OrthodoxChristianity.net
July 25, 2014, 12:10:13 AM *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News: Reminder: No political discussions in the public fora.  If you do not have access to the private Politics Forum, please send a PM to Fr. George.
 
   Home   Help Calendar Contact Treasury Tags Login Register  
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 All   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Muslim family taking Greek Orthodox school to High Court over hijab ban  (Read 9971 times) Average Rating: 0
0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« on: December 21, 2012, 05:50:09 PM »

So many fails on every side...

A GREEK Orthodox school is being taken to the High Court for banning a Muslim pupil from wearing a headscarf.

The nine-year-old girl's parents were so incensed at the decision they have pulled her out of St Cyprian's Greek Orthodox Primary Academy, in Thornton Heath...
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 05:52:40 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,450



« Reply #1 on: December 21, 2012, 05:57:29 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #2 on: December 21, 2012, 05:58:32 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because school isn't church.
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
pmpn8rGPT
Grammar Nazi in three languages.
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Christian
Jurisdiction: Eastern Orthodox (old calendarist)
Posts: 1,038


Proof that Russia won the Space Race.


« Reply #3 on: December 21, 2012, 06:10:22 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???
I was just thinking the same thing
Logged

"Tomorrow, I shall no longer be here."
-Nostradamus's last words.
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #4 on: December 21, 2012, 06:17:44 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???
That's a really good point, Vamrat! I did not even think of that. Muslims picked up the head covering practice from the Orthodox, along with domed religious architecture, the greeting "peace be upon you", and perhaps other customs. Even in the Soviet union it was common for working women to put pretty napkins on their hair, and women sometimes still do this in the countryside there.

I actually hope the Muslims win the court case, because otherwise it means Greece is labeling women wearing coverings as discriminatory, when in fact the state policy would discriminatory against religious women by penalizing them.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 06:19:40 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #5 on: December 21, 2012, 06:42:57 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #6 on: December 21, 2012, 06:54:52 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 
Right, sooo......."The school claims to "respect the religious beliefs and practice of all staff, pupils and parents".

What's the problem?

Would they make a little Jewish boy remove his yamika?
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #7 on: December 21, 2012, 07:05:47 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 
Right, sooo......."The school claims to "respect the religious beliefs and practice of all staff, pupils and parents".

What's the problem?

Would they make a little Jewish boy remove his yamika?

You asking me (as if that point is relevant)?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Basil 320
Site Supporter
Archon
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Eastern Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of Pittsburgh
Posts: 2,984



« Reply #8 on: December 21, 2012, 07:15:16 PM »

Too bad, that's what happens to a Moslem enrolled in an Eastern Orthodox academy.  What rules do they think would be imposed by a Moslem school upon Orthodox Christians?  I wonder if the parents will be screaming "Alla Akbar" when they enter the court room.
« Last Edit: December 21, 2012, 07:16:46 PM by Basil 320 » Logged

"...Strengthen the Orthodox Community..."
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #9 on: December 21, 2012, 07:18:26 PM »

Too bad, that's what happens to a Moslem enrolled in an Eastern Orthodox academy.  What rules do they think would be imposed by a Moslem school upon Orthodox Christians?  I wonder if the parents will be screaming "Alla Akbar" when they enter the court room.

This.
Logged
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #10 on: December 21, 2012, 07:28:33 PM »

Too bad, that's what happens to a Moslem enrolled in an Eastern Orthodox academy.  What rules do they think would be imposed by a Moslem school upon Orthodox Christians?  I wonder if the parents will be screaming "Alla Akbar" when they enter the court room.

It's not quite that simple when the school is state funded.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #11 on: December 21, 2012, 07:48:32 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 
Right, sooo......."The school claims to "respect the religious beliefs and practice of all staff, pupils and parents".

What's the problem?

Would they make a little Jewish boy remove his yamika?

You asking me (as if that point is relevant)?
If it's not relevant then why the hell is that their policy?


And what about this?



"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website."
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,004


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #12 on: December 21, 2012, 07:53:37 PM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Logged

For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #13 on: December 21, 2012, 07:58:15 PM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Well said. While I don't agree with much of Islam, I think Christians in the West could use a lesson in modesty..

Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #14 on: December 21, 2012, 08:28:07 PM »

So many fails on every side...

A GREEK Orthodox school is being taken to the High Court for banning a Muslim pupil from wearing a headscarf.

The nine-year-old girl's parents were so incensed at the decision they have pulled her out of St Cyprian's Greek Orthodox Primary Academy, in Thornton Heath...

Problem solved...
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #15 on: December 21, 2012, 08:30:01 PM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Well said. While I don't agree with much of Islam, I think Christians in the West could use a lesson in modesty..



Modesty isn't covering one's head in public. Like was earlier mentioned, school isn't church.

If you think women should wear headcoverings all the time, then I feel extremely sorry for you.
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #16 on: December 21, 2012, 08:30:39 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church.  
Right, sooo......."The school claims to "respect the religious beliefs and practice of all staff, pupils and parents".

What's the problem?

Would they make a little Jewish boy remove his yamika?

You asking me (as if that point is relevant)?
If it's not relevant then why the hell is that their policy?


And what about this?



"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website."

If you must argue the point, the article ALSO states the family was aware of the policy and exactly where they enrolled their child TWO years earlier. Given the venue, I've no doubt the Church will lose the suit with Britain so well along the way to dhimmitude already. Next the family, if they win, will want prayer time set aside, icons or paintings removed. I smell a set up. But I am not up on what constitutes a "private school" over there; I doubt the case would fly over here anyway.
The girl is now enrolled at a CoE school. She'll get a warm welcome there I am sure.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #17 on: December 21, 2012, 08:31:16 PM »

With a name like the one this school has, isn't it a private academy?
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #18 on: December 21, 2012, 08:33:00 PM »

So many fails on every side...

A GREEK Orthodox school is being taken to the High Court for banning a Muslim pupil from wearing a headscarf.

The nine-year-old girl's parents were so incensed at the decision they have pulled her out of St Cyprian's Greek Orthodox Primary Academy, in Thornton Heath...

Problem solved...

Huh Huh, they still sued despite pulling the child from the school. It's a show suit. I'm quite sick of Muslim antics.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #19 on: December 21, 2012, 08:42:30 PM »

So many fails on every side...

A GREEK Orthodox school is being taken to the High Court for banning a Muslim pupil from wearing a headscarf.

The nine-year-old girl's parents were so incensed at the decision they have pulled her out of St Cyprian's Greek Orthodox Primary Academy, in Thornton Heath...

Problem solved...

Huh Huh, they still sued despite pulling the child from the school. It's a show suit. I'm quite sick of Muslim antics.

As am I, but the problem was solved when they removed the child from the school, an Orthodox school, and placed the child somewhere else.  So, I guess the question is, why take them to court.  The court should dismiss the case before it ever makes it to the court room.
Logged
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #20 on: December 21, 2012, 09:04:11 PM »

With a name like the one this school has, isn't it a private academy?

It's a voluntary aided school, meaning the buildings and facilities are privately owned and the governing body must raise at least 10% of the capital costs. This allows a much greater degree of autonomy (VA schools are almost always religious), but as 'maintained schools' (state funded, free tuition) they still have to comply with various government regulations.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #21 on: December 21, 2012, 09:10:54 PM »

With a name like the one this school has, isn't it a private academy?

It's a voluntary aided school, meaning the buildings and facilities are privately owned and the governing body must raise at least 10% of the capital costs. This allows a much greater degree of autonomy (VA schools are almost always religious), but as 'maintained schools' (state funded, free tuition) they still have to comply with various government regulations.

So it is a private religious school. 
Logged
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #22 on: December 21, 2012, 09:14:58 PM »

So it is a private religious school. 

It's a state funded religious school, but where the buildings are owned by a trust which are allowed a certain degree of autonomy as to how the school should be run.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #23 on: December 21, 2012, 09:48:28 PM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy. 
Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #24 on: December 21, 2012, 09:54:22 PM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy. 

No.  You need to realize that in other countries, things operate differently.  This should not be a difficult concept.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #25 on: December 21, 2012, 10:19:03 PM »

It is ironic that on my screen this thread is right above a thread where it is reported that Coptic priests in Sudan have been arrested for accepting the conversion of an ex-Muslim. You're right, James, things certainly do operate differently in other countries. But it is most important that the Muslim parents of this girl get to sue a religious school because it will not allow their daughter to wear her hijab. That is the most important expression of religious liberty that I could ever imagine. Ever. And Muslims certainly deserve it by virtue of being citizens. Yes. Very, very important, and not hypocritical BS on the part of Muslims around the world at all. No.
Logged

Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #26 on: December 21, 2012, 10:29:19 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because they're not Russians and they don't live in church.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #27 on: December 21, 2012, 10:32:13 PM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Well said. While I don't agree with much of Islam, I think Christians in the West could use a lesson in modesty..



Besides this, many Mohammedan women cover their faces, something very objectionable from a Christian POV.

Modesty isn't covering one's head in public. Like was earlier mentioned, school isn't church.

If you think women should wear headcoverings all the time, then I feel extremely sorry for you.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #28 on: December 21, 2012, 10:35:09 PM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy. 

But you were offended, and shouldn't have been. Someone must pay for you being offended. Time for a lawsuit--where everyone can pay!
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
Shanghaiski
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Antiochian
Posts: 7,964


Holy Trinity Church of Gergeti, Georgia


« Reply #29 on: December 21, 2012, 10:36:50 PM »

It is ironic that on my screen this thread is right above a thread where it is reported that Coptic priests in Sudan have been arrested for accepting the conversion of an ex-Muslim. You're right, James, things certainly do operate differently in other countries. But it is most important that the Muslim parents of this girl get to sue a religious school because it will not allow their daughter to wear her hijab. That is the most important expression of religious liberty that I could ever imagine. Ever. And Muslims certainly deserve it by virtue of being citizens. Yes. Very, very important, and not hypocritical BS on the part of Muslims around the world at all. No.

And if the new school's cafeteria serves pork, it's perfectly reasonable to raise a stink. After all, pork is an abomination.
Logged

Quote from: GabrieltheCelt
If you spend long enough on this forum, you'll come away with all sorts of weird, untrue ideas of Orthodox Christianity.
Quote from: orthonorm
I would suggest most persons in general avoid any question beginning with why.
ialmisry
There's nothing John of Damascus can't answer
Hypatos
*****************
Offline Offline

Faith: جامعي Arab confesssing the Orthodox Faith of the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church
Jurisdiction: Antioch (for now), but my heart belongs to Alexandria
Posts: 37,124



« Reply #30 on: December 21, 2012, 10:47:27 PM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy. 

No.  You need to realize that in other countries, things operate differently.  This should not be a difficult concept.
Yes.  In Muslim countries they force all the girls to wear them, Muslim or not.
Logged

Question a friend, perhaps he did not do it; but if he did anything so that he may do it no more.
A hasty quarrel kindles fire,
and urgent strife sheds blood.
If you blow on a spark, it will glow;
if you spit on it, it will be put out;
                           and both come out of your mouth
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,004


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #31 on: December 21, 2012, 11:06:34 PM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Well said. While I don't agree with much of Islam, I think Christians in the West could use a lesson in modesty..



Modesty isn't covering one's head in public. Like was earlier mentioned, school isn't church.

If you think women should wear headcoverings all the time, then I feel extremely sorry for you.
I don't think they should, but I could feel just as sorry for you for thinking they shouldn't.
Logged

For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #32 on: December 21, 2012, 11:34:51 PM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy. 

No.  You need to realize that in other countries, things operate differently.  This should not be a difficult concept.
Other nations don't exercise common sense?  Sorry, but that is a difficult concept.

BTW-People in the USA think like these parents.  It's rediculous.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #33 on: December 22, 2012, 12:15:23 AM »

Perhaps I am missing something.  If I send my children/child to a religious school and I do not like how they operate, I take them out and put them in a different school.  Problem solved.  It really is that easy.  

No.  You need to realize that in other countries, things operate differently.  This should not be a difficult concept.
Other nations don't exercise common sense?  Sorry, but that is a difficult concept.

BTW-People in the USA think like these parents.  It's rediculous.


