Does Australia have an identity or are we just multiculturalism?

[ebia]

I agree, I dislike how people come to Australia expecting things and wanting to have their own ways.. People wanting to be allowed to have their face covered on in licence photos because it is their religion?

That's a pretty extreme position.

what a load! I am japanese but if I see an asian that cannot speak engish, I get annoyed.

Why?

Do you get equally anoyed at the Croats and Italians who came here 50 years ago and still barely speak English and yet have made such a huge contribution to the culture, infrastructure and economy of the country?

I have to say that every modern immigrant I've met who doesn't already speak English is doing their best to learn.

.. Perhaps I am too harsh. I just dont like people that dont want to change their way of living when they come here.

Most people want to change some aspects of their life, but not all. Who gets to decide which bits should be changed and to what?

They are more free here... They even have the freedom to LEAVE.

Not if they have nowhere else to go. What of those who were born here - Australia is their home as much as anyone else's?

 

[little_wing]

If people cannot have their photo taken without covering their face, then it is clear that they must unfortunately be precluded from driving. It is an obvious safety concern, as well as a security concern. I don't think its about racism or what have you--just common sense. At some point, religion and reality collide, and the individual must decide what is more important to them.

 

[The Bad Templar]

You want him to watch him get shot, or you just want him to be shot?

It's called 'irony'.

He was expecting to get shot but I sent a him a bouquet.

 

[ebia]

If people cannot have their photo taken without covering their face, then it is clear that they must unfortunately be precluded from driving. It is an obvious safety concern, as well as a security concern.

I'm not really with you. Is someone suggesting they should be allowed to drive with their eyes covered?

 

[little_wing]

I'm not really with you. Is someone suggesting they should be allowed to drive with their eyes covered?

No, they have a narrow slit to see through. This is obviously not adequate.

I believe some Islamic women have "one way" eye-coverings. They can see through them, but no-one can see in.

 

[ebia]

No, they have a narrow slit to see through. This is obviously not adequate.

I believe some Islamic women have "one way" eye-coverings. They can see through them, but no-one can see in.

Yep. My wife has worn one (in Pakistan). You can see perfectly well out of it.

 

[tsl]

Which is another thing that annoys me because it is unfair. Muslims, for example, not wearing their [public] school's uniform because of their religion. So the religious kids get to go to school not in school uniform, while the other kids have to conform to the school rules. A little bit of double standardism? One set of rules for some people, a totally different set of rules for the rest. So much for equality which many have prided our country being based on.

A fall out of humanism, gothicism and so on is 'if it feels good, then do it.' So, if it 'feels good' to be out of school uniform in casual clothes, then based on those religions, it should be allowed. So here we have a case of one religion being the exception while others with equally valid points are ignored and the kids who believe in them are forced to conform to the school's uniform.

Personally, I don't care if they wear their religious dress at Islamic schools which allow for that, but at public schools, I think it should not be tolerated (it's a blunt snubbing of the school rules) and is unfair (on other students who must conform) unless all students are treated equally and allowed to come out of school uniform.

 

[little_wing]

Which is another thing that annoys me because it is unfair. Muslims, for example, not wearing their [public] school's uniform because of their religion. So the religious kids get to go to school not in school uniform, while the other kids have to conform to the school rules. A little bit of double standardism? One set of rules for some people, a totally different set of rules for the rest. So much for equality which many have prided our country being based on.

A fall out of humanism, gothicism and so on is 'if it feels good, then do it.' So, if it 'feels good' to be out of school uniform in casual clothes, then based on those religions, it should be allowed. So here we have a case of one religion being the exception while others with equally valid points are ignored and the kids who believe in them are forced to conform to the school's uniform.

Personally, I don't care if they wear their religious dress at Islamic schools which allow for that, but at public schools, I think it should not be tolerated (it's a blunt snubbing of the school rules) and is unfair (on other students who must conform) unless all students are treated equally and allowed to come out of school uniform.

I think all school uniforms should be done away with.. but anyway..

