The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
..has banned all religious symbols in schools. Thats the jewish skull caps, christian crosses and Muslim head scarfs, what do u think of this?
Page:
In the case of police helmets, I don't think headgear makes much of difference in how good a copper you would. I've seen plenty of them wandering about town with naked heads and I've only committed a few more crimes as a result. (Only joking, I'm a good boy.)
For motorcycle helmets, I don't think there should be a law at all. It's not like seatbelts, where not wearing one endangers other people: the only person you're putting at risk is yourself. If someone is stupid enough to go riding without a helmet then let them; we shouldn't be prosecuting people for being idiots.
For motorcycle helmets, I don't think there should be a law at all. It's not like seatbelts, where not wearing one endangers other people: the only person you're putting at risk is yourself. If someone is stupid enough to go riding without a helmet then let them; we shouldn't be prosecuting people for being idiots.
That may be so, but should it be? Helmets shouldn't be optional. It seems to be one rule for one person, a different rule for another.
I think they can as well. They are the only people not legally required to wear a helmet on a motorcycle.
Can anyone arguing for this actually explain what the purpose of the law is? Who is harmed by a Christian wearing a cross at school?
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> Or perhaps a Sikh ditching his helmet for a turban?
I'm pretty sure that they can already do this.
ßora† SagdiyeV wrote:
> Or perhaps a Sikh ditching his helmet for a turban?
I'm pretty sure that they can already do this.
I'm with Unknown Kernel.
In the past to not believe in God was viewed as blasphemous. It just wasn't the done thing. And for those who didn't believe, it wasn't fair as it forced them to conform to something.
To ban religion would be the opposite of that, but with the same effect. It castigates those who have different ideas and beliefs. If someone suggested that all mention of evolution was to be outlawed in public, many would be outraged by it.
It is just the reverse of that.
In the past to not believe in God was viewed as blasphemous. It just wasn't the done thing. And for those who didn't believe, it wasn't fair as it forced them to conform to something.
To ban religion would be the opposite of that, but with the same effect. It castigates those who have different ideas and beliefs. If someone suggested that all mention of evolution was to be outlawed in public, many would be outraged by it.
It is just the reverse of that.
If it applies equally to all religions then no problem here.
If the relgiion doesn't allow it then it's time to adapt to the modern world or move country. Call that racist if you wish because no doubt someone will...
If the relgiion doesn't allow it then it's time to adapt to the modern world or move country. Call that racist if you wish because no doubt someone will...
I don't know, but if it is really that important just to wear a certain garment, then maybe they should consider private schools for such things. Nobody is asking them to change religion, or to stop practising it, they are simply asking them to adhere to certain dress codes for 8 hours a day.
If their religion doesn't allow them to do this, then it is up to them to make alternative arrangements.
If I wore a nose-ring and wanted a job in sales, which forbid it, I'd either have to take it out or find another job, regardless of how much I didn't like the idea.
If their religion doesn't allow them to do this, then it is up to them to make alternative arrangements.
If I wore a nose-ring and wanted a job in sales, which forbid it, I'd either have to take it out or find another job, regardless of how much I didn't like the idea.
I'd love to see a Rasta-policeman on the beat!
"Yah mon, I'll just be confiscating this bag of weed, mon".
Organisations like the police, fire services, army, etc. are meant to wear protective gear because of the nature of the work they deal with - this includes headgear and helmets. What danger could a headscarf in a school possibly present?
"Yah mon, I'll just be confiscating this bag of weed, mon".
Organisations like the police, fire services, army, etc. are meant to wear protective gear because of the nature of the work they deal with - this includes headgear and helmets. What danger could a headscarf in a school possibly present?
monkey_man wrote:
> I hope you're not serious!? Someone wearing a headscarf is a million
> miles away from that guy that stands in London with the microphone
> and loadspeaker, ranting on about "The light" (no, not our
> Light), and "He is the one true God". If you really think
> you've made a valid contribution to this thread, then you just lost
> any credibilty as a "non-tard" that you had.
I don't like religion monkey_man, that's all it is. It causes people to split up into smaller groups, who then oppose each other, often violently.
If it offends you I apologise, but that's the way I feel.
As for the issue of not wearing garments, I believe if the schools choose to have uniform attire, then it should be adhered to. I doubt, for example, that a rastafarian police officer in this country would be allowed to ditch his helmet in favour of the rastafarian hat. Why not? Is this not the same thing? Or perhaps a Sikh ditching his helmet for a turban? Why not? It's called uniform, and it is none-negotiable. I can't see a problem with applying this to schools.
> I hope you're not serious!? Someone wearing a headscarf is a million
> miles away from that guy that stands in London with the microphone
> and loadspeaker, ranting on about "The light" (no, not our
> Light), and "He is the one true God". If you really think
> you've made a valid contribution to this thread, then you just lost
> any credibilty as a "non-tard" that you had.
I don't like religion monkey_man, that's all it is. It causes people to split up into smaller groups, who then oppose each other, often violently.
If it offends you I apologise, but that's the way I feel.
As for the issue of not wearing garments, I believe if the schools choose to have uniform attire, then it should be adhered to. I doubt, for example, that a rastafarian police officer in this country would be allowed to ditch his helmet in favour of the rastafarian hat. Why not? Is this not the same thing? Or perhaps a Sikh ditching his helmet for a turban? Why not? It's called uniform, and it is none-negotiable. I can't see a problem with applying this to schools.
In a related incident recently Cincinnati Bengal’s quarterback Jon Kitna was fined $5000 recently for wearing a hat with a Christian cross logo on it at an official press conference.
Believe it or not, this wasn't because of the religious connotations of the logo but because the NFL has a rule that only league apparel can be worn for interviews immediately following games. This is a way of protecting its sponsorship deals with companies such as Reebok. Kitna appealed but the league decided to rescind the fine before Kitna's appeal was scheduled to be heard.
Since the controversy The Catholic Shop which stock the offending item have sold thousands more of the cap at $5 each.
go figure
Believe it or not, this wasn't because of the religious connotations of the logo but because the NFL has a rule that only league apparel can be worn for interviews immediately following games. This is a way of protecting its sponsorship deals with companies such as Reebok. Kitna appealed but the league decided to rescind the fine before Kitna's appeal was scheduled to be heard.
Since the controversy The Catholic Shop which stock the offending item have sold thousands more of the cap at $5 each.
go figure
Page: