Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

I have an issue with this because Friday is a school day, which means classes are in session. As far as I know, no other religious groups are using school time and school facilities to conduct worship except for the Catholic schools or other religious schools. The vast majority of students in the secular public school system pray outside of school time in their place of worship like temple, church, synagogue or mosque.

This doesn't have anything to do with taxes, as those Muslim kids' parents are taxpayers contributing to society like everyone else. The issue is turning a secular public school into a place of religious worship.

gertrude wrote:

shafique wrote: Now - whether school should allow religious freedom in allowing children to pray on Fridays or completely ban any religious activity during school time is another matter. To give Muslims this facility is a positive sign in my eyes - but I understand the opposing argument that others hold. On this, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Cheers,
Shafique

so it is ok to influence secular institutions , how about the legal system, Sharia law is ok too?

It's ok by me for a school hall to be used once a week for a Friday sermon and collective prayers by those pupils who happen to be Muslim. I personally have no problem with this at all - especially if it does not affect normal lesson times (Friday prayers are held during the normal lunch times - by definition).

If the hall is used for ballet practice by those who wish to learn ballet - that is perfectly fine by me too.

I'd understand the uproar if all students were being forced to pray like Muslims - but in this case, it is no different from the hall being used for other purposes, like ballet practice IMO.

Cheers,
Shafique

The view of the Taliban aside, the school is breaking its own gender discrimination policy along with Canadian legal precedent.

...Based on sheer geography alone, the TDSB has an obligation to see that the values and provisions outlined in its own Human Rights Policy are upheld within its school walls. The policy states that the Board has, “a duty to maintain an environment respectful of human rights and free of discrimination,” and may not “allow or condone behaviour contrary to this policy.”

How is it that the TDSB can call for instruction on sexism and gender inequality in its Social Studies classes, yet look the other way when girls are facing active discrimination within its walls?

The TDSB’s position is clear. It allows for the differential treatment of girls within its walls by insisting that the services are a community-run initiative, solicited by Valley Park parents and run by a neighbourhood imam. Indeed, according to a statement released by Chris Spence, TDSB director of education, :The division of the sexes which occurs during the service is a part of the Islamic faith.”

But faith or not, and supposed autonomy or not, the TDSB has an obligation to its students to provide a safe space free from discrimination. And it is all clear in writing; all persons operating on TDSB premises much adhere to Human Rights Policy. It states, “This policy applies to all Toronto District School Board students, employees, trustees, and other users such as members of consultative committees, clients of the Board, parents, volunteers, permit holders, contractors, and employees of organizations not related to the Board but who nevertheless work on or are invited onto Board premises.”...

...Religious accommodation in public schools should exist as a means for equity, not a medium of exclusion. And it should only be enforced insofar as the individual rights and freedoms of all students may still be upheld. The TDSB must practice what it (literally) preaches if it hopes to give any authority to its lessons on gender equality and discrimination. It cannot stand idly as its female students are sent to the back of the room, especially when that room is just down the hall.

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2 ... -property/

http://www.utulsa.edu/law/ilj/past%20is ... atrick.pdf

general_A wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:

These Muslim students, who are probably the minority in the school, are getting a free education at the taxpayers expense.

just a question here,

Muslims in Canada don't pay taxes? can somebody tell me?

I did not say they did not pay taxes. I said they were the minority, and I'm sure if the majority of the taxpayers were consulted/asked this practice more than likely they would oppose this practice in public schools. Yes, the parents of these students would be required to pay taxes, like everyone else who isn't Muslim, who would be the majority.

-- Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:27 am --

kanelli wrote:This doesn't have anything to do with taxes, as those Muslim kids' parents are taxpayers contributing to society like everyone else. The issue is turning a secular public school into a place of religious worship.

Rather than repeat myse see my post to the General. I'm sure if you were living in Canada, paying taxes, you might see it from a taxpayer's point of view and tax go towards public school education. I don't see it as turning the school into a place of worship, but bringing a level of religious practice into the school.

-- Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:28 am --

kanelli wrote:This doesn't have anything to do with taxes, as those Muslim kids' parents are taxpayers contributing to society like everyone else. The issue is turning a secular public school into a place of religious worship.

Rather than repeat myself see my post to the General. I'm sure if you were living in Canada, paying taxes, and had a child in that school you might see it from a taxpayer's point of view and tax go towards public school education. I don't see it as turning the school into a place of worship, but bringing a level of religious practice into the school.

-- Thu Jul 14, 2011 9:30 am --

shafique wrote:It's ok by me for a school hall to be used once a week for a Friday sermon and collective prayers by those pupils who happen to be Muslim. I personally have no problem with this at all - especially if it does not affect normal lesson times (Friday prayers are held during the normal lunch times - by definition).

If the hall is used for ballet practice by those who wish to learn ballet - that is perfectly fine by me too.

I'd understand the uproar if all students were being forced to pray like Muslims - but in this case, it is no different from the hall being used for other purposes, like ballet practice IMO.

Cheers,
Shafique

Of course you don't have a problem with this you being a Muslim.

shafique wrote:

gertrude wrote:

shafique wrote: Now - whether school should allow religious freedom in allowing children to pray on Fridays or completely ban any religious activity during school time is another matter. To give Muslims this facility is a positive sign in my eyes - but I understand the opposing argument that others hold. On this, we'll have to agree to disagree.

Cheers,
Shafique

so it is ok to influence secular institutions , how about the legal system, Sharia law is ok too?

It's ok by me for a school hall to be used once a week for a Friday sermon and collective prayers by those pupils who happen to be Muslim. I personally have no problem with this at all - especially if it does not affect normal lesson times (Friday prayers are held during the normal lunch times - by definition).

If the hall is used for ballet practice by those who wish to learn ballet - that is perfectly fine by me too.

I'd understand the uproar if all students were being forced to pray like Muslims - but in this case, it is no different from the hall being used for other purposes, like ballet practice IMO.

Cheers,
Shafique

1. The students of other religious faiths pray outside of school time and off of school property, so why are Muslims praying in the school during class time?

2. Are boys segregated behind the girls in ballet class and told to sit out if they had a wet dream that morning, and hence were unclean for ballet practice?

3. Schools are meant to foster equal rights for boys and girls, so even if the prayer was allowed on Fridays, the boys and girls should be praying together and girls who are menstruating should not be obligated to sit out because they are deemed unclean. If those conditions sound unacceptable, then the school is not the suitable place for Muslim prayer.

1. Friday prayers are held on Fridays just after mid-day, by definition.

2. No, boys aren't told to sit at the back during a part of the ballet class if they are unclean - but I wouldn't have a problem if the boys with groin strains sat out a part of the class. Would you?

3. I would laugh at any Balletophobic people who really, really hated ballet and thought it was an evil cult and shouldn't be part of a public school environment and made a big thing about a once a week class held at lunch time which was attended by those who want to take part in ballet. If they argue that school is not a place for the evil ballet teachers who wish to take over the world... I'd laugh and say, get a life. But that's just me.

Hey - as I said, my personal opinion is that this is ok - a school allows it's Muslim pupils to exercise freedom of religion once a week and hold collective prayers in its hall. Where's the harm?

Cheers,
Shafique

http://oncampus.macleans.ca/education/2 ... -property/

Someone named Fatimah commented on the article saying, "This is a ridiculous article. This article has more to do with the author trumpeting her own interpretation of the situation (limited, ethnocentric, biased and erroneous as it is) than the rights of these female Muslim students. The author assumes that mixing of genders during prayer would be desireable or even acceptable to Muslimahs. The author assumes that the fact that women pray behind men implies some sort of inferiority. Way to see the world through your own tiny, self-righteous lens, Ms. Urback. Next time, try engaging these women and hearing their voices, their views, rather than spewing out drivel regarding what YOU think their opinions ought to be."

