It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Switzerland denies Muslim girls citizenship after they refuse to swim with boys

page: 9
39
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 12:59 PM
link   
Can people not see how insane it is to keep bringing up how oppressive to women Islam is, when talking about forcing them to do something they find immoral in the name of western values. I as a woman don't want those values in Europe.




posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 02:28 PM
link   
I find it interesting that, after 8 pages, people still see this as a case of refugees trying to force their culture on the country that received them, ignoring that being Muslim is not the same as being foreign.

If a Muslim is forced, by the country's rules, to go against what his/her religion says, where's the freedom of choosing your own religion? That's what I find more worrying, not the fact that the people in this case came from a different country (which appears to be the biggest problem to most people) but that they cannot do things according to their religion but are forced to do them against their religion.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 03:11 PM
link   

originally posted by: IllegalName
a reply to: jellyrev

The way I see it is that if somebody has full citizenship then deporting them afterwards for a crime may not be legal. In your example, if they had lived in the USA all their life then where exactly are they going to be deported to? Chad? In all seriousness, if somebody does what you said then they might well end up in prison, not being deported. That would be a matter of criminal conduct, whereas what we’re discussing here are children deciding to not do something as innocuous as swimming - deportation for that is way, way too far.


It's entirely legal. For example, the UK has sent around 20 people into legal exile in the last few years, stripping existing citizens of their citizenship. It might not be very nice, but it's entirely legal.

Autonomous countries have no duty to pay any regard to what we think is "good" or "bad". We are not the moral arbiter of the rest of the world.


How are they “guests”? They are schooling, which suggests to me that they are full residents. You also believe they are “leeching state welfare”; if they are on benefits then again they are presumably full residents. Therefore, they are not “guests” but rather “citizens”.


That's a bit of leap. Unless there is some peculiarity of Swiss law that you're not sharing with us, I assume the underlying principle is similar to the UK. You can be a resident without being a citizen. Children can go to school without them, or their parents, being citizens. Heck, half the people in my daughter's class at school aren't citizens.

The only thing that is suggested by their going to school, is that there is some official recognition of their presence.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 03:35 PM
link   

originally posted by: eletheia
Learning to swim is a compulsory part of the school curriculum, along

with Physical Education (PE) as long as health reasons don't stand in the way.

The same applies to the UK, and i dare say many other countries.

Whatever the reasons for the refusal to complete the compulsory

educational requirements, it is a violation of the law not to do so.


Breaking the law is a criminal offence?? It was the last time i looked.


While I agree with the principle of your post, the pedant in me requires me to point out that, in the UK, you are not legally obliged to send your child to school, nor are you obliged to follow the national curriculum if you home school.

Other than that, carry on



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 03:49 PM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP
I find it interesting that, after 8 pages, people still see this as a case of refugees trying to force their culture on the country that received them, ignoring that being Muslim is not the same as being foreign.

If a Muslim is forced, by the country's rules, to go against what his/her religion says, where's the freedom of choosing your own religion? That's what I find more worrying, not the fact that the people in this case came from a different country (which appears to be the biggest problem to most people) but that they cannot do things according to their religion but are forced to do them against their religion.


The Swiss view appears to be that you are free to follow your religion, up until it conflicts with something within Swiss society. The Swiss have chosen to prioritise their society in that situation.

Your "muslim, not foreign" distinction is disingenuous. Foreigners have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. Muslims have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. The point of origin is irrelevant, the fact remains that there are differences in cultural expectation.

The Swiss cultural expectation is that "if you come to Switzerland, you change for us, we don't change for you". I really won't fault them for that, either.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 04:03 PM
link   

originally posted by: EvillerBob

It's entirely legal. For example, the UK has sent around 20 people into legal exile in the last few years, stripping existing citizens of their citizenship. It might not be very nice, but it's entirely legal.

Exiled for what, children not getting into a swimming pool? No, that would not be legal in any way shape or form. If the government has or even thinks about doing anything of the sort then I guess I should personally pop down to Whitehall and express my thoughts about that.

So far as Switzerland goes, I guess they will do what they want. As for England, there’s nothing left to discuss here because nobody tells me what my own country should or should not do when refugees are at stake, especially if they’re Syrian. Nobody.

edit on 1WednesdayWednesdayAmerica/Chicago4pmWednesday3pm07 by IllegalName because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 04:06 PM
link   

originally posted by: IllegalNameAs for England, there’s nothing left to discuss here because nobody tells me what my own country should or should not do when refugees are at stake, especially if they’re Syrian. Nobody.


