Myles Domini Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 [url="http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/06/njewel06.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/06/ixhome.html"]GIRL SENT HOME FOR WEARING CRUCIFIX[/url] Those of us who live in the UK need to do something about this!! Write to the papers, write to the Bishops, complain, campaign. This is WRONG Beau Seant!! Myles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
homeschoolmom Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ave Maria Totus Tuus Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tojo Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 The most I can imagine them being justified in is asking her to wear it beneath her clothing, in order to not draw attention to her receiving an exception to normal school rules. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
N/A Gone Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 thats it...americans, we need to take over to "help them" learn the proper way.. just playing of course, but this news article makes me sad sin-fin, anyone else think it is weird that the term "sin" and "fin"(finish-done) is the name of the school? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nathan Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Quite disturbing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Why ban religious symbols in the first place? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paladin D Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 They're banning jewelry, not religious symbols (so you can wear a shirt with a crucifix symbol on it). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 OK then... the rosary is not 'jewelry', it is a religious symbol and tool for prayer. That simple no? i would sue that school... and probably win... and I'm not even a lawyer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Didacus Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 OK then... the rosary is not 'jewelry', it is a religious symbol and tool for prayer. That simple no? i would sue that school... and probably win... and I'm not even a lawyer! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Balthazor Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 Yeah but English law is different than American Law. They have a completley different system and different laws so I do not know how you would establish precident. Can anyone from the UK out there help us out? I haven't heard the whole story. I want to hear the whole story before I get angry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Theoketos Posted December 6, 2005 Share Posted December 6, 2005 It is still very inconsistant. To ask that she take off the Crucifix when another set of people can wear prayer beads. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Myles Domini Posted December 7, 2005 Author Share Posted December 7, 2005 This is what gets me: [quote]He added: "As a Christian I don't have to wear a crucifix but Sikhs don't have that option and we have to be understanding. We live in a multi-faith society."[/quote] So the rules on jewellry in school can be dispensed with for one religion but not for another? The school claim they dont allow jewllery for health and safety reasons. If its that dangerous to wear religious items then they should force the Sikh's to comply with the rules. The fact that they dont force the Sikh's to obey establishes a double standard and to me shows that it cannot be that important to clamp down on items of religious devotion, that is, unless those items are Christian. She's been wearing it for 3 years her mother says why stop her now? I wear a white gold cross around my neck at all times, my Mother and Grandmother saved up one Christmas and bought it for me with all they could muster. For me it is emblematic of taking up one's cross, their struggle allowed me to take up my own cross, and their example is one for me to follow. Thats what it means to me and if some teacher told me I had to take it off because I dont have to wear it I would not be compliant. I do have to wear it, love and effort went into getting that cross, and love and struggle is what the cross means to all Christians. The passion of Christ is at the core of Christianity, the new covenant is sealed in His blood and we are to carry that reality with us at all times. Thats why people began making crucifix's and icons in the first place! If the teachers can be sensitive to Sikh sensibilities they should likewise show sensitivity to Christians. INXC Myles Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
qfnol31 Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 I think the second to last line of the story sums it up really well, however: [quote]A spokesman said: "It is lawful to ban crucifixes while allowing other religious symbols, but whether it is desirable is another matter.[/quote] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Christie_M Posted December 7, 2005 Share Posted December 7, 2005 Yeah. That is very sad. If that was me, I would just NOT go to school unless they let me wear my crusifux. (at least under my shurt) otherwise, they lose a student(and money for that matter) but people have different views. And I'm homeschooled, so I'm probley going to be in that situation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now