I ask myself, why would mixing during prayer be unacceptable for Muslimahs? The majority of other world religions see men and women praying mixed together. Why in all mosques around the world do women pray behind men? If it is just arbitrary and not indicating any type of inferiority, why don't we see men praying behind the women? What's with the physical barriers between the men's and women's sections too? How about at least men praying on one side and women on the other instead one behind the other?

Why would a God create women to menstruate, then say they are unclean and cannot pray before him/her when menstruating? Many other world religions don't segregate women who are menstruating. Perhaps some once did, but the religious practices evolved over the centuries to reflect the growing social and political equality of men and women. Islam still enforces the patriarchal and dare I say misogynistic views of centuries before.

Of course we can ask the views of the Muslimahs, but they've been raised to accept gender segregation and the notion of being unclean when menstruating, and they view these as proper practices in their religion, so what can they say to make us change our view on those practices when we have not been raised to accept such things?

As a woman I respect the efforts of the women who came before me and fought for my rights to participate in society side by side with men, vote, own property, hold political office, work in any field, have access to birth control and abortion, determine what I want to do with my own body etc. It is frustrating to see any portion of the female population in Canada willingly or forcibly being deprived of any of these rights, large or small. Canadian society aims for equality between men and women, so they should be enforcing those ideals in schools.

The lady is eloquent and expresses her views well.

The philosophy of why men and women pray either separately or with the women behind the men has been discussed in the religion forum before.

The reason is that the worship of God in the formal setting is meant to be a meditative and focussed act of worship. One is clean and asked not to wear strong perfumes or be otherwise 'smelly' - to avoid distracting other worshippers from their communion with God.

Similarly, the philosophy of not having pictures or icons in a place of worship is because focus is on worshipping God and not being distracted.

During a prayer, therefore, it is deemed that men viewing women would be a distraction for some. It appears that women are more in control and viewing men (when they stand behind the men) is on balance less distracting for them than vice versa.

Also, as shown above in the photo, the view when in prostration is not that flattering - and most women I know would prefer to not have men behind them when they are in prostration (another reason why women are behind or separate during formal prayers).

Now, non-Muslims may not share these values or see the benefit of concentration in prayer - but I'm just presenting the reasons why. It is not, as the lady quoted says, because women are viewed as inferior - au contraire - it seems to be because they are attractive and distracting.

I therefore do not personally agree that attending a congregational act of worship at Friday lunchtime is somehow depriving the Muslim children of basic human rights. Surely they are exercising the human right of freedom of worship?

Just my 2 cents.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:1. Friday prayers are held on Fridays just after mid-day, by definition.

2. No, boys aren't told to sit at the back during a part of the ballet class if they are unclean - but I wouldn't have a problem if the boys with groin strains sat out a part of the class. Would you?

3. I would laugh at any Balletophobic people who really, really hated ballet and thought it was an evil cult and shouldn't be part of a public school environment and made a big thing about a once a week class held at lunch time which was attended by those who want to take part in ballet. If they argue that school is not a place for the evil ballet teachers who wish to take over the world... I'd laugh and say, get a life. But that's just me.

Hey - as I said, my personal opinion is that this is ok - a school allows it's Muslim pupils to exercise freedom of religion once a week and hold collective prayers in its hall. Where's the harm?

Cheers,
Shafique

How about Muslims needing to work or study in secular settings having a Saturday after mid-day prayer instead of Friday?

Are Muslim women's uterine muscles strained and therefore they are physically unable to pray? Girls who may choose to sit out of gym glass don't do it because they are unclean, they do it if they have severe menstrual pain or a physical injury of any kind that stops them from doing any sport that will create further damage.

I have no idea what your point is in the last paragraph. Ballet is open to girls and boys and no one is segregated or made to sit out because menstruation or se.men ejacu.lation has made them dirty people unfit to practice. Most ballet classes are in fact held in dance schools outside of school property and outside of school hours, and paid separately by parents. If public schools can make some extra income by renting their facilities outside of school hours to outside groups, then that is a different story.