Why not just let this instance slide? Is it really worth alienating a whole generation of muslim Australians to achieve some political point? It's not harming anyone...

 

[ontheside]

I say Amen to that Korske.

Thanks!



I don't hate anyone. And I have met some awsome people of many different backgrounds. I am not against any paticular race or religion. I will accept people for who they are. There is a limit to these things though. I'm sure we all agree.

I would accept any needy person in my house....BUT if that person started to EXPECT me to do everything for them thats a different story. They follow my house rules whether it is taking of shoes at the door or being on a washing up roster.

Those that come to Australia and put in no effort to learn the language and expect us to accept them without changes is expecting too much. Those that try hard, thumbs up, I respect them, I really do.

My parents are Japanese, they came here in the 1980's, they spoke little english. They changed to become part of Australia, not to make Australia change for them. Now they run a sucessfull business, serving Australian businesses.

They wanted to become part of the Australian society. Our family is very Australian, even though my parents are Japanese citizens. My parents grew up in japan, they believe in the buddist culture, I grew up here and I am Christian. They have no problem with that.

I am part of a family migrated from Japan. I am in the least of positions to criticise migrants. I am just pointing out the things I do not like. My parents have put in the hard work to be accepted here. I dont see why others should have it any easier.

 

[ontheside]

Personally, I don't care if they wear their religious dress at Islamic schools which allow for that, but at public schools, I think it should not be tolerated (it's a blunt snubbing of the school rules) and is unfair (on other students who must conform) unless all students are treated equally and allowed to come out of school uniform.

As a christian, we are not allowed to burn a lamb in the backyard.

Animal cruelty will be on us like hounds!

I know it is a different situation... with dress code and animals but I hope you get the point.

 

[ontheside]

I have to say that every modern immigrant I've met who doesn't already speak English is doing their best to learn.

You don't see the ones that are not trying because they are either in hiding or they become part of a group of people that are from their countries. Like chinese groups and Japanese groups.

I have nothing against those that are puting in every effort!

I hope I dont sound like a really mean person! I'n not, I just dont like people expecting things for free and taking advantage from others as I have experianced this personaly. Im sure most other people have as well.

 

[ebia]

Which is another thing that annoys me because it is unfair. Muslims, for example, not wearing their [public] school's uniform because of their religion. So the religious kids get to go to school not in school uniform, while the other kids have to conform to the school rules.

Usually the school uniform is modified for students who need it modified. It is not normally dropped.

Uniforms were designed to meet the needs of the kids at the time. As those needs change, the uniforms change.

 

[The Bad Templar]

Why not just let this instance slide? Is it really worth alienating a whole generation of muslim Australians to achieve some political point? It's not harming anyone...

You are only 'alienating' a minority of Muslims who require that their children wear hajibs anyway... so yes it is worth it.

How many instances will you let 'slide'?

If you continue to bow to minorities within minorities... then what's stopping you if a minority request sharia law within Australia?


Edit... I actually support what the French did in banning religious symbolism (hajibs, skullcaps) in government schools... it is only logical for a secular society to do so.

I'm sure you Green and Democrat supporters agree on principle.

I think all school uniforms should be done away with.. but anyway..

I disagree... school uniform codes promote a feeling of equality within the student body. My wife went through a school system where there was no uniform and she says the division between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' was very obvious and every day seemed to be a fashion contest.

 

[little_wing]

You are only 'alienating' a minority of Muslims who require that their children wear hajibs anyway... so yes it is worth it.

How many instances will you let 'slide'?

If you continue to bow to minorities within minorities... then what's stopping you if a minority request sharia law within Australia?


I'm sure you Green and Democrat supporters agree on principle.

Sharia and religious dress are two entirely different things. I respect and would fight to maintain religious/political/ideological diversity in Australia. I believe in a "marketplace of ideas". As such, I want a system that allows competing religions and ideologies a degree of freedom. Sharia is antithetical to such a system, and so I naturally oppose it.

This has nothing to do with "giving in" and everything to do with making people's lives as easy as possible. A muslim girl wearing her headress does not affect me in the slightest--why should I oppose it?


