Dubai Forums Dubai Discussions Dubai Politics Talk

head of RE, was also accused of giving two schoolboys detention after they refused to kneel down and 'pray to Allah' during the lesson.

Parents said forcing their children to take part in the exercise at School, near Stoke-on-Trent - which included wearing Muslim headgear - was a breach of their human rights.

"It can be confirmed that following a long and rigorous disciplinary process, a member of staff at School has been dismissed from her post.

nostradamus wrote:head of RE, was also accused of giving two schoolboys detention after they refused to kneel down and 'pray to Allah' during the lesson.

Parents said forcing their children to take part in the exercise at School, near Stoke-on-Trent - which included wearing Muslim headgear - was a breach of their human rights.

"It can be confirmed that following a long and rigorous disciplinary process, a member of staff at School has been dismissed from her post.

Any info on the teacher? Was she herself a Moslem??

If anyone needed proof that the country has gone totally crazy, it's that people like this are allowed anywhere near our children.

Speedhump wrote:If anyone needed proof that the country has gone totally crazy, it's that people like this are allowed anywhere near our children.

you mean near any child .

uaekid wrote:

Speedhump wrote:If anyone needed proof that the country has gone totally crazy, it's that people like this are allowed anywhere near our children.

you mean near any child .

Of course. But this article was about UK. I guess the same problems occur everywhere.

any links to the article??

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... Allah.html

ok what is wrong is that the RE techer punished them for not taking part in the demonstration.

what is NOT wrong is educating the kids about Islam and allah.

what does me is when i read something like "My child has been forced to pray to Allah in a school lesson." WTF. they try to make it out that Allah is some evil guy??? come on shows how much ppl in england know about Allah and Islam.

you can not pray to allah unless you are a muslim. if you are kneeling over and u r not a muslim doesnt mean you are praying to Allah.

[quote="rudeboy"]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1031784/Schoolboys-punished-detention-refusing-kneel-pray-Allah.html

ok what is wrong is that the RE techer punished them for not taking part in the demonstration.

what is NOT wrong is educating the kids about Islam and allah.

Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

chevaliers-de-sion wrote:Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

Yep and the Muslims would all go crazy....sickening.

By the way, mass is a Catholic ceremony, the Uk is not predominantly Catholic.

chevaliers-de-sion wrote:Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

Before the English and Europeans advocate mass to anyone else, I'd suggest they attend mass first!

I'm not familiar with the schools in the UK. Is RE a school that requires tuition to be paid?

In the states it was very controversial the use of the word God in the pledge of alligence in public schools. The pledge was revised in 1957 to include the word "God" in public schools. In 1995 there was a proposed amendment that basically banned religion or reference to religion in public schools. Politics and religion do not belong in public schools. The argument "The Case Against School Prayer" is very interesting.

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php

nostradamus wrote:head of RE, was also accused of giving two schoolboys detention after they refused to kneel down and 'pray to Allah' during the lesson.

Parents said forcing their children to take part in the exercise at School, near Stoke-on-Trent - which included wearing Muslim headgear - was a breach of their human rights.

"It can be confirmed that following a long and rigorous disciplinary process, a member of staff at School has been dismissed from her post.

Although the topic might be interesting, the story is old. It happened almost a year ago!

When you post news stories, old or new, you should include the reference to the story!

dont see what the big fuss is. muslim pupils attend assemblies and sing hymns. does that mean they are worshipping the evil "christ"?

fact is anything the muslims do in UK is seen as bad.

facists rising in uk? they certainly are.

Misery Called Life wrote:

chevaliers-de-sion wrote:Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

Before the English and Europeans advocate mass to anyone else, I'd suggest they attend mass first!

I think as a mostly secular society now, generally people in the UK would say that religion is for the weak. I can't speak for the rest of Europe. The problem is that no real set of values has come along to replace the code of conduct which is all that religion really was.

Bora Bora wrote:I'm not familiar with the schools in the UK. Is RE a school that requires tuition to be paid?

In the states it was very controversial the use of the word God in the pledge of alligence in public schools. The pledge was revised in 1957 to include the word "God" in public schools. In 1995 there was a proposed amendment that basically banned religion or reference to religion in public schools. Politics and religion do not belong in public schools. The argument "The Case Against School Prayer" is very interesting.

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php

Religious education in UK schools is still compulsory as far as I know, and it is still included in the state schooling system, in other words free (er, taxes pay for it). It encompasses teaching about all the major religions.

i still remember my school days. in RE the students used to throw the bible on the floor and use it as a door stopper. hmmm says alot.

Speedhump wrote:

Misery Called Life wrote:

chevaliers-de-sion wrote:Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

Before the English and Europeans advocate mass to anyone else, I'd suggest they attend mass first!

I think as a mostly secular society now, generally people in the UK would say that religion is for the weak. I can't speak for the rest of Europe. The problem is that no real set of values has come along to replace the code of conduct which is all that religion really was.