Shaf, you don't see a problem with any of this because you are Muslim. Those of us who are not and come from societies that have fought to make a separation between religion and state because of the divisiveness it causes to those of various faiths do see a problem with a public school being used by one religious group during school hours. Furthermore, the religion has practices that do not support the goals of equality between boys and girls that are supposed to be enforced in the school. I don't see how our viewpoint is so hard to understand.

Places of worship are for worship, not a public school, unless it is outside of school hours and paid by the congregation.

Shaf, I would like to think that you won't admit to making a mistake by giving a poor example that bears a broad difference between ballet, which is a form of dance and has nothing to do with religious practice and praying, a form of religious practice, than to think that you can't distinguish the difference.

Going back a couple of years ago (2009) there was quite a bit of controversy in France, Italy and the US about students wearing religious symbols. In the States those looking for the ban did so on the grounds that religious symbols indicated one's membership to a gang, but not all those who wear the Star of David or a crucifix are gang related. Students were advised to wear their religious symbols inside their clothing.

Now you have a school that clearly allows for religious practice in a public school where the student body is multi-religious. In a public school that has a multi-religious student body should not make exceptions for one religion to allow prayer in the school.

While the work week in the US, Canada, and the UK, for example, is Monday through Friday, should companies start letting Muslims take off Friday and go into a closed office on Saturday or Sunday, or should companies change the work week to accommodate Muslims, or should they go on a 4 day work week to accommodate Muslims for Friday, Jews for Saturday and Christians for Sunday? Canada, the US, the UK are NOT Islamic countries. As you know, here in Dubai, the weekend is Friday and Saturday, no exceptions are made for the number of Christians for Sunday - and that would be why? because it's an Islamic country???

Now, non-Muslims may not share these values or see the benefit of concentration in prayer - but I'm just presenting the reasons why. It is not, as the lady quoted says, because women are viewed as inferior - au contraire - it seems to be because they are attractive and distracting.

Good, then do that in the Mosque or in your own homes. The view that girls need to be separated (and menstruating girls excluded) is against the Toronto school board's own policy on gender discrimination.

I therefore do not personally agree that attending a congregational act of worship at Friday lunchtime is somehow depriving the Muslim children of basic human rights. Surely they are exercising the human right of freedom of worship?

In the United States, government cannot be used to promote religion. In Canada, from the article I linked to, this belief has been established through legal precedent, city council meetings cannot start with prayer.

Canadians are right to be outraged by right-wing religious radicals who are pushing for schools to be turned into their little Mosque.

The idea that public schools create zones that are infidel free and enforce gender segregationist policies is outrageous.

kanelli - you're right - I do have a biased perspective because I am Muslim and attend Friday prayers each week.

I've also had many Muslim gatherings in school halls over the years - and pretty much all of them included collective prayers.

I also don't see the issue of men sitting separately from women as an issue of equality - but surely, as the lady quoted stated, this should be addressed to the Muslim ladies (and men) for their views.

I have no problems with Ballet, tae kwon do, scouts, brownies, Bible class etc being done within school premises as an accomodation for those who wish to take part.

Allowing Muslim students to worship God at Friday lunchtime seems to me to be something that should be inoffensive and indeed celebrated as a sign of religious freedom. If it doesn't impact on class time and doesn't impose restrictions or conditions on non-Muslims, I repeat, where's the harm?

In London, every employer allowed me extra time off on Friday to attend prayers and I just made up the time elsewhere - had I not had to travel to a place of worship (in this case it was a college a short tube journey away, and not a mosque), I wouldn't have had any extra time needed. Seems sensible to me that the school is providing this service - otherwise the kids would have had to miss out on this each week.

(Bora - ballet / balletophobia may seem an inappropriate analogy to you - but to me the principle is valid - elective and selective use of the hall is what this seems to be about.)

