visiting gurdwara

[spiderpig8]

MY DDS school is visiting a gurdwara and they have been told they have to wear a scarf and bow to their religious book.
Whilst I respect other peoples right to take part in whatever religion they like, I do not respect their religion , because as a Christian I believe christianity is the only true religion.
I feel that wearing a headscarf and bowing to a book crosses the line from educational into observing some of their religious beliefs.
DH has been into Muslim, sikh and hindu temples in the courses of his work and never been asked to cover his hair, so it can't be an 'absolute' rule.

teacherwith2kids A society in which people are expected to conform to social norms simply because not doing so will offend others is a fairly intolerant society.

But a society in which people refuse to conform to norms (however briefly and with no harm to themselves) that happen in any way to be different from their own is an extremely rude and unpleasant one ...

If you think it is OK to wear shoes into a non-shoe wearing house, to blow smoke into a non-smoker's face, to swear in front of my grandmother etc just because you think it's intolerant to be expected to conform to the norms of others then tbh I'm glad I'm 'intolerant' in that way.

I think SuchProspects post is erring slightly on the side of unintelligible gibberish tbh. Of course we bloody strive to conform and to avoid giving offence - durrrrrrrrrrrrr - that is what society is isn't it? Otherwise it would be a messy free for all and halfheads like the OP would be in charge.

Menopausal - you put it SOOO much better than I did :)

"I wouldn't be happy.

But then I wouldn't be happy about my kids observing any religion as I think they are all superstitious hocus pocus claptrap anyway.
My children do not pray or sing hymns. And yes, the school has been read the riot act advised of this."

Some people might think of this as intolerant bigotry. OK you don't believe. There is no tangible evidence that God exists. There is also no tangible evidence that he doesn't, so to call it hocus pocus claptrap is unfair and perhaps a little inflammatory.

I like to keep an open mind. Perhaps you should do the same.

[grin]@halfheads!

Bunbaker- be careful you don't keep such an open mind your brain falls out!

I think if you wear shoes in a non-shoe wearing house you should expect to be asked to leave and that wearing shoes in a non-shoe wearing house brings in more dirty and potentially increases wear, so is not about people simply being offended by your shoe wearing; that if you use language that people don't like (whether that's swearing or telling offensive jokes), you should not expect them to be friendly to you; that if you blow smoyouth someone's face you should expect them to be unpleasant back to you (and that second hand smoke isn't simply offensive it is dangerous to health and being blown in the face can causyo laughing and running eyes so isn't simply about being offended either).

But this is about the poster saying she expects her children to wait outside in the park with a TA rather than conform to a request to show a respect she does not find compatible with her faith. I don't think that's unreasonable (assuming her DCs are young). I do think it is unreasonable to expect people in a compulsory situation (kids at school) to be required to participate in something against their conscience when the only reason against it is that others will find their lack of participation offensive.

I generally think a friendly society is one in which we are conservative in our actions and liberal in the actions we accept of others. But at the same time, if people had not been prepared to offend others with their views we would not have challenged our society's racism or homophobia. So when it comes to matters of conscience and free speech that doesn't advocate violence and isn't deceptive, I tend stand on the side of supporting people even when I find their views at odds with my own.

Err Sorry about typos esp. ...cause coughing and...not laughing

OP, you are not only BU, you are also being deliberately obtuse, and refusing to take on board any comments made by many others.

MenopausalHaze, teacherwith2kids and babybythesea, I would like you three to be my friends :o

"Bunbaker- be careful you don't keep such an open mind your brain falls out!"

What makes you think I have any?

I have read your post a number of times now suchprospects and I have to be honest - I can make little sense of it, especially when taken in relation with your previous post. One can only assume it makes sense to you and so, for that, I suppose one should be grateful.

I don't think the OP's children are being asked to participate in anything that is against their conscience - rather that of their intolerant and unbending parent. Of course, now that she has made it an issue it will probably and sadly become received wisdom to them and thus intolerance is perpetuated. Such a shame.

" I do think it is unreasonable to expect people in a compulsory situation (kids at school) to be required to participate in something against their conscience when the only reason against it is that others will find their lack of participation offensive."

I say again. In order participate fullybinnthenlife of any state shook in this country, children are expected to take part in acts of Christian worship. I have been repeatedly told that this is fine, that it's good for my children to do this and i am unreasonable to object. The OP's child is not being asked to take part in worship- he is merely being asked to show respect to anoth person's holy things. Why is it, as many people have said, reasonable for her to object to this but not for me to object to enforced Christiqn worship in state schools?

Menopausal It's not my clearest writing! Sorry.

I was trying to make three points 1) that the examples Teacher2 gave are not directly comparable, 2) that just because I don't think it's unreasonable to flout social norms where you disagree with them doesn't mean I don't think there should always be no consequences, and 3) that this isn't (from what the poster has said here) about trying to give offense but about trying not to go against her own conscience.

I agree about it not necessarily being the kid's pov, which is why I have previously said that I think she is NBU if her children are young. If they are older I think it should be for them to decide whether or not they go in.

No of course you are not being unreasonable. What does DDS think about it all? If she wants to go, personally I would let her, but also explain your own reservations about the religion, as the school very likely won't do this, being indoctrinated with PC nonsense.

I find any religion that segregates men and women, or requires veiling to be a step backwards and an insult to the suffragettes who fought and even died for the freedom of women in this country. All of you harping on about respect need to get a grip.

Zombie thread?

Sorry, that was to Hattie. How did you find it?