Here we go...................again

[Guest rance]

Dagger,

The point is that if I chose to move to another country I would assume that I might not have everything exactly the same as in my original country and might have to be flexible and not expect the whole country to change to fit my sensitivities.

Canada does an amazing job of respecting others religious and cultural differences, is it too much to ask the same of others who chose to come over here to live?

If this is such an important issue to her religiously, why wait the 5 years?

[chockalicious]

I would bet that if you moved your family to Israel or Saudi Arabia and you were offended by their customs and traditions they would say too bad.It is now politically incorrect to say Merry Christmas...where does it end?

Israel is a pretty secular place despite it being a Jewish state. While you are right that they would not care if you are offended they would really not care if you chose to celebrate your own way.

Dragging out the Saudi example is a non starter. It never suprises me that they always get brought out for these arguements as they are the most severe in their belief. Why not use Kuwait or Dubai where you can in fact see all kinds of decorations during the Christmas season.

It is NOT politically incorrect to say "Merry Christmas". Some retailers made a choice that "Happy Holidays" works better as it is more inclusive. I personally can't recall ever seeing a news story where someone was up in arms because they were wished a "Merry Christmas". I still hear "Merry Christmas" all the time.

As for singing Christmas carols in school, I have no problem with it as long as they are secular. I don't think it is fair for anyone to have to sing about Jesus in a public school, there are pleanty of other venues for that.

As an aside I received a form this week from my daughter's public school here in YYC. It was letting us know that the Gideon society will be handing out New Testaments in the schools here with parent's permission.

I find this wildly inappropriate just as I would if they wanted to hand out the Koran, the Torah or any other religous book.

Religion should be taught in schools as a comparative course so that childeren have an understanding of what other religions believe. Take an academic approach for better understanding. If you want religous indoctrination then stay out of public schools.

[Guest rattler]

As an aside I received a form this week from my daughter's public school here in YYC.  It was letting us know that the Gideon society will be handing out New Testaments in the schools here with parent's permission.

I find this wildly inappropriate just as I would if they wanted to hand out the Koran, the Torah or any other religous book. 

Religion should be taught in schools as a comparative course so that childeren have an understanding of what other religions believe.  Take an academic approach for better understanding.  If you want religous indoctrination then stay out of public schools.

As an agnostic I believe that all of our children should have access to this type of material so they can read / review it and then make an informed decision on what their belief should or should not be. So on that basis I would encourage schools and parents to support the provision of religious material (from all religions) if the religious organization wishes to provide the material at their expense. This does seem to complement your desire to have Religion taught in schools, any teaching about religion has to include their documents.

Knowledge is power.

[Guest rattler]

Since Saudi Arabia was mentioned earlier, the following article may be of interest and for once I would bet we all agree that this is wrong.

Saudi defends verdict against gang-rape victim

Tue Nov 20, 2007 10:37am EST

RIYADH (Reuters) - Saudi Arabia defended on Tuesday a court's decision to sentence a woman who was gang-raped to 200 lashes of the whip, after the United States described the verdict as "astonishing".

The 19-year-old Shi'ite woman from the town of Qatif in the Eastern Province and an unrelated male companion were abducted and raped by seven men in 2006.

Ruling according to Saudi Arabia's strict reading of Islamic law, a court had originally sentenced the woman to 90 lashes and the rapists to jail terms of between 10 months and five years. It blamed the woman for being alone with an unrelated man.

Last week the Supreme Judicial Council increased the sentence to 200 lashes and six months in prison and ordered the rapists to serve between two and nine years in jail.

The ruling provoked rare criticism from the United States, which is trying to persuade Saudi Arabia to attend a Middle East peace conference in Annapolis, Maryland next week.

A State Department spokesman told reporters on Monday that "most (people) would find this relatively astonishing that something like this happens".

The court also took the unusual step of initiating disciplinary procedures against her lawyer, Abdul-Rahman al-Lahem, forcibly removing him from the case for having talked about it to the media.