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:During a prayer, therefore, it is deemed that men viewing women would be a distraction for some. It appears that women are more in control and viewing men (when they stand behind the men) is on balance less distracting for them than vice versa.

Also, as shown above in the photo, the view when in prostration is not that flattering - and most women I know would prefer to not have men behind them when they are in prostration (another reason why women are behind or separate during formal prayers).

Now, non-Muslims may not share these values or see the benefit of concentration in prayer - but I'm just presenting the reasons why. It is not, as the lady quoted says, because women are viewed as inferior - au contraire - it seems to be because they are attractive and distracting.

But that view is se.xist. If a great looking guy with a nice a.$$ is bending over in front of me I get just as distracted as men supposedly do viewing women. The distraction last a second - after all, its only a bum and we all have them. I've been in mixed yoga class many times and so far it hasn't broken out into an orgy yet! Both men and women appreciate a nice looking person and both are equally capable of controlling themselves. In many cultures where the main religion is Islam, women are often segregated beyond the mosque, and as you know, in some cultures women are called on to dress in abayas, veils, burkas to prove their modesty to their families and husbands and keep themselves "safe" from other men. So apparently women are too much of a temptation in society... That's not equality, that's men dictating that women need to be covered and separated because of their views on women's se.xuality.

In any case, the just way to handle praying in a mosque so that prostrating men and women wouldn't be distracted by each other's bottoms would be to have men praying on one side and women on the other. To me this is a logical solution, but I suspect that placing the women behind the men has more to do with reinforcing a role rather than women having more self-control at looking at male backsides.

I've said my piece, and we'll definitely have to agree to disgree on this one!

Yes, I agree the view I've expressed about women being more distracting than men can be viewed as se.xist.

However the point is that the separation is not due to men considering women inferior (as the Canadian lady said) - whether we agree on the reasoning is a separate matter, but one that shouldn't be confused with the actual reasons for separation. (From my perspective, it is because men have LESS self-control and therefore are the ones that are inferior)

These issues relate to all places where Muslim women and men pray.

As for the school allowing their Muslim pupils to exercise freedom of religion once a week during lunchtime - I'm still puzzled at the strong reactions against this basic human right.

joking aside - I've not much to add either. Let's agree to disagree.

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote: freedom of religion once a week and hold collective prayers in its hall. Where's the harm?

The whole point is that countries that hold the seperation between religion and state high, pupils of public school should have the right of freedom from religion. Religion tends to divide people and people should have every right to be completely free from that.
I understand that the concept of seperation of religion and state is hard to grasp for some or just cannot understand it (and comparing it to ballet). But there are countries that this is a valued concept and this should be respected.

I still can't see how allowing Muslim pupils to worship at Friday lunchtime is impinging on any student's right of freedom from religion?

Where is the harm, I ask again? If you hate ballet, you don't go to the ballet classes. If you hate Islam, don't go to the hall on Friday lunchtimes.

It is rather allowing those who choose to attend the freedom to practise their religion. Why deprive them of this right?

The school isn't, as far as I can see, doing anything more than giving a group of students space to worship. Giving ballet students space to practice is as innocuous/evil as this, IMO.

Cheers,
Shafique

If boys and girls had their own sides of the room they'd be prostrating in front of those of their own gender, so I don't see why this isn't done and why women are placed behind men with a physical barrier between.

People of other faiths in Muslim countries have to work and study on their religious days and therefore hold their masses on different days or using flexible times. Why can't Muslims in non-Muslim countries do the same? No one is saying there should be no mosques, no praying, and no Islam. The issue is that no other religious groups are using public school facilities for free, during school hours, for religious prayer. It doesn't matter that this example is Islam, the criticism would still stand if any other religious group was doing this. (The s.exism part would like be a non-issue though.)

The reason you want to put forward for women praying behind men (and menstruating girls being too impure to pray) doesn't change that this practice goes against the Toronto school system's policy on gender equality.