What's even more ridiculous is my spelling.  Ouch!
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 12:15:35 AM by Kerdy » Logged
JamesR
Virginal Chicano Blood
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: On-n-Off
Jurisdiction: OCA (the only truly Canonical American Orthodox Church)
Posts: 5,221


St. Augustine of Hippo pray for me!


« Reply #34 on: December 22, 2012, 02:26:04 AM »

Ahh big deal. Screw them. Muslims consistently persecute us in their countries but no one gives a rat's behind, let us extract some vengeance on them in our territory. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 02:26:44 AM by JamesR » Logged

Quote
You're really on to something here. Tattoo to keep you from masturbating, chew to keep you from fornicating... it's a whole new world where you outsource your crosses. You're like a Christian entrepreneur or something.
Quote
James, you have problemz.
Maria
Orthodox Christian
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 7,838


O most Holy Theotokos, save us.


« Reply #35 on: December 22, 2012, 02:41:58 AM »

What policy does this Greek School have when the girls join a Greek Dance group and compete?

Most of the girls who participate in Greek Dancing in GOARCH wear traditional head coverings.

To be fair, if the court rules that the Muslim girl cannot wear a head covering, then the Greek Girls should not be allowed to wear their traditional head coverings when competing in Greek dancing, or vice versa, everyone should be allowed to wear a traditional veil. Cannot have it both ways.
Logged

Glory to Jesus Christ!
Glory to Him forever!
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #36 on: December 22, 2012, 02:59:19 AM »

I read the article again, and again, I see no problem with what the school said.  The parents purposely sought out this specific school, were told of the uniform requirements, it’s a regulated and private type of institution and yet they still expect the school to bend to their will.  Sounds very much like a severe case of whimper to me.  I am reminded of the Muslim students who attended a private Catholic school and were offended when the school wouldn’t take down all of their crosses.  If it’s a problem, don’t go to that school.  A little common sense goes a long way.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #37 on: December 22, 2012, 05:07:17 AM »

If an Orthodox Christian wears their baptismal cross to a private school, do you think it'd be okay for that school to tell them that they can't wear it?

I don't think it is okay, and it doesn't matter if it is private because it is still infringing on that persons freedom to practice their religion. That's also why I believe private schools affiliated with religion can't and shouldn't force those not of their religion or sect to behave, believe or dress a certain way. Sure, they can choose staff and students with religion in mind, but if they hire someone or accept a student who practiced a different faith, they can't interfere with their rights.

There are religious affiliated schools who require you to attend services. If its Christian and you're a Muslim, then why should they force you?

A school should have the right to refuse someone. But once that person is within the schools walls, the school must respect that persons freedom to practice their religion.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 05:08:32 AM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,084


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #38 on: December 22, 2012, 05:46:38 AM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???
I was just thinking the same thing

Me too. But even if the Greek girls choose not to wear head coverings, shame on this school for forcing Muslim girls not to embrace modesty. Things like this greatly hinder our efforts to evangelize Muslims.


Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,084


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #39 on: December 22, 2012, 05:49:47 AM »

I read the article again, and again, I see no problem with what the school said.  The parents purposely sought out this specific school, were told of the uniform requirements, it’s a regulated and private type of institution and yet they still expect the school to bend to their will.  Sounds very much like a severe case of whimper to me.  I am reminded of the Muslim students who attended a private Catholic school and were offended when the school wouldn’t take down all of their crosses.  If it’s a problem, don’t go to that school.  A little common sense goes a long way.

I can agree with this. However, I don't think the Greek school should have fought this particular battle. Muslims asking a Christian school to take down their crosses is an absurd request. Muslims asking that they be allowed to cover their heads in a Christian school is not an absurd request. The former is asking Christians to compromise their faith, but the latter is not.


Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #40 on: December 22, 2012, 06:24:45 AM »

If an Orthodox Christian wears their baptismal cross to a private school, do you think it'd be okay for that school to tell them that they can't wear it?

I don't think it is okay, and it doesn't matter if it is private because it is still infringing on that persons freedom to practice their religion. That's also why I believe private schools affiliated with religion can't and shouldn't force those not of their religion or sect to behave, believe or dress a certain way. Sure, they can choose staff and students with religion in mind, but if they hire someone or accept a student who practiced a different faith, they can't interfere with their rights.

There are religious affiliated schools who require you to attend services. If its Christian and you're a Muslim, then why should they force you?

A school should have the right to refuse someone. But once that person is within the schools walls, the school must respect that persons freedom to practice their religion.

If you choose to attend that school, it isn't by force you are doing anything, it's by your choice when you attend.  That is the difference between private and public schools and why public schools are required to remain neutral, because the student does not have a choice in attending.  Private schools can do whatever they want because you can always choose to leave.  By attending that school, you are stating you respect the schools policies, religion, dress code, etc., and give up any right to complain.

For example, if I attend a private university (Protestant), I must comply with their requirements, even if I disagree with them.  My option is to attend a different university.  Very simple.

Also, I am not saying I either agree or disagree with the schools decision, only I agree the choice is with the school, no one else.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 06:35:05 AM by Kerdy » Logged
Byron
Moderated
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Nationalist
Posts: 470



« Reply #41 on: December 22, 2012, 06:56:02 AM »

If an Orthodox Christian wears their baptismal cross to a private school, do you think it'd be okay for that school to tell them that they can't wear it?

I don't think it is okay, and it doesn't matter if it is private because it is still infringing on that persons freedom to practice their religion. That's also why I believe private schools affiliated with religion can't and shouldn't force those not of their religion or sect to behave, believe or dress a certain way. Sure, they can choose staff and students with religion in mind, but if they hire someone or accept a student who practiced a different faith, they can't interfere with their rights.

There are religious affiliated schools who require you to attend services. If its Christian and you're a Muslim, then why should they force you?

A school should have the right to refuse someone. But once that person is within the schools walls, the school must respect that persons freedom to practice their religion.

If you choose to attend that school, it isn't by force you are doing anything, it's by your choice when you attend.  That is the difference between private and public schools and why public schools are required to remain neutral, because the student does not have a choice in attending.  Private schools can do whatever they want because you can always choose to leave.  By attending that school, you are stating you respect the schools policies, religion, dress code, etc., and give up any right to complain.

For example, if I attend a private university (Protestant), I must comply with their requirements, even if I disagree with them.  My option is to attend a different university.  Very simple.

Also, I am not saying I either agree or disagree with the schools decision, only I agree the choice is with the school, no one else.

Kerdy is absolutely right. These Muslim parents are total tools. Simply propaganda for the agenda their backers are pushing. Wouldn't be surprised if they got financial backing from Saudi Arabia as well to go to court.

Even better, deport them back to wherever they came from and make the wearing of the hijab illegal in all public/state schools. Sort of like France has done.

This sort of nonsense would never have been attempted pre 1960s.  When will the "sheeple" living in western countries wake up?
Logged

I. Metaxas - 4th of August Regime

"Country, Loyalty, Family and Religion".

Nationalism, Monarchy, Family and Orthodoxy.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #42 on: December 22, 2012, 07:03:11 AM »

To be fair, if the court rules that the Muslim girl cannot wear a head covering, then the Greek Girls should not be allowed to wear their traditional head coverings when competing in Greek dancing, or vice versa, everyone should be allowed to wear a traditional veil. Cannot have it both ways.

This is not really a relevant point since we are discussing the regular school uniform here. I don't think Greek students are allowed to wear traditional Greek costumes to class either.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #43 on: December 22, 2012, 07:16:39 AM »

Can't believe an Orthodox school has a headcovering ban. That's ridiculous. Girls should have such modesty as a model.

That being said, most Greek Orthodox schools I know of are more Greek than Orthodox.
Well said. While I don't agree with much of Islam, I think Christians in the West could use a lesson in modesty..



Modesty isn't covering one's head in public. Like was earlier mentioned, school isn't church.

If you think women should wear headcoverings all the time, then I feel extremely sorry for you.
If you think women who would wear headcoverings if they choose to do so as a show of modesty is a problem, then I feel sorry for you. Maybe some people feel they need to be modest in school as welll as in Church. Christians at one time did.

Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #44 on: December 22, 2012, 07:25:08 AM »

Repeat...a school is not a church.  
Right, sooo......."The school claims to "respect the religious beliefs and practice of all staff, pupils and parents".

What's the problem?

Would they make a little Jewish boy remove his yamika?

You asking me (as if that point is relevant)?
If it's not relevant then why the hell is that their policy?


And what about this?



"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website."

If you must argue the point, the article ALSO states the family was aware of the policy and exactly where they enrolled their child TWO years earlier. Given the venue, I've no doubt the Church will lose the suit with Britain so well along the way to dhimmitude already. Next the family, if they win, will want prayer time set aside, icons or paintings removed. I smell a set up. But I am not up on what constitutes a "private school" over there; I doubt the case would fly over here anyway.
The girl is now enrolled at a CoE school. She'll get a warm welcome there I am sure.
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 07:26:33 AM by Charles Martel » Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #45 on: December 22, 2012, 09:24:54 AM »

Ahh big deal. Screw them. Muslims consistently persecute us in their countries but no one gives a rat's behind, let us extract some vengeance on them in our territory. An eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth.
Is this attitude what our Lord taught us?
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #46 on: December 22, 2012, 09:32:56 AM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 09:41:16 AM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #47 on: December 22, 2012, 11:15:36 AM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #48 on: December 22, 2012, 12:10:12 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

From the article: "The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan. We are the only Greek Orthodox Primary School in the whole country. The parents actively sought our school. They must have done so with their eyes open."

Seems they were duly informed. Hence, I must dismiss your rant.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #49 on: December 22, 2012, 12:22:35 PM »

Kerdy, while this case isn't the US, the rights of a person apply even in private institutions. If I go to a private school here in the US, I retain every single right within the bill of rights.

Your attitude towards this could also be used to defend the segregation and prejudice against blacks.
Based on the logic you exhibit here, you could also say that if blacks want to be treated equally with others and even be able to use the same restrooms and drinking fountains as others, they should attend a public school or a private school that allows them to.

Human rights don't work like that. Human rights are universal, and it doesn't matter if you're in a private or public institution.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #50 on: December 22, 2012, 12:26:31 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

From the article: "The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan. We are the only Greek Orthodox Primary School in the whole country. The parents actively sought our school. They must have done so with their eyes open."

Seems they were duly informed. Hence, I must dismiss your rant.

"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website. Girls are required to wear a dark blue coat, an optional blazer, a skirt, a white blouse, a navy blue pullover and navy blue or white socks and black shoes."
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
TheMathematician
Banished and Disgraced
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 1,388


Formerly known as Montalo


« Reply #51 on: December 22, 2012, 01:17:57 PM »

Kerdy, while this case isn't the US, the rights of a person apply even in private institutions. If I go to a private school here in the US, I retain every single right within the bill of rights.

Your attitude towards this could also be used to defend the segregation and prejudice against blacks.
Based on the logic you exhibit here, you could also say that if blacks want to be treated equally with others and even be able to use the same restrooms and drinking fountains as others, they should attend a public school or a private school that allows them to.

Human rights don't work like that. Human rights are universal, and it doesn't matter if you're in a private or public institution.

A public high school, like the one i attended, has every right to restrict freedom of the press, and censor articles in the high school paper deemed to be unsuitable.
Logged
TheMathematician
Banished and Disgraced
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Serbian
Posts: 1,388


Formerly known as Montalo


« Reply #52 on: December 22, 2012, 01:19:22 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

From the article: "The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan. We are the only Greek Orthodox Primary School in the whole country. The parents actively sought our school. They must have done so with their eyes open."

Seems they were duly informed. Hence, I must dismiss your rant.

"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website. Girls are required to wear a dark blue coat, an optional blazer, a skirt, a white blouse, a navy blue pullover and navy blue or white socks and black shoes."


The only thing that be construed from this is: since the headscarf is not mentioned in the school uniform, it is not part of it, and as such, is banned.
Logged
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #53 on: December 22, 2012, 01:19:51 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

What about burqas?
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #54 on: December 22, 2012, 01:21:58 PM »

What about burqas?

Like these?

Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Cyrillic
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Posts: 8,706


« Reply #55 on: December 22, 2012, 01:26:29 PM »

Isn't is a rule in schools that hats and other headgear aren't allowed in class?
Logged

On a temporary/semi-permanent/permanent vacation from OC.net.
Orthodox11
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Posts: 2,999


« Reply #56 on: December 22, 2012, 01:28:36 PM »


That would be an abaya.