Code of conduct that religion really was? Hmmm
So would that imply that religious people are virtuous, honest, wise and fulfilled people? No! or maybe Yea? I honestly don't know! Is religion for the weak then? I used to think so too. But reality would suggest otherwise. My mentor(finance) and professor two of the most brilliant, sincere people I've come across. Yet they are also the devout Muslims. There are a lot of successful people who are also deeply devout. So religion can't be for the weak.Although I personally can't understand the association.
All this talk of values and religion has left me befuddled. I'll leave it at that!
Thankfully I'm rather vain, and I take pride in my intelligence. Despite everything around me, I question beliefs. And I prefer things my way.
So at the end of the day to me is really doesn't make a difference weather one is religious or not. My guard is always up. In fact I'm a little more wary of religious people
I like western society today. The thought process is quite advanced. People imbibe in them values regardless of religion.

So I really can't agree when you say

Speedhump wrote:The problem is that no real set of values has come along to replace the code of conduct which is all that religion really was.

I would think otherwise.

Speedhump wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:I'm not familiar with the schools in the UK. Is RE a school that requires tuition to be paid?

In the states it was very controversial the use of the word God in the pledge of alligence in public schools. The pledge was revised in 1957 to include the word "God" in public schools. In 1995 there was a proposed amendment that basically banned religion or reference to religion in public schools. Politics and religion do not belong in public schools. The argument "The Case Against School Prayer" is very interesting.

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php

Religious education in UK schools is still compulsory as far as I know, and it is still included in the state schooling system, in other words free (er, taxes pay for it). It encompasses teaching about all the major religions.

Well they should consider the guidelines taken in the US in public schools (funded by taxpayers money) with regard to religion. If you want your children to learn religion, then they go to religious instruction which is held outside the public school system and provided by the faith being practiced. What religion one practices is a personal thing. Learning about another religion and forced practice are two different things. If a student doesn't want to say the pledge of alligence they may sit it out.

R.E. or Religious Education is only compulsory upto 3rd year when students choose their GCSE subjects.

Personally it's an outdated and useless educational class.

Bora Bora wrote:

Speedhump wrote:

Bora Bora wrote:I'm not familiar with the schools in the UK. Is RE a school that requires tuition to be paid?

In the states it was very controversial the use of the word God in the pledge of alligence in public schools. The pledge was revised in 1957 to include the word "God" in public schools. In 1995 there was a proposed amendment that basically banned religion or reference to religion in public schools. Politics and religion do not belong in public schools. The argument "The Case Against School Prayer" is very interesting.

http://www.ffrf.org/nontracts/schoolprayer.php

Religious education in UK schools is still compulsory as far as I know, and it is still included in the state schooling system, in other words free (er, taxes pay for it). It encompasses teaching about all the major religions.

Well they should consider the guidelines taken in the US in public schools (funded by taxpayers money) with regard to religion. If you want your children to learn religion, then they go to religious instruction which is held outside the public school system and provided by the faith being practiced. What religion one practices is a personal thing. Learning about another religion and forced practice are two different things. If a student doesn't want to say the pledge of alligence they may sit it out.

Fully agreed on religious education not being a matter for the State. But surely the Pledge is a matter of pride in your nation (whether adopted nation or not), is it just the inclusion of God in it that's the problem?

Misery Called Life wrote:

Speedhump wrote:

Misery Called Life wrote:

chevaliers-de-sion wrote:Why stop there The English should make all the thurd world kids attend mass
very Sunday so they learn how to integrate

Before the English and Europeans advocate mass to anyone else, I'd suggest they attend mass first!

I think as a mostly secular society now, generally people in the UK would say that religion is for the weak. I can't speak for the rest of Europe. The problem is that no real set of values has come along to replace the code of conduct which is all that religion really was.

Code of conduct that religion really was? Hmmm So would that imply that religious people are virtuous, honest, wise and fulfilled people? No! or maybe Yea? I honestly don't know! Is religion for the weak then? I used to think so too. But reality would suggest otherwise. My mentor(finance) and professor two of the most brilliant, sincere people I've come across. Yet they are also the devout Muslims. There are a lot of successful people who are also deeply devout. So religion can't be for the weak.Although I personally can't understand the association.
All this talk of values and religion has left me befuddled. I'll leave it at that!
Thankfully I'm rather vain, and I take pride in my intelligence. Despite everything around me, I question beliefs. And I prefer things my way.
So at the end of the day to me is really doesn't make a difference weather one is religious or not. My guard is always up. In fact I'm a little more wary of religious people
I like western society today. The thought process is quite advanced. People imbibe in them values regardless of religion.

So I really can't agree when you say

Speedhump wrote:The problem is that no real set of values has come along to replace the code of conduct which is all that religion really was.

I would think otherwise.

I can agree that you're confused

You equate pride in intelligence with an absence of any need to unquestioningly accept religious faith, but also say that mentally strong people can be devout. Ok they can, but surely it's through rationalisation of their beliefs rather than blind acceptance, which is what religions actually ask of the vast majority of their adherents, no?