Not even other English people? Or do their views not count?



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 04:14 PM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

Of course they count, if they’re considerate that is and not full of hate and bigotry. The problem is that sometimes the masses are disillusioned and befuddled by the media, believing in phantom enemies and ignoring the obvious. It’s times like such when we have to do the right things in order to put things right. Kicking children out of the country because they won’t wear a bikini is not the correct way for us to go and anybody who suggests otherwise is not fit to be a parent. So yes, if the majority of English support this sick attitude then do rest assured now that we have become of high time for a new style of leadership.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 05:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: IllegalName
a reply to: EvillerBob

Of course they count, if they’re considerate that is and not full of hate and bigotry.


Ahhh, I see. "Yes, provided their views confirm with your own".

I've seen the terms "hate" and "bigotry" thrown around a lot in the last few months. I think it's the new codeword for "I hate different opinions".



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 05:29 PM
link   
There are no “opinions” when it comes to a child’s dignity - we just preserve them. For if we do not then there is no future.



posted on Jul, 6 2016 @ 05:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: EvillerBob
Your "muslim, not foreign" distinction is disingenuous. Foreigners have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. Muslims have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. The point of origin is irrelevant, the fact remains that there are differences in cultural expectation.

I see why you say my distinction is disingenuous, it's because you ignore it.
The point is not irrelevant if you think that a Swiss citizen can be a Muslim. From that point of view, your "Muslims have different cultural expectations to the Swiss" doesn't apply, as someone can be a Muslim and a Swiss.


The Swiss cultural expectation is that "if you come to Switzerland, you change for us, we don't change for you".

Again, I'm talking about those that are already in Switzerland, your "if you come to Switzerland" doesn't apply.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 01:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: ArMaP

originally posted by: EvillerBob
Your "muslim, not foreign" distinction is disingenuous. Foreigners have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. Muslims have different cultural expectations to the Swiss. The point of origin is irrelevant, the fact remains that there are differences in cultural expectation.

I see why you say my distinction is disingenuous, it's because you ignore it.


It's not that I ignore it, I just believe it's likely someone who was already a citizen, Muslim or not, would still be treated as breaking the law. In fact, that's exactly what is discussed in one of the articles linked.

For example, in relation to the previous "handshake" case - where two muslim children refused to shake hands with a teacher because they were not permitted to have physical contact with a female who was not a relative - it was found that:



Under the decision, teachers at the school can require their students to shake hands.

Refusal to comply could land the parents with a warning, a call to a meeting with school leaders, other disciplinary measures, and in the extreme, fines of up to 5,000 francs as part of standard school policies, the board said.


This isn't a rule that applies only to foreigners. It applies to born and bred Swiss citizens, too.

Is the impact greater on foreigners? Yes, certainly, but I find it hard to fault a country for expecting those applying for nationality to comply fully with all expectations.



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 01:53 AM
link   

originally posted by: IllegalName
There are no “opinions” when it comes to a child’s dignity - we just preserve them. For if we do not then there is no future.


So why aren't you insisting that children are sent to school wearing a burka? That's the benchmark for dignity in some cultures. Or are you basing your assessment of what constitutes dignity on your own cultural background? If you are, then you're doing exactly the same as the Muslim parents and the Swiss government in this case - each applying a different threshold based on their own cultures.

And there's nothing wrong with that, as long as you don't lose sight of why you are reaching that conclusion.

What about the cultures where entire family groups walk around completely naked, such as some of the Amazonian and African tribes?

I'm sure the Swiss consider themselves to have dignity. I'm sure their children consider themselves to have dignity.

I don't question that you make your argument thinking that you are defending dignity. You're not. You're just waving your fist at Johnny Foreigner for "doing things differently to us". It's exactly the kind of thinking that white people used to justify stealing the children of Aboriginal tribes in Australia. Which brings us back to why I find it amusing to see you throw the "hate and bigotry" card at other people.
edit on Ev55ThursdayThursdayAmerica/ChicagoThu, 07 Jul 2016 01:55:31 -05003302016b by EvillerBob because: (no reason given)



posted on Jul, 7 2016 @ 02:54 AM
link   

originally posted by: EvillerBob
This isn't a rule that applies only to foreigners. It applies to born and bred Swiss citizens, too.

And that's what I find worrying and why I think it's wrong, and I see that as a way to force people to do things they do not want to do, at a personal level, and I see that as an action of a totalitarian regime that sees itself more important than the people it rules.



new topics




 
39
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join