A burqa is this:


And a niqab just to complete the picture:
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #57 on: December 22, 2012, 01:29:17 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

From the article: "The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan. We are the only Greek Orthodox Primary School in the whole country. The parents actively sought our school. They must have done so with their eyes open."

Seems they were duly informed. Hence, I must dismiss your rant.

"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website. Girls are required to wear a dark blue coat, an optional blazer, a skirt, a white blouse, a navy blue pullover and navy blue or white socks and black shoes."


Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #58 on: December 22, 2012, 01:36:37 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #59 on: December 22, 2012, 01:37:54 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #60 on: December 22, 2012, 01:40:53 PM »

Quote
Right and when they enrolled her there was a policy to respect their religious beliefs (within reason) and no mention of a ban on hijab or headcoverings. What is the problem with this young girl wanting to display a show of modesty to her peers? The school damn well knew the traditions of Muslims before they enrolled her and now want to make an issue of it?

Maybe these Christians aren't being convincing enough to compel the family to possibly convert away from Islam to begin with and this certainly isn't going to accomplish anything but cause them to despise the school and perhaps Orthodoxy itself.

The only "dhimmitude" going on here are by the secularists.
WHY DO YOU ASSUME they were unaware of the policy on headcoverings?

Frankly, YOU are aiding the dhimmitude by tacit agreement with a non-existent "wrong" that needs righting. And the secularists are jointed by the anti-Christians, any religion but Christianity is fine with them and worthy legal cover.
And why do you ASSUME they were? They told them their religious beliefs would be respected, nothing else. There's nothing in the article suggesting otherwise. All we have here is a young girl coming of age and in her tradition she is obligated to cover up a little in a display of modesty. I don't know the substance of Islamic modesty laws in proper dress for young females. I'm sure it varies within it's scets. But for a Christian school to have a problem with a young girl displaying a little modesty sounds a little off to me, God knows we have a hard  enough time trying to stop our young women from dressing and acting like two-bit whores, personally, I welcome a young girl displaying a little modesty, I don't care what religion she comes from.

I'm not "aiding" in anything and there is a wrong here with the school demanding that she expose herself regardless of her religious beliefs in humility and modesty. From a Christian vantage point, this family is morally correct. And if Christians would start acting more like Christians and standing up for their mores and values the secularists would back off a little or at least know that their in for a fight.

From the article: "The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan. We are the only Greek Orthodox Primary School in the whole country. The parents actively sought our school. They must have done so with their eyes open."

Seems they were duly informed. Hence, I must dismiss your rant.

"There is no mention of a ban on headscarves in the uniform policy on the school’s website. Girls are required to wear a dark blue coat, an optional blazer, a skirt, a white blouse, a navy blue pullover and navy blue or white socks and black shoes."


The only thing that be construed from this is: since the headscarf is not mentioned in the school uniform, it is not part of it, and as such, is banned.
That would definitley be a reach.

Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #61 on: December 22, 2012, 01:41:37 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 01:42:14 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #62 on: December 22, 2012, 01:42:38 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.

Can you read? Already done in Reply #48 above.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 01:44:34 PM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #63 on: December 22, 2012, 01:45:34 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.

Can you read? Already done in Reply #48 above.

In the uniform plan they published there is nothing about headcoverings.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #64 on: December 22, 2012, 01:51:52 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.

Can you read? Already done in Reply #48 above.

In the uniform plan they published there is nothing about headcoverings.

So what? They were obviously informed DIRECTLY two years earlier.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #65 on: December 22, 2012, 01:53:04 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.

Can you read? Already done in Reply #48 above.

In the uniform plan they published there is nothing about headcoverings.

So what? They were obviously informed DIRECTLY two years earlier.

They were informed about regulations which are silent about headcoverings.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #66 on: December 22, 2012, 01:53:41 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.

What we do know is that there isn't a headscarf ban on the school's website of rules. And they will respect others religious beliefs. I know that can get kind of messy, but not in this instance. all the girl wants to do is cover her hair as a sign of modesty and  obedience to God in her religion, I can't see why this is such a problem. And I damn sure don't see how it's "absolutley" clear that this issue was settled in a privet meeting.

Also, she seems to be an exemplenary student as far as the school's religious practices, you should take this into consideration.


Again, from the article;


"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Greek Orthodox practices."

Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #67 on: December 22, 2012, 01:56:14 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.
Even broken clocks are right twice a day. Grin
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #68 on: December 22, 2012, 01:59:03 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.

What we do know is that there isn't a headscarf ban on the school's website of rules. And they will respect others religious beliefs. I know that can get kind of messy, but not in this instance. all the girl wants to do is cover her hair as a sign of modesty and  obedience to God in her religion, I can't see why this is such a problem. And I damn sure don't see how it's "absolutley" clear that this issue was settled in a privet meeting.

Also, she seems to be an exemplenary student as far as the school's religious practices, you should take this into consideration.


Again, from the article;


"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Greek Orthodox practices."



What a ridiculous stretch. You're reading your own spin into the article. Bah... a waste of bandwidth this is.
Please go feel offended about something else.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #69 on: December 22, 2012, 01:59:08 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive ban on wearing crosses. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.

What we do know is that there isn't a ban on wearing crosses on the school's website of rules. And they will respect others religious beliefs. I know that can get kind of messy, but not in this instance. all the girl wants to do is wear a cross as a sign of modesty and  obedience to God in her religion, I can't see why this is such a problem. And I damn sure don't see how it's "absolutley" clear that this issue was settled in a private meeting.

Also, she seems to be an exemplary student as far as the school's religious practices, you should take this into consideration.


Again, from the article;


"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Muslim practices."



Edited it in some parts to illustrate a point.
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 01:59:44 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
JamesRottnek
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Anglican
Jurisdiction: Episcopal Diocese of Arizona
Posts: 5,103


I am Bibleman; putting 'the' back in the Ukraine


« Reply #70 on: December 22, 2012, 02:28:01 PM »

Kerdy, while this case isn't the US, the rights of a person apply even in private institutions. If I go to a private school here in the US, I retain every single right within the bill of rights.

Your attitude towards this could also be used to defend the segregation and prejudice against blacks.
Based on the logic you exhibit here, you could also say that if blacks want to be treated equally with others and even be able to use the same restrooms and drinking fountains as others, they should attend a public school or a private school that allows them to.

Human rights don't work like that. Human rights are universal, and it doesn't matter if you're in a private or public institution.

A public high school, like the one i attended, has every right to restrict freedom of the press, and censor articles in the high school paper deemed to be unsuitable.

Actually this isn't entirely correct.  While the schools certainly have much greater freedom to censor, it isn't entirely unlimited, IIRC.
Logged

I know a secret about a former Supreme Court Justice.  Can you guess what it is?

The greatest tragedy in the world is when a cigarette ends.

American Spirits - the eco-friendly cigarette.

Preston Robert Kinney (September 8th, 1997-August 14, 2011
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #71 on: December 22, 2012, 05:25:02 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because school isn't church.
But how many women wear headcoverings in Church these days?
I attended an Orthodox liturgy a while back and I didn't see it.
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #72 on: December 22, 2012, 06:07:55 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because school isn't church.
But how many women wear headcoverings in Church these days?
I attended an Orthodox liturgy a while back and I didn't see it.

Depends on where you go. My old parish is half and half. Many OCA parishes the women wear them, GOA they don't, AOCNA they do, Serbian they don't.

Of course that is my personal experience and not possibly all encompassing.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #73 on: December 22, 2012, 07:03:13 PM »

Kerdy, while this case isn't the US, the rights of a person apply even in private institutions. If I go to a private school here in the US, I retain every single right within the bill of rights.

Your attitude towards this could also be used to defend the segregation and prejudice against blacks.
Based on the logic you exhibit here, you could also say that if blacks want to be treated equally with others and even be able to use the same restrooms and drinking fountains as others, they should attend a public school or a private school that allows them to.

Human rights don't work like that. Human rights are universal, and it doesn't matter if you're in a private or public institution.
And that's the thing, her rights were not violated.  Just like a military members right to freedom of speech isn't violated when joining the armed forces, because it’s a voluntary action with known expectations.  Even better, a male Muslim, or Orthodox for that matter, can’t grow a beard for religious reasons.  They know this prior to joining and accept these restrictions upon joining.  Can I join a Quaker or Amish community and expect them to allow me to do what I want?  Can I go to a Protestant university which requires men to wear a tie and show up in a T-shirt and expect no reply from the school?  If I'm Native American and the school rule is no smoking on campus, but I claim its religious, should they make exception?  No.  This whole way of thinking is incorrect.  She can wear whatever she wants, off school property.  No rights violation, anywhere.

And to address you silly racial attempt, are there not black organizations which allow no one else to join?  Indeed.  Are my rights violated?  Nope.

There are all male and all female schools as well?  No rights violations.

There are religious organizations which allow no one but that religion, no rights violation.

My advice is to stop always thinking as a victim.  Life is too short to consider one’s self a victim every day for every reason known to man.  One persons perceived rights at the costs of another's actual rights is not how things should work.

EDIT:
I really need to stop posting from my phone so I don’t have to go back and change so much. 
 laugh
« Last Edit: December 22, 2012, 07:31:13 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #74 on: December 22, 2012, 07:12:37 PM »

Argumentative, aren't we today? The quote SPECIFICALLY says they were informed in a meeting. I know you can read. If one doesn't see something on the Internet does not mean it does not exist or that it did not occur.

What sense would be in publishing some randomly chosen rules on the website, and some not? How can you prove headcover ban is included in those rules at all?

Read the cited article CLOSELY. Why is this so hard? The "proof" is contained therein.

Can you quote it?

I agree with Charles Martel. The world has ended indeed.

Can you read? Already done in Reply #48 above.

In the uniform plan they published there is nothing about headcoverings.

So what? They were obviously informed DIRECTLY two years earlier.

They were informed about regulations which are silent about headcoverings.
My kids used to attend a charter school.  They changes regulations all the time.  Deal with it.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #75 on: December 22, 2012, 07:18:40 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #76 on: December 22, 2012, 09:20:18 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 
Although a school is not a Church, education, especially in a religious school, does have religious undertones and significance for many people. If it is a religious school, then presumably prayers are said, religious values and morals are taught, and as well being a good student and well informed and educated citizen is seen by many as being a worthwhile virtue for Christians.
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,450



« Reply #77 on: December 22, 2012, 09:34:09 PM »


That would be an abaya.

A burqa is this:


And a niqab just to complete the picture:


All of those would do a good job in fighting the muffin-top epidemic amongst our teenagers.  Unfortunately, I think the niquab and burka would need to go as not being able to identify students is a problem.
Logged
vamrat
Vamratoraptor
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Serbian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: New Gracanica
Posts: 7,450



« Reply #78 on: December 22, 2012, 09:35:10 PM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because they're not Russians and they don't live in church.

The Theotokos lived in the temple.  Why should these other girls act any different?
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #79 on: December 22, 2012, 10:26:21 PM »

Repeat...a school is not a church. 

If school is not a religious entity, then why should Muslims be allowed to conduct their religious beliefs there?
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #80 on: December 23, 2012, 01:31:28 AM »

You know...I'm not going to go all Allahu Admiral Akbar on the Greeks for restricting Moslem symbolism but this brings up a question...why weren't the Greek girls wearing head coverings???

Because they're not Russians and they don't live in church.

The Theotokos lived in the temple.  Why should these other girls act any different?

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2012, 01:32:59 AM by LBK » Logged
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,984


WWW
« Reply #81 on: December 23, 2012, 01:52:35 AM »

The girl now attends a CoE school.  Does she wear her hijab there?
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #82 on: December 23, 2012, 02:18:00 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.

Which I haven't.


Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #83 on: December 23, 2012, 02:18:58 AM »

The girl now attends a CoE school.  Does she wear her hijab there?

I am not certain, but the article states her brother still attends the school.  I wonder why.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #84 on: December 23, 2012, 02:22:02 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.

What we do know is that there isn't a headscarf ban on the school's website of rules. And they will respect others religious beliefs. I know that can get kind of messy, but not in this instance. all the girl wants to do is cover her hair as a sign of modesty and  obedience to God in her religion, I can't see why this is such a problem. And I damn sure don't see how it's "absolutley" clear that this issue was settled in a privet meeting.

Also, she seems to be an exemplenary student as far as the school's religious practices, you should take this into consideration.


Again, from the article;


"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Greek Orthodox practices."



What a ridiculous stretch. You're reading your own spin into the article. Bah... a waste of bandwidth this is.
Please go feel offended about something else.
What on earth are you talking about? You're the one who 's getting all huffy about someone else's opinons.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #85 on: December 23, 2012, 04:00:37 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?
Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #86 on: December 23, 2012, 04:03:11 AM »

Repeat...a school is not a church.  

If school is not a religious entity, then why should Muslims be allowed to conduct their religious beliefs there?

Where is that here?
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #87 on: December 23, 2012, 04:54:46 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?

Another false comparison.

A school is not a house of prayer (though it may contain a chapel), the female students are all minors (the Orthodox tradition of head covering in church was and is intended for women who are of age), and the Mother of God was, essentially, a monastic. None of the non-Moslem schoolgirls are nuns.
« Last Edit: December 23, 2012, 04:55:21 AM by LBK » Logged
Gebre Menfes Kidus
"SERVANT of The HOLY SPIRIT"
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Ethiopian Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Tewahedo / Non-Chalcedonian
Posts: 8,084


"Lord Have Mercy on Me a Sinner!"


WWW
« Reply #88 on: December 23, 2012, 06:26:42 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?


Because St. Mary's role was to give birth to Christ, not to provide an example for us to follow. Just as Christ came to to atone for our sins, not to set a moral example. Oh wait, I'm not Protestant anymore. Nix that.


Selam
Logged

"If you stop to throw stones at every dog that barks at you along the way, you will never reach your goal." [Turkish Proverb]
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #89 on: December 23, 2012, 03:15:59 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about what they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2012, 12:17:32 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #90 on: December 23, 2012, 09:23:38 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #91 on: December 23, 2012, 09:45:05 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #92 on: December 24, 2012, 05:24:19 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?

Another false comparison.

A school is not a house of prayer (though it may contain a chapel), the female students are all minors (the Orthodox tradition of head covering in church was and is intended for women who are of age), and the Mother of God was, essentially, a monastic. None of the non-Moslem schoolgirls are nuns.
So it is not proper for a woman to imitate the Mother of God?
Logged
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #93 on: December 24, 2012, 05:33:05 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?


Because St. Mary's role was to give birth to Christ, not to provide an example for us to follow. Just as Christ came to to atone for our sins, not to set a moral example. Oh wait, I'm not Protestant anymore. Nix that.


Selam
Do I understand then that according to you,  women should not follow the example of modesty that we see in the Holy Mother of God? I certainly can't agree with that. Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly. Almost every officially approved icon of the Holy Mother of God depicts her with her head covered. I see nothing wrong with women who follow the example of the Holy Mother of God. I see everything wrong with following the example of some of the modern females whose pictures we see and whose lurid stories we read about in the supermarket tabloids.
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #94 on: December 24, 2012, 05:46:25 AM »

Well if that isn't a false dichotomy...! The thing is, when it comes to Islam and covering (just like when it comes to Islam and everything else), the practices that look similar to our preexisting practices (that they stole and now claim as "Islamic") have very different motivations than ours. Muslim women cover, as per Qur'an 33:59, so that they may be identified as belonging to Muhammad's community or Muhammad: "O Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble." Christian veiling, of course, is not to identify the woman as Christian or as belonging to a particular Christian prophet. It might be better to compare the wearing of the cross to the Muslim wearing of the hijab, but of course Muslims hate the cross, so...  Undecided

So it's not very illuminating to compare the Theotokos to Muslim women, unless you're making the point that St. Mary is a Muslim (as in, a believer in Muhammad and his blasphemies; none of this "she DID submit to God" business...yes, she did -- Muhammad did not), or one of Muhammad's wives. And both of those ideas make me want to vomit.
Logged

stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #95 on: December 24, 2012, 05:52:43 AM »

Well if that isn't a false dichotomy...! The thing is, when it comes to Islam and covering (just like when it comes to Islam and everything else), the practices that look similar to our preexisting practices (that they stole and now claim as "Islamic") have very different motivations than ours. Muslim women cover, as per Qur'an 33:59, so that they may be identified as belonging to Muhammad's community or Muhammad: "O Prophet! say to your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers that they let down upon them their over-garments; this will be more proper, that they may be known, and thus they will not be given trouble." Christian veiling, of course, is not to identify the woman as Christian or as belonging to a particular Christian prophet. It might be better to compare the wearing of the cross to the Muslim wearing of the hijab, but of course Muslims hate the cross, so...  Undecided

So it's not very illuminating to compare the Theotokos to Muslim women, unless you're making the point that St. Mary is a Muslim (as in, a believer in Muhammad and his blasphemies; none of this "she DID submit to God" business...yes, she did -- Muhammad did not), or one of Muhammad's wives. And both of those ideas make me want to vomit.
Mary is not a Muslim, but it is not unknown for people who are outside the Christian tradition to show their respect to Christian saints.
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #96 on: December 24, 2012, 05:59:36 AM »

Yes, fine, but my point is that we cannot look at Muslims and say, as you appeared to be saying in your post, that they veil as the Theotokos veiled, so it's a good thing. It's not an inherently good thing, as they're doing it for wrong reasons, so there's no real comparison to be made. They're not following the example of the mother of God in any way. If they really were, they would be followers of Christ, not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #97 on: December 24, 2012, 06:56:45 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #98 on: December 24, 2012, 08:02:21 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

Muslims have Jesus not as the Anointed One, Christ.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #99 on: December 24, 2012, 08:09:00 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

Muslims have Jesus not as the Anointed One, Christ.

Wrong. They call Him Masih.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #100 on: December 24, 2012, 08:14:55 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

Muslims have Jesus not as the Anointed One, Christ.

Wrong. They call Him Masih.

Do they? And what do they mean by that?

Not the Son of God, not One of the Trinity = Christ-denier.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2012, 08:16:26 AM by Αριστοκλής » Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #101 on: December 24, 2012, 08:23:11 AM »

Do they? And what do they mean by that?

"Anointed" as everyone does.

Quote
Not the Son of God, not One of the Trinity = Christ-denier.

Are Roman Catholics or Nestorians Christ-deniers too?
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 3,948


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #102 on: December 24, 2012, 08:31:14 AM »

Here in the UK, religious paraphernalia, of any religion, break school uniform code, and not only in secular schools (I call them that because most religious schools are public as well, so they fall under the same directive). That means no crosses, no Stars of David, no Sikh bracelets, and no hijab. End of story.

Perhaps a clearer policy over there wouldn't have muddied the waters so much.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #103 on: December 24, 2012, 08:32:53 AM »

Do they? And what do they mean by that?

"Anointed" as everyone does.

Quote
Not the Son of God, not One of the Trinity = Christ-denier.

Are Roman Catholics or Nestorians Christ-deniers too?

Your argument is silly.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #104 on: December 24, 2012, 08:40:01 AM »

Your argument is silly.

Really?

Everyone everywhere understand "messiah", "christos", "christ", "christus", "mashiach", "crist", "masih"  as "the anointed one". Only you for unknown reason broaden that definition to "everything the Eastern Orthodox Church believes about Jesus of Nazareth".

There are many reasons to blame Muslims of. We do not need to invent more, especially ungrounded ones.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #105 on: December 24, 2012, 08:40:34 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

His existence isn't denied, rather His divinity.  To them, Jesus is only a prophet, not even the greatest prophet, and certainly not the Messiah.  They deny Him.
Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #106 on: December 24, 2012, 08:45:21 AM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

His existence isn't denied, rather His divinity.  To them, Jesus is only a prophet, not even the greatest prophet, and certainly not the Messiah.  They deny Him.

He is Messiah for them.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #107 on: December 24, 2012, 08:49:50 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #108 on: December 24, 2012, 08:51:28 AM »

Your argument is silly.

Really?

Everyone everywhere understand "messiah", "christos", "christ", "christus", "mashiach", "crist", "masih"  as "the anointed one". Only you for unknown reason broaden that definition to "everything the Eastern Orthodox Church believes about Jesus of Nazareth".

There are many reasons to blame Muslims of. We do not need to invent more, especially ungrounded ones.

Bah, so says Michal the New Theologian. I don't buy it. You don't like that, too bad.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #109 on: December 24, 2012, 08:51:47 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?

Another false comparison.

A school is not a house of prayer (though it may contain a chapel), the female students are all minors (the Orthodox tradition of head covering in church was and is intended for women who are of age), and the Mother of God was, essentially, a monastic. None of the non-Moslem schoolgirls are nuns.
So it is not proper for a woman to imitate the Mother of God?
Evidently it's not in the West these days.

Oh wait, excuse me..........only if your in a Church. Roll Eyes
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #110 on: December 24, 2012, 09:06:01 AM »

Yes, fine, but my point is that we cannot look at Muslims and say, as you appeared to be saying in your post, that they veil as the Theotokos veiled, so it's a good thing. It's not an inherently good thing, as they're doing it for wrong reasons, so there's no real comparison to be made. They're not following the example of the mother of God in any way. If they really were, they would be followers of Christ, not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.
They' doing it because they believe that once a young girl reaches the age of seven she should begin to start covering up her "adornments" or things that separate herself from the boys and not giving them temptation to sin, that's why she veils. she's doing it in order to "avoid the near occasion to sin"......sound familiar?

From the article;

"The parents believe it would be a sin for her head to be uncovered because she has reached puberty and is in the presence of male teachers."



They do it in obedience to God (Allah). Is this such a "wrong reason"?

I'm not advocating the heresy of Islam but not everything in that religion misses the mark. But here in the degenerate, secularized, pornographic West we have lost a sense of modesty and humility with our women (and men for that matter) and we are so brainwashed about our "rights" that many of our women carry themselves openly as venerable whores which we turn a blind eye or are willing to accept just about anything except small forms of common decency practiced by a people where it's culturally accepted to despise these days.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #111 on: December 24, 2012, 09:13:35 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?

Another false comparison.

A school is not a house of prayer (though it may contain a chapel), the female students are all minors (the Orthodox tradition of head covering in church was and is intended for women who are of age), and the Mother of God was, essentially, a monastic. None of the non-Moslem schoolgirls are nuns.
So it is not proper for a woman to imitate the Mother of God?
Would you suggest, then, that ALL women become nuns? Last I heard, men can't make babies by themselves.
« Last Edit: December 24, 2012, 09:23:31 AM by PeterTheAleut » Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #112 on: December 24, 2012, 09:15:44 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?


Because St. Mary's role was to give birth to Christ, not to provide an example for us to follow. Just as Christ came to to atone for our sins, not to set a moral example. Oh wait, I'm not Protestant anymore. Nix that.


Selam
Do I understand then that according to you,  women should not follow the example of modesty that we see in the Holy Mother of God? I certainly can't agree with that. Perhaps I am not understanding you correctly.
No, you aren't understanding him correctly, for you totally missed that Gebre was speaking in sarcasm, which he often does on this forum.
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #113 on: December 24, 2012, 09:18:47 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #114 on: December 24, 2012, 09:29:06 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Why do you not?
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #115 on: December 24, 2012, 09:31:46 AM »

The Mother of God was dedicated to the temple by her parents to fulfill their vow to God to do so if He granted them a child. Last time I checked, schools are not temples, nor are children consecrated to live there to fulfill solemn vows to God.
How often do officially approved icons depict the Holy Mother of God with Her head uncovered? I don't see anything wrong with women following a custom of covering their head as did the Mother of God? If the Mother of God covered Her head, then why can't any girl, muslim or not, cover her head also?

Another false comparison.

A school is not a house of prayer (though it may contain a chapel), the female students are all minors (the Orthodox tradition of head covering in church was and is intended for women who are of age), and the Mother of God was, essentially, a monastic. None of the non-Moslem schoolgirls are nuns.
So it is not proper for a woman to imitate the Mother of God?
Would you suggest, then, that ALL women become nuns? Last I heard, men can't make babies by themselves.
Do you try to imitate Christ? No babies for you either then.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #116 on: December 24, 2012, 09:57:58 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

I disagree that they owe an explaination. 
Logged
Alpo
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox. With some feta, please.
Posts: 6,497



« Reply #117 on: December 24, 2012, 10:32:34 AM »

So many fails on every side...