This is an issue of equity and of school promoting religion. The bottom line is that Muslim religious practices being employed here do break Toronto school board policy. I'm glad some have chosen to point the obvious out, even if others want to ignore this fact.

It's also interesting to read that Christian prayers are not allowed in Canadian schools. So there appears to be a clear separation between church and state in Canadian school systems that I was previously unaware of. Unfortunately, school officials seem willing to break policy and allow schools to be turned into Mosques during school hours.

Hopefully a Canadian version of the ACLU will be filing a lawsuit against the Toronto school district.

Christian and other prayers are disallowed in the public school system.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/on_the_front_ ... teria.html

shafique wrote:I still can't see how allowing Muslim pupils to worship at Friday lunchtime is impinging on any student's right of freedom from religion?

Where is the harm, I ask again? If you hate ballet, you don't go to the ballet classes. If you hate Islam, don't go to the hall on Friday lunchtimes.

It is rather allowing those who choose to attend the freedom to practise their religion. Why deprive them of this right?

The school isn't, as far as I can see, doing anything more than giving a group of students space to worship. Giving ballet students space to practice is as innocuous/evil as this, IMO.

Cheers,
Shafique

Right, the level of thought is now that it is unfair that there is a separation of state and religion and not a seperation between state and ballet.

I still can't see how allowing Muslim pupils to worship at Friday lunchtime is impinging on any student's right of freedom from religion?

Why is our forum's Taliban mentioning this in response to FD's point of a separation of church and state and government's role in not promoting religion?

Where is the harm, I ask again?

You can start with it breaking Toronto school board policy on gender equality. As for actual prayer at school, organized or not, it too breaks Canadian school policy.

If you hate Islam, don't go to the hall on Friday lunchtimes.

You mean, don't go to the cafeteria at lunchtime because that's when and where these religious services are taking place?

The school isn't, as far as I can see, doing anything more than giving a group of students space to worship. Giving ballet students space to practice is as innocuous/evil as this, IMO.

Mr Taliban, what part of separation between church and state don't you understand? It's not government's job to promote religion which it is doing when an Imam comes on campus and gives religious services to students during school hours at tax payer's expense.

If you love living in the seventh century, then live in Saudi Arabia.

kanelli wrote:If boys and girls had their own sides of the room they'd be prostrating in front of those of their own gender, so I don't see why this isn't done and why women are placed behind men with a physical barrier between.

Actually, this is usual in some mosques where the separation runs down the middle of the mosque separating out right and left (It's usually a curtain, or some other moveable barrier).

Where there isn't a physical barrier (visual barrier), the women sit behind.

Cheers,
Shafique

Great, they can do that in their Mosques. Separating boys and girls - and excluding menstruating girls - in, say, math class would not be allowed based on Toronto school board policy.

If you don't like complaints, then don't bring your religious practices to public schools - where they don't belong and aren't welcome based on the rule of law, apparently.

Still waiting to hear what the harm is.

The only ones I see complaining are those who wish to restrict a child's right to spend Friday lunchtime in prayer, if they choose.

Are children praying to God really that offensive that you want to ban it, even though they aren't imposing this worship on others? Hmm.

Cheers,
Shafique

You can start off by acknowledging that this breaks Toronto school board codes on gender equality. No math teacher would be allowed to segregate and even exclude some of his students because of their faith, gender and if they were menstruating.

Separation between church and state and Canada's ruling that children cannot pray at school - which was passed as a response to Christian students (sorry, you can't claim Islamophobia against the legislation) make this practice against policy as well.

Oh, and it's a public school. Canadian taxpayers are more than entitled to complain and see that the school board starts following their own policy when dealing with these students.

It was a simple question:

Are children praying to God really that offensive that you want to ban it, even though they aren't imposing this worship on others? Hmm.

Applies to Canadian taxpayers and posters on DF.

I see no problems with allowing children to pray during Friday lunchtime - and I'm still a bit perplexed why others seem to be offended by the school allowing them to pray.