Brilliant professors (as a minority group!) are not necessarily the best examples of my ideas. Let's instead consider the billions of unwashed who are just asked to follow a religion (equating to a legal and social system also in many countries) through blind faith, as a way to keep order through fear or superstition. Those with power (the ones in charge of the religion) are often the ones who feel that the strictures of their religion does not apply so toughly to them.....the adage is that 'power corrupts', and it's not an adage for nothing.

Your comment that 'Code of conduct that religion really was? Hmmm. So would that imply that religious people are virtuous, honest, wise and fulfilled people?' kind of misses my point, which was that religions are used to tell people how to behave, what they can and can't do. A code of conduct over and above the actual laws of the country (in the West). A reinforcement by the Clergy of the power held by the State over the population. When that is reduced then the power of Law is also diminished as people feel less morally obliged to behave correctly (as is being seen in the vacuum left by the rejection of religion in the UK, I believe).

Nothing currently is in place to replace the moral obligations which previous generations had placed on them by overwhelming acceptance of a religion as a reason for correct behaviour. You can try to live by your own code or 'bushido' as I and others do, or you can revert to the law of the jungle and the strong over the weak, as some others also do.

Interesting chat.

Speedhump wrote:I can agree that you're confused

You equate pride in intelligence with an absence of any need to unquestioningly accept religious faith, but also say that mentally strong people can be devout. Ok they can, but surely it's through rationalisation of their beliefs rather than blind acceptance, which is what religions actually ask of the vast majority of their adherents, no?

Brilliant professors (as a minority group!) are not necessarily the best examples of my ideas. Let's instead consider the billions of unwashed who are just asked to follow a religion (equating to a legal and social system also in many countries) through blind faith, as a way to keep order through fear or superstition. Those with power (the ones in charge of the religion) are often the ones who feel that the strictures of their religion does not apply so toughly to them.....the adage is that 'power corrupts', and it's not an adage for nothing.

Your comment that 'Code of conduct that religion really was? Hmmm. So would that imply that religious people are virtuous, honest, wise and fulfilled people?' kind of misses my point, which was that religions are used to tell people how to behave, what they can and can't do. A code of conduct over and above the actual laws of the country (in the West). A reinforcement by the Clergy of the power held by the State over the population. When that is reduced then the power of Law is also diminished as people feel less morally obliged to behave correctly (as is being seen in the vacuum left by the rejection of religion in the UK, I believe).

Nothing currently is in place to replace the moral obligations which previous generations had placed on them by overwhelming acceptance of a religion as a reason for correct behaviour. You can try to live by your own code or 'bushido' as I and others do, or you can revert to the law of the jungle and the strong over the weak, as some others also do.

Interesting chat.

Ur Right. Religion should be sold along with the tag line Caveat Emptor.

I don't sit down too well with the fact that everything boils down to judgment day. But religion is about believing. There's an adage the religious always use: Your faith can move mountains. I kinda realize that for so many religious people, they have accepted that challenge. The challenge to believe, despite their conflicting thoughts. That's what makes them special. There has to be more to theology than blind faith.
Although for the vast majority, you are right, it's blind faith, and I guess if that works for them then so be it.

I've come to agree with your stand on the Code of Conduct. Not because I've the seen the system work or anything, but just because what you say makes sense.
Religion is also culture. I make it a point to attend mass once or twice a month, and it's an absolute joy to sit there watch the faithful and listen to the choir. The midnight masses on Christmas, decorating your house , setting up the Christmas crib, Easter, Easter eggs etc all of which I wholeheartedly endorse. Not necessarily because I believe, but because in a way it's my identity.

Chocoholic wrote:R.E. or Religious Education is only compulsory upto 3rd year when students choose their GCSE subjects.

Personally it's an outdated and useless educational class.

it wasnt usless it was helpful in telling the students about other religions and cultures.

i guess all british expats should have a RE lesson before boarding a plane for dubai

rudeboy wrote:

Chocoholic wrote:R.E. or Religious Education is only compulsory upto 3rd year when students choose their GCSE subjects.

Personally it's an outdated and useless educational class.

it wasnt usless it was helpful in telling the students about other religions and cultures.

i guess all british expats should have a RE lesson before boarding a plane for dubai

As I said earlier teaching and educating people about religion is one thing. Forced practice, even if for the "experience" is a no-no. That's like telling a Muslim - eat pork, it really isn't bad for you, just try it.

rudeboy wrote:

Chocoholic wrote:R.E. or Religious Education is only compulsory upto 3rd year when students choose their GCSE subjects.

Personally it's an outdated and useless educational class.

it wasnt usless it was helpful in telling the students about other religions and cultures.

i guess all british expats should have a RE lesson before boarding a plane for dubai

Same goes for your Muslim brothers bringing their filthy 'honour killings' of women to the UK. And preaching death to Infidels in UK Mosques. Disgusting perverts.