[/thread]
Logged
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #118 on: December 24, 2012, 11:16:13 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Why do you not?
Because it's none of our business.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #119 on: December 24, 2012, 05:07:00 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

I disagree that they owe an explaination. 
that's the problem.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #120 on: December 24, 2012, 05:07:54 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Why do you not?
Because it's none of our business.
then why is there a thread about it?
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
SolEX01
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Archdiocese of America, Holy Metropolis of New Jersey
Posts: 10,984


WWW
« Reply #121 on: December 24, 2012, 05:13:50 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Why do you not?
Because it's none of our business.
then why is there a thread about it?

Because Hyperdox Herman was looking for a little holiday fun.   Wink
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #122 on: December 24, 2012, 07:19:25 PM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

His existence isn't denied, rather His divinity.  To them, Jesus is only a prophet, not even the greatest prophet, and certainly not the Messiah.  They deny Him.

He is Messiah for them.
I find it interesting you leave out "the", as in THE Messiah instead of "a" messiah, simply for the sake of argument.  Why would you do this?
« Last Edit: December 24, 2012, 07:35:57 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #123 on: December 24, 2012, 07:21:27 PM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

I disagree that they owe an explaination. 
that's the problem.

For you, perhaps.  Sometimes, we just don't get what we want.
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #124 on: December 24, 2012, 08:23:25 PM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

His existence isn't denied, rather His divinity.  To them, Jesus is only a prophet, not even the greatest prophet, and certainly not the Messiah.  They deny Him.

He is Messiah for them.
I find it interesting you leave out "the", as in THE Messiah instead of "a" messiah, simply for the sake of argument.  Why would you do this?

In common with other Slavic languages (except for Macedonian and Bulgarian), neither Belorussian nor Polish have definite articles, so Michal could have just forgotten it. 
Logged

Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #125 on: December 24, 2012, 08:28:58 PM »

not the Christ-denying blasphemer Muhammad.

How can Muhammad be a Christ-denier as Christ in Islam is one of the most important prophets?

His existence isn't denied, rather His divinity.  To them, Jesus is only a prophet, not even the greatest prophet, and certainly not the Messiah.  They deny Him.

He is Messiah for them.
I find it interesting you leave out "the", as in THE Messiah instead of "a" messiah, simply for the sake of argument.  Why would you do this?

In common with other Slavic languages (except for Macedonian and Bulgarian), neither Belorussian nor Polish have definite articles, so Michal could have just forgotten it. 

I hope that is the case, and it is a plausible explanation.  Still, I believe he likely knows the intent of what people are saying.  Perhaps we should use the word Savior instead of Messiah, although, depending on which definition is used, it would mean the same thing.  In any event, he cannot deny Muslims deny Jesus for who He really was.
Logged
Nicene
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Greek
Posts: 574


« Reply #126 on: December 24, 2012, 10:44:58 PM »

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?
Logged

Thank you.
NicholasMyra
Taxiarches
**********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian/Greek
Posts: 5,761


Avowed denominationalist


« Reply #127 on: December 25, 2012, 03:35:51 AM »

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?

Ethnic prejudice.
Logged

Quote from: Orthonorm
if Christ does and says x. And someone else does and says not x and you are ever in doubt, follow Christ.

"Simply put, if you’re not willing to take what is dearest to you, whether plans or people, and kiss it goodbye, you can’t be my disciple."
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #128 on: December 25, 2012, 04:20:49 AM »

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?

Ethnic prejudice.

How so?  Are others allowed to wear their specific type of head coverings?  Is anyone allowed head coverings?  Maybe I don't understand what you mean.  Perhaps it is as simply as school policy and there is nothing else to this.  At this point, no one has all of the specifics so I feel it may be a little premature for this sort of statement.  Even in public schools here in the United States, there are still types of clothing students are not allowed to wear.  Why don’t we all stop playing the feelings game without enough information.  Based on what we do know, nothing has been done which is legally wrong.  Morally, perhaps...that is debatable, but legally, no.  At least nothing we can say for certain.
Logged
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #129 on: December 25, 2012, 04:33:36 AM »

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?

Ethnic prejudice.

"Muslim" is not an ethnicity. Try again.
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #130 on: December 25, 2012, 06:19:45 AM »

In any event, he cannot deny Muslims deny Jesus for who He really was.

Roman Catholics also deny it. Not to mention Protestants or Nestorians.

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?

Ethnic prejudice.

"Muslim" is not an ethnicity. Try again.

Hijab is not a Muslim thing. Try again.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
PeterTheAleut
The Right Blowhard Peter the Furtive of Yetts O'Muckhart
Section Moderator
Protospatharios
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 31,472


EXTERMINATE!


« Reply #131 on: December 25, 2012, 06:40:31 AM »

From the article;

""The pupil in question came to us from a private school. Her parents actively chose us and, before she arrived, we held a meeting which included details of the uniform plan."

Ok, so this still doesn't reveal anything about a definitive headscarf ban. We can't just take it on assumption that this particular issue was discussed at the time and why the heck doesn't the school just come right out and say they did discuss it prior to her admittance if their so damn adamant about the whole issue.
Why does it matter to you what they did or did not discuss in a private meeting? You obviously were not there.
Neither were you or anyone else on this forum, so no one can assume anything that was said at it.
I've not made any assumptions about what was said there.

Which I haven't.
You seem to have some very strong opinions about they should have discussed, however. You also seem to think they owe you an explanation.
They owe the Muslim girl and her family an explanation.....not me.
I disagree; however, the family was given an explaination.  They simply did not like the explaination provided.
How can you disagree when you don't even know what the "explanation" detalied?

Again, they're not even telling us if they told her headcoverings were forbidden at that "private discussion" before her enrollment and if they did why don't they just come out and declare "we told them so!" before they joined the school?

Why is this so difficult? Why do we have to "read between the lines" about this private discussion?

Something fishy's going on here and that's why this Muslim family is taking them to task.
Why do you care?
Why do you not?
Because it's none of our business.
then why is there a thread about it?
Again, why do you care?
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #132 on: December 25, 2012, 06:44:31 AM »

In any event, he cannot deny Muslims deny Jesus for who He really was.

Roman Catholics also deny it. Not to mention Protestants or Nestorians.

It may help a little if you stop talking in riddles.  It seems you are the only one who knows what you are really saying.  This limits discussion considerably.  Actually, it makes it almost one sided.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #133 on: December 25, 2012, 06:48:32 AM »

In any event, he cannot deny Muslims deny Jesus for who He really was.

Roman Catholics also deny it. Not to mention Protestants or Nestorians.

The hijab is essentially a headscarf right? How can an orthodox school ban that? Its their right and all but wheres the logic in it?

Ethnic prejudice.

"Muslim" is not an ethnicity. Try again.

Hijab is not a Muslim thing. Try again.

"the traditional head, face, or body covering worn by Muslim women or men. It does not only refer to the physical body covering, but also embodies a metaphysical dimension, where al-hijab refers to "the veil which separates man or the world from God.""

Really?

Why is it then when I google it the only references to hijab are from or about Islam?

For instance:

hi·jab (h-jäb)
n.
1. The headscarf worn by Muslim women, sometimes including a veil that covers the face except for the eyes.
2. The veiling or seclusion of women in some Islamic societies, customarily practiced in order to maintain standards of modesty.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 06:49:48 AM by Kerdy » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #134 on: December 25, 2012, 07:09:21 AM »

These Muslims do not wear them:

Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #135 on: December 25, 2012, 07:27:11 AM »

These Muslims do not wear them:


Soooooo, anyway...hijab is a muslim garment and I understand why a private Orthodox school would not allow it to be worn.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 07:28:15 AM by Kerdy » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #136 on: December 25, 2012, 08:00:10 AM »

Soooooo, anyway...hijab is a muslim garment

 Roll Eyes



« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 08:00:37 AM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #137 on: December 25, 2012, 08:19:32 AM »

You have an unparalleled skill for making non-points.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #138 on: December 25, 2012, 08:22:33 AM »

Soooooo, anyway...hijab is a muslim garment

 Roll Eyes



The monastic Habit: khiton, undercassock, mantle, klobuk, paraman, etc.

 Roll Eyes
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 08:26:22 AM by Kerdy » Logged
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #139 on: December 25, 2012, 09:07:59 AM »

 Roll Eyes Thread going nowhere...
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #140 on: December 25, 2012, 12:37:06 PM »

The monastic Habit: khiton, undercassock, mantle, klobuk, paraman, etc.

How are they different from hijabs?
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 12:37:25 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #141 on: December 25, 2012, 01:09:01 PM »

Because as I tried to explain in my earlier post, Michal, it is more than just a piece of fabric. Yes, they look similar, but their motivations are different. Hijab was invented for Muslim women to be identified as Muslim women and "not troubled" (or whatever translation your prefer). Is that why nuns wear their coverings? No. So they're not comparable.

[Incidentally, a friend of mine who got a degree in Near Eastern/Arabic history (with a specialization in interactions between early Islam and the Byzantine empire) at NYU told me that the real roots of the hijab lie in harassment of Muhammad's wives by people in Arabia due to their being recognized. One of his companions told him something like "You know, your wives would be harassed a lot less if they couldn't be identified", and voila, the hijab was born. I don't know how true this is, but apparently he got it from some Arabic source.]
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #142 on: December 25, 2012, 01:13:57 PM »

Because as I tried to explain in my earlier post, Michal, it is more than just a piece of fabric. Yes, they look similar, but their motivations are different.

Did that school ban "motivations" or a piece of fabric?
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 01:16:10 PM by Michał Kalina » Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
dzheremi
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Coptic
Posts: 4,027


« Reply #143 on: December 25, 2012, 01:33:13 PM »

That was not your question. You asked how they're different than the hijab. That can be answered without reference to the school's decision. Quit moving the goal posts, Michal.
Logged

mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #144 on: December 25, 2012, 01:37:15 PM »

People do not put on "motivations" or "ideologies". They put on specially formed pieces of cloth. And my question is what it the (real / material) difference between the ones called hijab and monastic habit as I do not see anyone.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #145 on: December 25, 2012, 01:43:04 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #146 on: December 25, 2012, 03:20:20 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Seems modesty went out with Byzantium as well.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #147 on: December 25, 2012, 08:35:06 PM »

Because as I tried to explain in my earlier post, Michal, it is more than just a piece of fabric. Yes, they look similar, but their motivations are different.

Did that school ban "motivations" or a piece of fabric?
Please stop running around in circles.  
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 08:40:13 PM by Kerdy » Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #148 on: December 25, 2012, 08:39:14 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Seems modesty went out with Byzantium as well.

Modesty isn't asking women to constantly have their heads covered, or asking women to cover most of their body.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #149 on: December 25, 2012, 08:39:43 PM »

People do not put on "motivations" or "ideologies". They put on specially formed pieces of cloth. And my question is what it the (real / material) difference between the ones called hijab and monastic habit as I do not see anyone.
I suppose US Army troops and Nazi SS troops were the same in WW2 as well.  I mean, both were well trained in an organized military, both had weapons, both wore military uniforms, both killed their ememy.  They are essentially the same, right?

A poor example to be certain, but I hope the irrational correlation presented makes my point.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 08:42:50 PM by Kerdy » Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #150 on: December 25, 2012, 08:46:02 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Seems modesty went out with Byzantium as well.

Modesty isn't asking women to constantly have their heads covered, or asking women to cover most of their body.
Actually true modesty is a woman doing it on her own volition.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #151 on: December 25, 2012, 08:51:32 PM »

People do not put on "motivations" or "ideologies". They put on specially formed pieces of cloth. And my question is what it the (real / material) difference between the ones called hijab and monastic habit as I do not see anyone.
I suppose US Army troops and Nazi SS troops were the same in WW2 as well.  I mean, both were well trained in an organized military, both had weapons, both wore military uniforms, both killed their ememy.  They are essentially the same, right?
A poor example to be certain, but I hope the irrational correlation presented makes my point.
Yes they were all soldiers. This includes the Red Army of the Soviets, the allies of the American Army.

 That is a poor example in a way because just about all fighting men on every side believed that "God" was on their side.

Just like the monastics and the hijab-wearing Muslims.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #152 on: December 25, 2012, 08:55:34 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Seems modesty went out with Byzantium as well.

Modesty isn't asking women to constantly have their heads covered, or asking women to cover most of their body.
Actually true modesty is a woman doing it on her own volition.

You have a really weird idea of modesty, or at least an idea that seems incredibly misogynistic.

To me, if a girl wears shorts slightly above her knee rather than shorts up almost to her crotch, she is being modest. The other day there was a girl in Chipotle who basically had those obscenely short shorts and they were kind of a similar appearance as Michael Jackson's glove. It even caught the attention of the older women in the store. I would consider that obscene. However, if a girl were to wear knee-high shorts, she is being modest.

I would like to see more girls wear skirts, not because I have some screwed-up view of modesty, but because I think they are actually more attractive and beautiful that way.

There was a time, not too long ago, when girls weren't allowed to wear pants because they were seen as too "sexy" and obscene, even though they showed no skin and men were allowed to wear pants. In fact, there was even a time when pants were considered barbaric and obscene.

If we stuck with antiquated ideas of modesty, we'd all look like the Amish.
« Last Edit: December 25, 2012, 08:57:52 PM by 88Devin12 » Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #153 on: December 25, 2012, 09:15:15 PM »

The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Seems modesty went out with Byzantium as well.

Modesty isn't asking women to constantly have their heads covered, or asking women to cover most of their body.
Actually true modesty is a woman doing it on her own volition.

You have a really weird idea of modesty, or at least an idea that seems incredibly misogynistic.

To me, if a girl wears shorts slightly above her knee rather than shorts up almost to her crotch, she is being modest. The other day there was a girl in Chipotle who basically had those obscenely short shorts and they were kind of a similar appearance as Michael Jackson's glove. It even caught the attention of the older women in the store. I would consider that obscene. However, if a girl were to wear knee-high shorts, she is being modest.

I would like to see more girls wear skirts, not because I have some screwed-up view of modesty, but because I think they are actually more attractive and beautiful that way.

There was a time, not too long ago, when girls weren't allowed to wear pants because they were seen as too "sexy" and obscene, even though they showed no skin and men were allowed to wear pants. In fact, there was even a time when pants were considered barbaric and obscene.

If we stuck with antiquated ideas of modesty, we'd all look like the Amish.
I think you have it backwards, the way some of these woman are dressing (or not) with all their parts hanging out all over and exposed we seem to be moving back in time and look like some of those primitive tribes from National Geographic where the men treat women like property and take them at will. you want to talk about a twisted idea of "modesty".

We are removing all barriers for the social  mores and values of a society and won't be long to we descend back to the brain of the beast.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,004


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #154 on: December 25, 2012, 11:50:06 PM »

^I'm glad somebody is thinking clearly!

Quote
The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Really? Where did you derive that sentiment from?

Personally, I find modesty as a beautiful expression of faith, and find it hard to understand why some women don't want to wear headscarves.
Logged

For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #155 on: December 26, 2012, 12:17:42 AM »

^I'm glad somebody is thinking clearly!

Quote
The Muslim practice of the Hijab actually has partial roots in Byzantium. But of course, this isn't ancient Byzantium, and that was a cultural thing rather than religious.
Really? Where did you derive that sentiment from?

Personally, I find modesty as a beautiful expression of faith, and find it hard to understand why some women don't want to wear headscarves.

I think you have words confused. The Muslim Hijab actually does have parts of its origin in the Byzantine Empire, where the practice of women (more especially higher ranking women rather than lower-class women) was to cover themselves, often to show position rather than modesty. It wasn't rooted in the Christian faith, but rather in the original practice of many Roman women prior to the Christianization of the Empire.
Logged
Antonis
Prodigal
OC.net guru
*******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Metropolis of San Francisco
Posts: 1,004


You must try this Balkan blend, Barsanuphius.


« Reply #156 on: December 26, 2012, 12:20:21 AM »

Sorry, I wasn't clear, how did you develop the understanding that wearing headcoverings was simply a cultural thing for Byzantine women?
Logged

For peace in the whole world,
for the stability of the holy churches of God,
and for the unity of all,
let us pray to the Lord.
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #157 on: December 26, 2012, 01:55:38 AM »

Sorry, I wasn't clear, how did you develop the understanding that wearing headcoverings was simply a cultural thing for Byzantine women?

It wasn't universal among all women for one, it was among the more well off families rather than the poor and was inherited from the ancient Romans rather than the ancient Jews.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #158 on: December 26, 2012, 01:57:19 AM »

Congratulations on side tracking the real issue here!  Bottom line, it's up to the school. 
Logged
88Devin12
Warned
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: OCA
Posts: 4,864



« Reply #159 on: December 26, 2012, 02:53:01 PM »

So then, whose standards of modesty should we use for secular society? What time period? What culture?

Should women dress like this:



If so, which one?
and that doesn't even include Asia.
Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #160 on: December 27, 2012, 07:36:08 AM »

Congratulations on side tracking the real issue here!  Bottom line, it's up to the school. 
So the school has absolute power.

Tell me, would you feel the same if they banned her for her race or ethnicity?
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
stanley123
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Catholic
Jurisdiction: Roman Catholic
Posts: 3,809


« Reply #161 on: December 27, 2012, 12:15:12 PM »

So then, whose standards of modesty should we use for secular society? What time period? What culture?

Should women dress like this:
I don't see why some Orthodox Christians make such a fuss and complaint about young women who want to wear headcovering? Yes, of course, if the outfit covers the whole face except for a small slit for the eyes, it would present a problem of identification. But for a simple scarf or covering of the head, I don't see the problem that some Orthodox Christians on this forum have with that.
« Last Edit: December 27, 2012, 12:16:15 PM by stanley123 » Logged
orthonorm
Hoplitarches
*************
Offline Offline

Faith: Sola Gratia
Jurisdiction: Outside
Posts: 16,343



« Reply #162 on: December 27, 2012, 01:42:04 PM »

Can someone move all these posts out of "news" so I can make some acerbic points?
Logged

Ignorance is not a lack, but a passion.
biro
Excelsior
Site Supporter
Toumarches
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Greek Orthodox Church
Posts: 12,658


Και κλήρονομον δείξον με, ζωής της αιωνίου

fleem
WWW
« Reply #163 on: December 27, 2012, 07:24:16 PM »

Can someone move all these posts out of "news" so I can make some acerbic points?

Maybe you could start a spinoff thread in Other Topics. Just a thought.
Logged

Charlie Rose: If you could change one thing about the world, what would it be?

Fran Lebowitz: Everything. There is not one thing with which I am satisfied.

http://spcasuncoast.org/
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #164 on: December 27, 2012, 08:47:44 PM »

Congratulations on side tracking the real issue here!  Bottom line, it's up to the school.  
So the school has absolute power.

Tell me, would you feel the same if they banned her for her race or ethnicity?
Yes, it's a private school.  They make the rules.

They didn't, but for clarification, do you mean in the same way some schools are male or female only or how some are restricted to a certain race?  Like those schools?  Or do you mean like scholarships which are reserved for specific ethnical groups?  Something like those?
« Last Edit: December 27, 2012, 08:51:08 PM by Kerdy » Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #165 on: December 29, 2012, 06:41:41 PM »

One of the big problems with the school's logic is not that it is anti-Muslim in particular, but that it can apply similarly to Orthodox.

The school's logic can be that the veil discriminates against women. But that is one of the occasional claims made against women wearing veils in Orthodox countries. St Paul said women would be submissive to their husbands as heads of their families, and the husbands would have to respect their wives in return. St Paul's idea of the husband being the protecting head of the family though has been sometimes depicted as anti-female. So this kind of reasoning used against Muslim head coverings can then be used against Orthodox women.

Another kind of reasoning can be that the headscarf is showing a strong religious character in a school that should be equal or without a religion showing itself strongly. But this thinking can also be used against Orthodox girls who are more strongly religious.

I think Orthodox who care about the issue should be OK with women choosing a custom where it matches an Orthodox one, rather than banning it because it's part of a religion with whose basics we disagree.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 06:42:22 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #166 on: December 29, 2012, 08:50:59 PM »

People do not put on "motivations" or "ideologies". They put on specially formed pieces of cloth. And my question is what it the (real / material) difference between the ones called hijab and monastic habit as I do not see anyone.
I suppose US Army troops and Nazi SS troops were the same in WW2 as well.  I mean, both were well trained in an organized military, both had weapons, both wore military uniforms, both killed their ememy.  They are essentially the same, right?
A poor example to be certain, but I hope the irrational correlation presented makes my point.
Yes they were all soldiers.

In this case, I suppose clothing is clothing, whether it be a habit, summer dress, string bikini or a bowtie.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #167 on: December 29, 2012, 08:55:32 PM »

One of the big problems with the school's logic is not that it is anti-Muslim in particular, but that it can apply similarly to Orthodox.

The school's logic can be that the veil discriminates against women. But that is one of the occasional claims made against women wearing veils in Orthodox countries. St Paul said women would be submissive to their husbands as heads of their families, and the husbands would have to respect their wives in return. St Paul's idea of the husband being the protecting head of the family though has been sometimes depicted as anti-female. So this kind of reasoning used against Muslim head coverings can then be used against Orthodox women.

Another kind of reasoning can be that the headscarf is showing a strong religious character in a school that should be equal or without a religion showing itself strongly. But this thinking can also be used against Orthodox girls who are more strongly religious.

I think Orthodox who care about the issue should be OK with women choosing a custom where it matches an Orthodox one, rather than banning it because it's part of a religion with whose basics we disagree.

It also could be as simple as it isn't part of the approved school clothing guidelines with no discriminatory influence or social etiquette influence at all.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #168 on: December 29, 2012, 09:03:15 PM »

Has anyone, other than myself, gone to this schools webpage to see if they even utilize school uniforms and if so, what do they look like?  There is a lot of speculation and guessing going on when a quick visit to the school page will answer this simply question.  But, I will do it for you.

Yes, they have uniforms. 
Yes, with the exception of what appears to be kindergarten, they all look the same.
No, the females to not have any head coverings.  It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #169 on: December 29, 2012, 09:33:59 PM »

No, the females to not have any head coverings. It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.
If it's that simple, what is the point of discussing anything. eg.: School X doesn't allow crosses. It doesn't matter if you think they should, they don't.

I happen to think if a person in an Orthodox school wants to wear crosses or religious clothes matching Orthodox traditions, like modest dresses or veils for girls, they should be allowed to.

Regards.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2012, 09:37:48 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #170 on: December 29, 2012, 09:52:34 PM »

Congratulations on side tracking the real issue here!  Bottom line, it's up to the school.  
So the school has absolute power.

Tell me, would you feel the same if they banned her for her race or ethnicity?
Yes, it's a private school.  They make the rules.

They didn't, but for clarification, do you mean in the same way some schools are male or female only or how some are restricted to a certain race?  Like those schools?  Or do you mean like scholarships which are reserved for specific ethnical groups?  Something like those?
I believe they would never stand for racial intolerance as much as religious, that's all.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #171 on: December 29, 2012, 09:55:23 PM »

Has anyone, other than myself, gone to this schools webpage to see if they even utilize school uniforms and if so, what do they look like?  There is a lot of speculation and guessing going on when a quick visit to the school page will answer this simply question.  But, I will do it for you.

Yes, they have uniforms. 
Yes, with the exception of what appears to be kindergarten, they all look the same.
No, the females to not have any head coverings.  It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.

Does it stipulate they can't?

you're right, it doesn't matter one way or another what we think.


Point is, what did the school think or declare before she enrolled about headcoverings?

We're not getting any info on that either way.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #172 on: December 29, 2012, 10:07:54 PM »

No, the females to not have any head coverings. It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.
If it's that simple, what is the point of discussing anything. eg.: School X doesn't allow crosses. It doesn't matter if you think they should, they don't.

I happen to think if a person in an Orthodox school wants to wear crosses or religious clothes matching Orthodox traditions, like modest dresses or veils for girls, they should be allowed to.

Regards.