"The Ministry of Justice welcomes constructive criticism ... The system allows appeals without resort to the media," said Tuesday's statement issued on the official news agency SPA.

It berated media for not specifying that three judges, not one, issued the recent ruling and reiterated that the "charges were proven" against the woman.

It also repeated the judges' attack against Lahem last week, saying he had "spoken insolently about the judicial system and challenged laws and regulations".

Lahem was not available for comment.

New York-based Human Rights Watch has called on King Abdullah, who last month announced plans to overhaul the system, to drop all charges against the woman.

A series of erratic verdicts have focused attention on the Saudi legal system, which is dominated by clerics who adhere to the kingdom's austere Sunni form of Islamic law. Personal status law remains uncodified and the system does not recognize the concept of precedent.

(Reporting by Andrew Hammond; Editing by Caroline Drees)

© Reuters2007All rights reserved

[Kip Powick]

A compromise has been reached in the case of a Muslim woman suspended from her job at Pearson International Airport because of the length of her skirt.

Halima Muse was suspended in August from her job as a screener with a security firm for wearing a skirt longer than the knee-length one supplied with her uniform.

The Teamsters union says Garda has agreed to offer the 33-year-old woman a full-time administrative job in civilian attire at her previous salary and to pay her full back pay for the time she was suspended.

The union says Muse will remain in the new position until the Canadian Air Transport Security Authority completes a review of the uniform policy.

Muse, a practicing Muslim, wanted to conform with the Islamic dress code that requires clothes to cover the body except the face, hands and feet.

The Teamsters union and the Canadian Council on American-Islamic Relations said Monday that they filed a religious discrimination complaint on behalf of Muse.

[GDR]

Why did we have to go through anothe divisve public debate to come to this decision?

[Moon The Loon]

Y'know, in a secular society with historic Christian traditions as in which we live in North America, religious based holidays follow the tradition.

Maybe we need a combined society, one in which our Christian traditions are not subjugated but other major religions are incorporated into our secular laws. I figure we'd get an extra 20 statutory holidays a year. If we can turn this emotional debate (my god is bigger than your god) into a monetary debate and one of lifestyle, I figger much of the underlying pettiness that so many people continue to die for will disappear. Most will be honoured when they should and will have the time to spend with each other to discuss ipso facto resolve any differences they may have with each other's beliefs.

The problem of course is the determination of just what is a major religion because by definition, what is a major religion could be said to discriminate against what is not. Which restarts the timer of the Intolerant.

Is Hinduism a major religion [in our society]? Is Inuit spiritualism a major religion? How about followers of the Latter Day Saints? How about the thousands of churches founded on premises based fundamentally on tax evasion?

So by the mathematical premise reductio ad absurdum, we should have no holidays based upon religious tradition.

This would be the New Canada.

Management would be happy; workers would continue to complain; life would go on as it does today.

Amen, In'sh'Allah

Point Of Post?

Labour laws, contracts, etc would follow.

[Guest rattler]

Seems like a good and acceptable compromise.

Alberta soccer approves Sports hijabs for players

Last Updated: Tuesday, December 18, 2007 | 1:23 PM MT

CBC News

Girls will be allowed to play soccer while wearing traditional Muslim headscarves, the Alberta Soccer Association decided on Tuesday.

The group temporarily banned players from wearing hijabs on the pitch after a referee said a 14-year-old girl's headscarf posed a safety risk and asked her to leave a game in Calgary last month.

After a review, the association said sports-type hijabs, which are not tied under a player's neck, will be allowed on the field as long as they have been inspected by the referee before any game begins.

The ASA had been following international soccer rules which forbid all headgear, including sweatbands.

In a news release Tuesday, it referenced a different rule by FIFA, soccer's world governing body, that allows headgear as long as it has been inspected and "determined not to be dangerous."

The temporary ban in hijabs had sidelined a Muslim female team in Edmonton because half of the players wore headscarves on the field.

Soccer associations in B.C. and Ontario have already made exceptions for players to wear hijabs.