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.

 

NEWS: Schoolgirl in UK wins right to wear Islamic dress

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 08:51 AM
link   
In contrast to the decisions made in France concerning Muslims wearing their traditional clothing, a 15 year old girl has won the right to wear Islamic dress in school.
The decision, that has delighted many Muslim groups, was found after a previous decision by the high court that rejected Shabina Begum (the girl in question) case was found to deny her rights under the European human rights legislation. This could be seen as an important ruling for issues of personal freedoms.
 



news.bbc.co.uk
A girl was unlawfully excluded from school for wearing a traditional Muslim gown, Appeal Court judges have ruled.
Lord Justice Brooke said Denbigh High School in Luton, Beds, denied Shabina Begum, 16 - now at another school - the right to manifest her religion.

He called for more guidance for schools on complying with the Human Rights Act.

Miss Begum called the ruling a victory for Muslims who wanted to "preserve their identity and values". The school said it had lost on a technicality.

Miss Begum, whose parents are both dead, had worn a regulation shalwar kameez (trousers and tunic) until September 2002 when she informed the school authorities she intended to wear a full-length gown called a jilbab.

Speaking outside the Court of Appeal Miss Begum, who now attends a school where the jilbab is allowed, said Denbigh High School's action could not be viewed merely as a local decision taken in isolation.

"Rather it was a consequence of an atmosphere that has been created in Western societies post 9/11, an atmosphere in which Islam has been made a target for vilification in the name of the 'war on terror'," she said.

"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."

Lawyers at the Children's Legal Centre which represented Miss Begum said the judgement was a "landmark victory" which could have wide-ranging consequences for the freedom to manifest religious beliefs and a "significant impact" on school dress codes.



Please visit the link provided for the complete story.


As the quote says, this is a landmark victory. I think it is wrong to stop Muslim children from wearing what is right in their religious beliefs. I'm sure a big fuss would be made if Christian children had to stop wearing crosses, so why should this be any different?

I find it a bit silly to deny people an education just for manifesting their religion through what they wear. It shouldn't happen.

Related News Links:
newsbox.msn.co.uk

[edit on 2-3-2005 by EvilSpallacus]

[edit on 2-3-2005 by EvilSpallacus]




posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:27 AM
link   
The fact is, there is a dress code at the school and what she wanted to dress in was prohibited. I see nothing wrong with he school enforcing their dress code. This is from the article:


The High Court had last year rejected Begum's argument that her education was suffering and her human rights were breached as a result. A judge said she had always had the option of attending school in clothes under school rules.


The girl had a choice to attend a school that allowed the clothing she wished to wear. IMO, the girl had no grounds to accuse the school of anything. They never said she couldn't wear religous jewlery, just that she had to stick to the dress code.

IF I was a member of a religon that just wore thongs, should I be able to take the school to court to allow it?............


Another frivilous lawsuit.



[edit on 3/2/05 by Kidfinger]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:41 AM
link   
Ms Begum says:

"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."

Compare that with some Muslim countries who wouldn't even allow her to go to school because of her sex or would deny any non-Muslims the right to go to school at all!

This is so typical of countries like the US and the UK being held to a higher standards.



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 09:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Off_The_Street
Ms Begum says:

"It is amazing that in the so-called free world I have to fight to wear this attire."


Score 1 for Clothes Rights...I'm a total advocate of Clothes Rights, after getting on the Animal Rights, Victims Rights, Gun Owners Rights, Right Wing Psycho Rights bandwagon, I am now a full fledged card carrying member of the Clothes Rights Action Committee for Kids (CRACK)...Next year we will be fighting for wearing baseball caps during the Pledge of Allegience, if congress doesn't ban it first!

[edit on 2-3-2005 by 00PS]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 10:08 AM
link   

I find it a bit silly to deny people an education just for manifesting their religion through what they wear. It shouldn't happen.


In France it was a bit different, the full head wrap also made identification difficult, just as allowing people to attend class with ski masks on would. THAT I can see not allowing. However, when a religion's tenets dictate covering the arms and legs, I don't see a problem with permitting a slight exception of dress code for a public school (as it doesn't hamper identification of the student). BUT, if a private school, then they should have the right to determine if they will allow such exceptions....just as the muslim has the right to choose another school if they wish.


Next year we will be fighting for wearing baseball caps during the Pledge of Allegience, if congress doesn't ban it first


Not removing your hat for the pledge may not be illegal (yet), but it is a SERIOUS breech of etiquette, just as an FYI...


[edit on 2-3-2005 by Gazrok]



posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 05:23 PM
link   
what if you hate the pledge and all it stands for? is that also a breach of etiquette?


dh

posted on Mar, 2 2005 @ 05:46 PM
link   
The state has no right to inhibit the expression of individual belief through clothing or anything else as long as it doesn't actually impact on other's freedom
Everything else is the hive mentality
You feel that this sensible judgement will promote some further oppressive legislation, like the discrimatory imprisoning of foreign nationals led to a judgement that British citizens could also be held under house arrest on the whim of the Home Secretary and the judiciary

[edit on 2-3-2005 by dh]



posted on Mar, 3 2005 @ 11:14 PM
link   
You have missed a tiny little detail.


British Muslim girl wins court case for wearing jilbab

Begum - who was represented by Cherie Blair, the lawyer wife of British Prime Minister Tony Blair



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 04:12 AM
link   
I agree with the author of the thread, I really don't see an issue with wearing such things.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 04:16 AM
link   
Did anyones else notice that while ths girl was outside of court, talking about how she felt it proper for her to wear her muslim robes while in public she wasn't?

She sued the school on the grounds that her religon required her to wear said robes, yet when she went to court that day, knowng she would be in the news, on camera, and in full view of the public, she chose not to wear those same robes.

Interesting no?

[edit on 4-3-2005 by mwm1331]



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 04:54 AM
link   
She was, it was black.



posted on Mar, 4 2005 @ 04:57 AM
link   
Uhh no Kriz she wasn't. I watched her give her stament in fromn t of the courthouse last night on CNN (twice in fact as they replayed it) She was not wearing the Jlbab she was wearing a shirt and pants.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join