I understand people are upset and are complaining - I'm just saying I don't understand why. Hence the question, what's the harm in allowing Muslim children to pray during Friday lunchtime? Why ask them to leave school to pray?

Cheers,
Shafique

Some commenters on the article pointed out that public schools segregate the boys and girls bathrooms, so segregation is acceptable. When I lived in university residence I chose to live in a co-ed hall because I like the dynamic of men and women living together. I didn't realize that the bathrooms were also co-ed - you know, the nice North American style public bathroom stalls - just like that. :O I quickly got used to going into a stall, seeing the neighbouring feet, hearing the newspaper rustle, recognizing who it was, saying "Good morning Steve!" and having a little chit chat, finishing my business and leaving. The shower stalls had two sets of curtains one for the shower room, one for the changing section. The bathtub rooms had lockable doors. We certainly learned to respect each other, and respect people's space and privacy. The co-ed halls had better harmony, while the segregated halls often had wars with each other. The university could have made it completely segregated because of the common bathroom facilities (the building was an old nurses residence, not built by the university), but I'm glad they gave the option for co-ed halls.

Shaf, where has anyone said that they object to people praying to their God? No one wants to ban praying, they are just saying that it cannot be done at public school during school hours, no matter what the religion. Canadians have struggled to separate religion and state precisely so that there is more tolerance between students of various faiths. Bringing religion back into the school is a step back. You don't seem to understand that and I don't know why.

-- Thu Jul 14, 2011 1:03 pm --

Maybe Dubai Media City should have a large canopy on the grounds in the middle of the complex where all the Christians can congregate on Sunday during their lunch hour to have a nice church service? I don't think anyone would complain, right?

Flying Dutchman wrote:

shafique wrote: freedom of religion once a week and hold collective prayers in its hall. Where's the harm?

The whole point is that countries that hold the seperation between religion and state high, pupils of public school should have the right of freedom from religion. Religion tends to divide people and people should have every right to be completely free from that.
I understand that the concept of seperation of religion and state is hard to grasp for some or just cannot understand it (and comparing it to ballet). But there are countries that this is a valued concept and this should be respected.

It's a hard concept to grasp when someone resides, or choses to reside, in a Western country, but insists on living according to a holy book where there is no separation from church and state, in this regard, mosque and government.

I only asked what the harm was.. it wasn't really a difficult question to grasp.

I happen to agree with separation of state and religion, and that religious freedom should be a universal human right. I am failing to see how allowing Muslim kids to pray during Friday lunchtime violates this separation. The state isn't imposing religion on anyone when it allows the hall to be used for prayers by those who wish to attend.

Why complicate things?

If there is a harm from children praying to God on Fridays in school, I'd like to hear what the harm is.

Believing it violates the separation of Church and State is a matter of opinion - one that I don't agree with. But is there another real harm, other than a supposed violation of this principle?

Cheers,
Shafique

shafique wrote:I only asked what the harm was.. it wasn't really a difficult question to grasp.

I happen to agree with separation of state and religion, and that religious freedom should be a universal human right. I am failing to see how allowing Muslim kids to pray during Friday lunchtime violates this separation. The state isn't imposing religion on anyone when it allows the hall to be used for prayers by those who wish to attend.

Why complicate things?

If there is a harm from children praying to God on Fridays in school, I'd like to hear what the harm is.

Believing it violates the separation of Church and State is a matter of opinion - one that I don't agree with. But is there another real harm, other than a supposed violation of this principle?

Cheers,

Shafique

You are either really thick or really stupid, or more likely a combination of both.

Obviously prayer can be performed anywhere and not necessarily in a house of worship. If there is a need to pray they can sit at their desk and do it silently.

If I missed the answer to my question 'what is the harm' - please let me know. I didn't think I was THAT thick.

Yes, of course, the children can pray at the their desks etc if they didn't have this option - that's not in dispute.

Cheers,
Shafique