place.

The teaching unions therefore had the school, they needed to ban a Sikh bangle. The teaching unions are the thought police who rule us by victimizing our children.
11

Moscow,

01/08/2008 17:58:27
"if they had stuck to their guns and said no jewellery and forced her to seek another school then their stance wuold have been creditible..."

The teaching unions wanted it to be humiliating, nasty, the school was operated without regard for the law, and that's how they knew what school to pick.

Bad though our teachers are, they needed to find a school, which was obnoxious enough to do what was needed and one which had a Sikh.

It isn't that easy, it took a couple of years. When they did find the school, they went for their gamble, which they thought, they would win. But they were unlucky, some of the judiciary have had enough of their legal pranks.

So the unions were as bad or worse than the BNP. That's why they're whing to the TES etc. Can you name me one union which isn't anti-Polish? They all support the humiliations of Polish kids.

They'll ban anything except sex offenders. That's the kind of teaching unions we are pampering, vile, anti-faith bogoted thugs.

 

Comment on this Story

 

In order to post comments you must Register or Sign In

 
 
RSS Feed of this article's comments
Delivery formats: RSS, Atom, Javascript & Email
 
  

 
 


Sister Newspapers:
Press Complaints Commission

This website and its associated newspaper adheres to the Press Complaints Commission’s Code of Practice. If you have a complaint about editorial content which relates to inaccuracy or intrusion, then contact the Editor by clicking here.

If you remain dissatisfied with the response provided then you can contact the PCC by clicking here.