And I agree with you, unless that Orthodox person willfully attends a private institution which does not allow that sort of thing.  It’s up to that person to ensure they do not find themself in that situation.  Their option is attend an institution which does allow that sort of thing.  If they willingly attend one which does not, they have no room to grip.  If a parent sends their child to an institution like that, they also have no room to grip. 

Prior to becoming Orthodox, my wife and I discussed sending out children to a Catholic school.  School rules were part of that discussion.  We couldn’t afford the tuition so we sent them to a Charter school.  Guess what, they also make the rules and if you don’t like it, your option is to send your child to a different school, period.  School uniforms were a requirement and even if it was not written in the handbook, they could change the rules, which they did several times.  Like is hard sometimes.  Deal with it.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #173 on: December 29, 2012, 10:08:46 PM »

Congratulations on side tracking the real issue here!  Bottom line, it's up to the school.  
So the school has absolute power.

Tell me, would you feel the same if they banned her for her race or ethnicity?
Yes, it's a private school.  They make the rules.

They didn't, but for clarification, do you mean in the same way some schools are male or female only or how some are restricted to a certain race?  Like those schools?  Or do you mean like scholarships which are reserved for specific ethnical groups?  Something like those?
I believe they would never stand for racial intolerance as much as religious, that's all.

No one said it was either of these. You are making an assumption.
Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #174 on: December 29, 2012, 10:14:38 PM »

Has anyone, other than myself, gone to this schools webpage to see if they even utilize school uniforms and if so, what do they look like?  There is a lot of speculation and guessing going on when a quick visit to the school page will answer this simply question.  But, I will do it for you.

Yes, they have uniforms. 
Yes, with the exception of what appears to be kindergarten, they all look the same.
No, the females to not have any head coverings.  It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.

Does it stipulate they can't?

you're right, it doesn't matter one way or another what we think.


Point is, what did the school think or declare before she enrolled about headcoverings?

We're not getting any info on that either way.

No, the point is the school makes its own rules. 

If they require females to wear head coverings, it’s their choice, but they said no.  There appears to be a standard uniform code and anything outside that code is not accepted. 

If I am in charge of an institution and I say, “You will wear this and this,” but I do not exclude what you can wear, you think it acceptable.  However, the truth is, when I say, “You will wear this and this,” that is all you are going to wear.  If you don’t have permission, the answer is no.  How long of a dress code do you want?  If you mention all the things you can’t wear rather than was you are allowed to wear, the book would be about 3 tons.  Let’s be rational about this whole thing.
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #175 on: December 30, 2012, 01:27:42 AM »

No, the females to not have any head coverings. It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.
If it's that simple, what is the point of discussing anything. eg.: School X doesn't allow crosses. It doesn't matter if you think they should, they don't.

I happen to think if a person in an Orthodox school wants to wear crosses or religious clothes matching Orthodox traditions, like modest dresses or veils for girls, they should be allowed to.

Regards.

And I agree with you, unless that Orthodox person willfully attends a private institution which does not allow that sort of thing.  It’s up to that person to ensure they do not find themself in that situation.  Their option is attend an institution which does allow that sort of thing.  If they willingly attend one which does not, they have no room to grip.  If a parent sends their child to an institution like that, they also have no room to grip.  

Prior to becoming Orthodox, my wife and I discussed sending out children to a Catholic school.  School rules were part of that discussion.  We couldn’t afford the tuition so we sent them to a Charter school.  Guess what, they also make the rules and if you don’t like it, your option is to send your child to a different school, period.  School uniforms were a requirement and even if it was not written in the handbook, they could change the rules, which they did several times.  Like is hard sometimes.  Deal with it.
Wasn't what I said OK, brother?

To recap: I think the school should allow students to wear clothes that match traditional Orthodox dress, like girls wearing crosses, headcoverings, and modest dresses if the girls want to. My reasoning is that it makes sense for an Orthodox school to accommodate good Orthodox practices where possible.

I do not have children that go to the school, but I have an opinion about their policy.  Grin

Be Happy. It's almost Old Calendar Christmas, and you can celebrate it at an Old Calendar Church in your region, even if you disagree with it.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 01:31:48 AM by rakovsky » Logged
Kerdy
Moderated
Taxiarches
**********
Offline Offline

Posts: 5,732


« Reply #176 on: December 30, 2012, 04:45:45 AM »

No, the females to not have any head coverings. It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.
If it's that simple, what is the point of discussing anything. eg.: School X doesn't allow crosses. It doesn't matter if you think they should, they don't.

I happen to think if a person in an Orthodox school wants to wear crosses or religious clothes matching Orthodox traditions, like modest dresses or veils for girls, they should be allowed to.

Regards.

And I agree with you, unless that Orthodox person willfully attends a private institution which does not allow that sort of thing.  It’s up to that person to ensure they do not find themself in that situation.  Their option is attend an institution which does allow that sort of thing.  If they willingly attend one which does not, they have no room to grip.  If a parent sends their child to an institution like that, they also have no room to grip.  

Prior to becoming Orthodox, my wife and I discussed sending out children to a Catholic school.  School rules were part of that discussion.  We couldn’t afford the tuition so we sent them to a Charter school.  Guess what, they also make the rules and if you don’t like it, your option is to send your child to a different school, period.  School uniforms were a requirement and even if it was not written in the handbook, they could change the rules, which they did several times.  Like is hard sometimes.  Deal with it.
Wasn't what I said OK, brother?

To recap: I think the school should allow students to wear clothes that match traditional Orthodox dress, like girls wearing crosses, headcoverings, and modest dresses if the girls want to. My reasoning is that it makes sense for an Orthodox school to accommodate good Orthodox practices where possible.

I do not have children that go to the school, but I have an opinion about their policy.  Grin

Be Happy. It's almost Old Calendar Christmas, and you can celebrate it at an Old Calendar Church in your region, even if you disagree with it.

Of course what you said was ok.  I may even be inclined to agree with you, but the choice isn’t ours to make.  That is all I wanted to impress upon you.  Personally, I like head coverings.  I think hijabs for the average person is a little extreme, but a nice head covering is fine.

You have yourself a wonderful Christmas.  I have no issue with the Old Calendar.   Grin
Logged
LBK
Warned
Merarches
***********
Online Online

Faith: Orthodox
Posts: 10,159


Holy Father Patrick, pray for us!


« Reply #177 on: December 30, 2012, 06:58:15 AM »

Quote
like girls wearing crosses,

I imagine most would, as long as they are kept underneath their clothing. Long chains need to be tucked away for reasons of safety and practicality.

Quote
headcoverings,

Irrelevant. Orthodox girls of school age are minors. The tradition of female head covering only applies to adult women, and, in some Orthodox countries/regions, only to married women.

Quote
and modest dresses

Again, irrelevant. Show me a standard, school-approved girls' school uniform which is anything other than modest. No school I know of, religious or otherwise, where a uniform is required, would tolerate immodesty in a uniform.
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 06:59:00 AM by LBK » Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #178 on: December 30, 2012, 02:59:39 PM »

Of course what you said was ok.  I may even be inclined to agree with you, but the choice isn’t ours to make.  That is all I wanted to impress upon you.  Personally, I like head coverings.  I think hijabs for the average person is a little extreme, but a nice head covering is fine.

You have yourself a wonderful Christmas.  I have no issue with the Old Calendar.   Grin
Thanks.

I was the guy in Catholic school who the teachers kept telling to tuck his shirt in. I just think if someone wants to conform more strictly than me, I should give them a pass. Maybe then they will give me one too when I fail to live up to it. Smiley
Logged
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #179 on: December 30, 2012, 03:12:24 PM »

Quote
headcoverings,

Irrelevant. Orthodox girls of school age are minors. The tradition of female head covering only applies to adult women, and, in some Orthodox countries/regions, only to married women.
Well, I trust your opinion, but it might not always be true:
Quote
We find the basis for covering the head in Sacred Scripture itself, in the New Testament. The Most Holy Virgin Mary covered her head in the holy temple from her young years.
http://www.stjohnaz.org/index.cfm/resources/attending-divine-services/on-the-covering-of-heads
And besides that, in early Christian times, the age of adulthood was about 13, so in following the ancient custom, a girl in her teens could be of marrying age and wish to wear a covering.

Quote
Quote
and modest dresses
Again, irrelevant. Show me a standard, school-approved girls' school uniform which is anything other than modest. No school I know of, religious or otherwise, where a uniform is required, would tolerate immodesty in a uniform.
Japanese schoolgirl uniforms


But what I originally had in mind is that some Orthodox customs or monastery rules ask for the dresses to be below the knees for modesty. Some private school uniforms do not follow that.
Logged
Arachne
Trinary Unit || Resident Bossy Boots
Section Moderator
Protokentarchos
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: Greek Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Antiochian Archdiocese of the British Isles and Ireland
Posts: 3,948


Tending Brigid's flame


« Reply #180 on: December 30, 2012, 03:23:39 PM »

Japanese schoolgirl uniforms

You do realise that a lot of those uniforms are just adult fetish wear, don't you?

Even if they were actual uniforms, the Japanese culture, religion, and moral compass is leagues away from ours in the West.
Logged

'When you live your path all the time, you end up with both more path and more time.'~Venecia Rauls

Blog ~ Bookshelf ~ Jukebox
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #181 on: December 30, 2012, 03:47:21 PM »

Japanese schoolgirl uniforms

You do realise that a lot of those uniforms are just adult fetish wear, don't you?

Even if they were actual uniforms, the Japanese culture, religion, and moral compass is leagues away from ours in the West.
Yes, there is alot of water between us.

Secondly, I find interesting parallels to stereotypical Prussian/German culture. The neighboring countries like Korea have the same kind of attitude towards Japanese based on parallel WW2 experiences. The same approach about traditional unquestioning respect towards authority, similar militarism and imperialism, which in both cases was overly self-confident and unfortunately brutal and uncompromising toward opponents.

In any case, these are stereotypes found among their neighbors, who themselves can sometimes themselves be authoritarian, at least among themselves (eg. within Chinese or Russian culture, for example).
« Last Edit: December 30, 2012, 04:03:57 PM by rakovsky » Logged
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #182 on: December 31, 2012, 07:13:16 AM »

Has anyone, other than myself, gone to this schools webpage to see if they even utilize school uniforms and if so, what do they look like?  There is a lot of speculation and guessing going on when a quick visit to the school page will answer this simply question.  But, I will do it for you.

Yes, they have uniforms. 
Yes, with the exception of what appears to be kindergarten, they all look the same.
No, the females to not have any head coverings.  It doesn’t matter if you think they should, they don’t.

Does it stipulate they can't?

you're right, it doesn't matter one way or another what we think.


Point is, what did the school think or declare before she enrolled about headcoverings?

We're not getting any info on that either way.

No, the point is the school makes its own rules. 

If they require females to wear head coverings, it’s their choice, but they said no.  There appears to be a standard uniform code and anything outside that code is not accepted. 

If I am in charge of an institution and I say, “You will wear this and this,” but I do not exclude what you can wear, you think it acceptable.  However, the truth is, when I say, “You will wear this and this,” that is all you are going to wear.  If you don’t have permission, the answer is no.  How long of a dress code do you want?  If you mention all the things you can’t wear rather than was you are allowed to wear, the book would be about 3 tons.  Let’s be rational about this whole thing.
Yes, let's be rational is right. Let's use a little logic here;

1. The family is Muslim.

2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

3.The school reportedly had some sort of a "private discussion" about the dress code (although no one is telling us what was agreed upon in said meeting) prior to their enrollment.

4. Muslim girls begin to start wearing headcoverings around the age of seven.

5. School forbids girl from following her religion.

Now, like I said, let's use a little logic here. You're telling us  that this school had absolutley no knowledge of Muslim tradition and none of this was ever acknowledged before the family signed on until she began to cover herself?

I find this hard to believe.

Someone is being disingenuous here, either the school was too vague about their own rules or they distinctly mentioned the ban on hijab or headcoverings in the private meeting which the Muslims in turn disregarded or had a change of heart in complying to the rule.

I'm sure all this will come out in time or in the courts.

Until then all we can do is speculate.
Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Theophilos78
Warned
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: pro-Israeli Zionist Apostolic Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: Adonai Yeshua
Posts: 2,043



« Reply #183 on: December 31, 2012, 07:18:20 AM »

The Greek school must do one thing: hire a camel and send the student with her family to Mecca. The Muslima is free even to cover herself in shrouds in the house of Hubal-lah.  Grin
Logged

Longing for Heavenly Jerusalem
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #184 on: December 31, 2012, 07:21:46 AM »

Japanese schoolgirl uniforms

You do realise that a lot of those uniforms are just adult fetish wear, don't you?

Even if they were actual uniforms, the Japanese culture, religion, and moral compass is leagues away from ours in the West.
Actually, if you ask many Japanese they will tell you that the pollution of their culture is mainly coming from Western influence.

You can see the whoreification of their young women even at that age from those pics and that is definitely not traditional Japanese dress. Japanese culture prior to the American/Western infestation after WWII was one of the most conservative socities on the planet.


Women in traditional Japanese garb here;


Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #185 on: December 31, 2012, 10:00:23 AM »

Quote
2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

Why do you assume the school could deny her entering the school? Turn it around, the family KNEW it was NOT a Muslim school.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #186 on: December 31, 2012, 10:07:41 AM »

Quote
2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

Why do you assume the school could deny her entering the school? Turn it around, the family KNEW it was NOT a Muslim school.


These are two fails I mentioned in the OP.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #187 on: December 31, 2012, 10:10:26 AM »

Quote
2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

Why do you assume the school could deny her entering the school? Turn it around, the family KNEW it was NOT a Muslim school.


These are two fails I mentioned in the OP.

Yes, I know, and your (our) interlocutor has not addressed the point, yet, only danced around it.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Charles Martel
Traditional Roman Catholic
Moderated
Archon
********
Offline Offline

Faith: Roman Catholic
Jurisdiction: New york
Posts: 3,103


« Reply #188 on: January 01, 2013, 08:20:50 AM »

Quote
2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

Why do you assume the school could deny her entering the school? Turn it around, the family KNEW it was NOT a Muslim school.

I don't base my logic on assumptions usually. Is there any evidence that the school couldn't deny them entry?

Anyway, they only let in so many students a year and while seemingly only recognizing Christianity in their admissions policy but other faiths are eligible to enter. They let this family in for a reason, my guess is maybe for high academic reasons.

From the article;

"St Cyprian's admits 52 pupils each year. While children from other religions are eligible, the admissions policy only mentions Catholic and other Christian faiths"


And being a Muslim school is irrelevant. they were already exemplary students in following th school's religious structure.

"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Greek Orthodox practices."
« Last Edit: January 01, 2013, 08:21:33 AM by Charles Martel » Logged

Sancte Michael Archangele, defende nos in proelio, contra nequitiam et insidias diaboli esto praesidium.
Αριστοκλής
Merarches
***********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Catholic
Jurisdiction: American Carpatho-Russian Orthodox Diocese
Posts: 10,026


« Reply #189 on: January 01, 2013, 10:28:15 AM »

Quote
2. The school knowing full well the family was Muslim and allowed then to enroll anyway.

Why do you assume the school could deny her entering the school? Turn it around, the family KNEW it was NOT a Muslim school.

I don't base my logic on assumptions usually. Is there any evidence that the school couldn't deny them entry?
Then why start now? Does it matter one way or the other outside your HYPOTHETICAL scenario? No.
Quote
Anyway, they only let in so many students a year and while seemingly only recognizing Christianity in their admissions policy but other faiths are eligible to enter. They let this family in for a reason, my guess is maybe for high academic reasons.

Guessing again, aren't you? Not that I care what reason or basis was used to admit her.
Quote
From the article;

"St Cyprian's admits 52 pupils each year. While children from other religions are eligible, the admissions policy only mentions Catholic and other Christian faiths"


And being a Muslim school is irrelevant. they were already exemplary students in following th school's religious structure.

"Mrs Magliocco said the girl had otherwise observed all of the school's Greek Orthodox practices."


Again...SO WHAT? And again, the school did not throw her out.

You continue to demand 'evidence' while you continually rely on your own conjecture.
Logged

"Religion is a neurobiological illness and Orthodoxy is its cure." - Fr. John S. Romanides
Marinaki
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Ecumenical Patriarchate
Posts: 1


« Reply #190 on: January 02, 2013, 11:16:27 PM »

Writing as part of the Orthodox Community in London and a teacher the amount of general ignorance about both this particular school and the British Education system is frankly astounding. Also, amazed to see the entrenched cultural differences across Orthodoxy.

The school is a state school with a faith character .
Almost 7,000 of the 21,000 state schools in England are religious - but almost all are linked to the Anglican and Catholic churches.
This is the first ever Greek Orthodox School and it was set up with a lot of time, investment and sheer hard work by the mainly Greek Cypriot community in London. All schools in the UK have a compulsory daily act of Christian worship and Religious Education lessons. In purely state schools this "worship" is usually a liberal, feel-good, let's be nice to each other mish mash - with no other doctrinal content.
In this school worship follows Orthodox patterns and Religious Education is from an Orthodox perspective. The parents who send their children there sign up to that and follow that. The children start the day with the sign of the cross etc. This girl's little brother is there and makes the sign of the cross etc. In fact, quite a number of the children are from Black Caribbean or Black African families and follow the Orthodox practices. In their final year at the school they go on a trip to Cyprus and are warmly welcomed by the Church there.

Unfortunately, rather than being placed in North London, where most of the Greek Orthodox community is based, it is in South London where the Greeks and Orthodox overall are very much a minority. However, it takes children of all faiths, as I said. Priority is given to the Orthodox and then other Christians. They are quite rigid in their discipline and do not allow any bending of the rules. School uniform is standard throughout all schools in England and is generally seen as a means of encouraging discipline and good behaviour.

Personally, I think the school could have been more flexible and allowed the hijab. But not because all girls should wear headscarves in school. We are not the Taliban - and quite shocked at the misogynistic views that some Afghani Imams wouldn't even say coming from some "Orthodox" here. It is not a Church and even 100 years ago young pre-pubescent girls did not have their heads covered in primary school in traditional Orthodox countries - whereas adult women wore head coverings as a matter of course.
The issue here is not the girl's modesty. She is barely 9 years old and has not worn a hijab for the past two years at the school (which she joined at 7 years old - schooling starts at 4 in the UK).   She had previously gone to a private school and the parents enrolled her in the Orthodox school signing up to follow its worship and ethos. The abhorrent idea is that somehow the male teachers at the school would harbour sexual desire for a 9 year old girl and therefore she has to cover up from their advances. It is the implication that the male teachers are some sort of pedophiles so the girl has to cover up! That is truly outrageous!

What is also interesting is of the thousands of faith schools across the UK - many with similar strict uniform - they choose to pick on the Greek Orthodox one. They were always free to enrol their daughter in another kind of school. But maybe they figured like many of the Slavic background people here that Orthodoxy means headscarves so their daughter would fit in. Or maybe it's an old Muslim tradition to pick on the Orthodox - old habits die hard.

The school should have just allowed it - purely for diplomatic reasons. It really is not a big deal. I teach lots of girls with headscarves in a purely non-denominational school, I also taught in an Anglican state school that tolerated them (they had to be in the colours of the school uniform in both schools). It is interesting how many in their late teens leave the house in a scarf to please their parents and then take it off at school. Or where deeply unsuitable clothing on the rest of their body (midriffs etc) but keep the headscarves as a Muslim tribal badge.

The other issue is, where would it end? Would they then start demanding wash areas, and a Muslim place for prayer, and halal food on the menu, exceptions made for Ramadan and Eid, Muslim teaching in the classroom etc etc.

The question really is do you think that the male teachers in this Greek Orthodox School are pedophiles who would make advances towards a 9 year old girl. Her parents obviously think they are!

Also worth noting - there are many Muslim girls who do not cover up. Also, in Turkey - where our Patriarchate is based (the school is Thyateira, EP) hijabs are also banned in all state schools there. That is in a mainly Muslim country.


« Last Edit: January 02, 2013, 11:22:30 PM by Marinaki » Logged
Christopher McAvoy
Never forget the Franciscan Friars of the Immaculate & all persecuted christians!
Elder
*****
Offline Offline

Faith: orthodóxis, atque cathólice et apostólice fídei
Jurisdiction: Latin Catholic from the 12th c.
Posts: 440



WWW
« Reply #191 on: January 24, 2013, 08:20:10 PM »

I lament the fact that head coverings have become political symbols in the culture wars.
My grandparents still wore hats whenever they went outside the home to do anything until the 1980's.

It is true that at the age of nine years old there is not as strict a view taken toward wearing a head covering.
Children are frequently exempt from certain customs until they are older.
On the other hand there is no reason a nine year old can not have her head covered either, especially being a female.

It seems to me that traditionally minded God-fearing people, whether moslem or christian, are disliked by those who more easily accept
the secularized "man-worshipping" culture, including those the very "sophisticated" greek orthodox people that want compromise themselves into it.

Now what some forget however, is that the hijab which simply means covering could theoretically extend to covering the face as well. Thats the real difference between christians and moslems. Although that is partially cultural, as even many men cover their faces in certain tribes around north africa. If christians and moslems are going to be at odds with each other, it ought not be over the basic idea of the head being covered.

What was once a common tradition throughout the western christian world has in the later 20th century experienced great unpopularity.

Men and women want to dress the same. Everyone wants to be equal and have the same roles.
But God makes us different and unique and to fulfill certain tasks and certain roles - the illusion of complete freedom is the tyrrany of subjucation.

The truth is that a woman who dresses like a man is less free than one who dresses like a woman, and vice versa for men.

I read elsewhere:

Quote
Conservative Amish and Mennonite women wear an outer bonnet (usually black) in obedience to the Biblical commands given in 1 Tim. 2:9-15, 1 Peter 3:1-6, and Titus 2:3-5 that a Christian woman should be discreet, chaste, modest, sober-minded, in subjection, meek and quiet, and shamefaced. The bonnet fosters the proper sense of godly reserve and shamefacedness, especially in regards to interaction with the opposite sex, that is becoming of a Christian woman.
These women would also wear white cap-style headcovering or "veiling", often made of opaque mesh, under their bonnet, in obedience to the commands given in 1 Corinthians 11:2-16. These commands are that a Christian woman should have long uncut hair, and that it should be modestly covered with a veil that is a sign of her being under the authority of her husband or father.
Additionally in the bible it says a woman must worship with her head covered and in the Amish and mennonite faith one should be prepared to pray and worship at anytime. Therefore, their heads are covered all the time.

If it means anything to anyone, I can probably find you a few westernized Orthodox secondary schools that also require men to shave their beards off !!  (It doesnt take a royal edict from Tsar Peter the Great !)
« Last Edit: January 24, 2013, 08:26:39 PM by Christopher McAvoy » Logged

"and for all who are Orthodox, and who hold the Catholic and Apostolic Faith, remember, O Lord, thy servants" - yet the post-conciliar RC hierarchy is tolerant of everyone and everything... except Catholic Tradition, for modernists are as salt with no taste, to be “thrown out and trampled under foot
rakovsky
Protokentarchos
*********
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox
Jurisdiction: Orthodox Church in America
Posts: 4,165



WWW
« Reply #192 on: March 15, 2013, 02:37:22 AM »


I was looking at the girl with the red hair in the upper left corner and the one below her, and wondered:
« Last Edit: March 15, 2013, 02:40:09 AM by rakovsky » Logged
mike
Stratopedarches
**************
Offline Offline

Posts: 21,467


WWW
« Reply #193 on: March 15, 2013, 07:40:54 AM »

I was looking at the girl with the red hair in the upper left corner and the one below her, and wondered:


I've read somewhere, that yes.
Logged

Byzantinism
no longer posting here
Santagranddad
High Elder
******
Offline Offline

Faith: Orthodox Christian
Jurisdiction: ROCA
Posts: 987



« Reply #194 on: March 15, 2013, 07:52:42 AM »

Remember that Muhammad take a nine year old girl as a wife and knew her (in the Biblical) sense. He is for Moslems the exemplar for all behaviour.

That is something sobering to reflect upon, especially at a time when there is so much concern over adults preying upon underage children.
Logged
Tags:
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 All   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.18 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
Page created in 0.614 seconds with 221 queries.