PS: I am a fiscal centrist and a social liberal, so I am best represented by the Democrats but can empathise with the social agenda of the Greens. I see no reason why a Green or a Democrat would support such authoritarian measures.

 

[ebia]

You are only 'alienating' a minority of Muslims who require that their children wear hajibs anyway... so yes it is worth it.

You annoy more than that. You also annoy those who believe their children should have the choice (we have many of those), and those who feel their children should have the choice. It can also be more complex than just the hajib - if you school uniform doesn't include provision for long trousers and long sleaves for the girls all year.

so yes it is worth it.

Why? What is gained to offset this infringement of someones right to observe their religion?

How many instances will you let 'slide'?

Personally, none. Adjusting a school uniform isn't letting it slide. In my experience girls that wear the hajib do a better job of wearing the rest of the uniform than most of the other kids. Unless someone can prove otherwise I'm skeptical that there are many schools just letting Muslim kids where whatever they like but enforcing a uniform policy on everyone else; such a policy would be unjustifiable and lazy.

If you continue to bow to minorities within minorities... then what's stopping you if a minority request sharia law within Australia?

The slippery slope fallacy.

Edit... I actually support what the French did in banning religious symbolism (hajibs, skullcaps) in government schools... it is only logical for a secular society to do so.

Why?

I'm sure you Green and Democrat supporters agree on principle.

Why?

I disagree... school uniform codes promote a feeling of equality within the student body. My wife went through a school system where there was no uniform and she says the division between the 'haves' and the 'have-nots' was very obvious and every day seemed to be a fashion contest.

Likewise, I support a uniform for all. With suitable variation being allowed for those who need it.

 

[The Bad Templar]

I'll try to reply to both of you in one post...

Yes, I'm aware I employed the 'slippery slope' fallacy of relevance... however this is an example of the slippery slope in regards to school uniforms.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Schoolgirl-punished-for-Muslim-dress/2005/05/13/1115843374379.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/School-backs-down-over-students-dress/2005/05/15/1116095857407.html

The 'sqeeky wheel'...the minority within a minority bucks the trend... after extensive consultation between the school and the Islamic community over uniform... they are appeased to avoid the rather liberal use of the term 'racist' these days (an example has been evident on this thread).

This is an example of where the everything has been done to 'make life easy' and to aid them in 'observing their religion'.... but it is never good enough, some people will always want more.



As for my Green/Democrat comments... both (mainly the Greens) have been attempting to further secularise the parliament and society (ie objections to parliamentary prayers and the ability of Christian schools to hire staff on conditions of their faith and sexual preference).

I have no problem with children wearing hajibs (other than when it is involuntary) in public schools etc... but I believe that a truly secular system could quite rightly ban overtly religious imagery.

My children go to state schools... if there was a ban on crucifixes, hajibs and skull caps etc... I would observe it.

However, I would oppose pluralistic hypocrisy like which exists in Britian.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/06/njewel06.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/06/ixhome.html


Edit... I note that the school system didn't back down for the Christian in this case.

 

[little_wing]

This is an example of where the everything has been done to 'make life easy' and to aid them in 'observing their religion'.... but it is never good enough, some people will always want more.

I don't think that's correct. There is a sigificant population of several different faiths at my Anglican school. The muslims pray on their mats between classes/recess/lunch. The Sikhs wear their daggers. Catholics wear their crucifixes etc. etc.

There is no slippery slope that I can see. These people are just tryingto get an education without compromising their faith. The school would put a stop to any religious activity that is actually disruptive to the learning of the general student body, and that is fair enough.

As for my Green/Democrat comments... both (mainly the Greens) have been attempting to further secularise the parliament and society (ie objections to parliamentary prayers and the ability of Christian schools to hire staff on conditions of their faith and sexual preference).

I support the secularisation of all government bodies. I don't want politicians making a farce of my religion .

 

[The Bad Templar]

I don't think that's correct. There is a sigificant population of several different faiths at my Anglican school. The muslims pray on their mats between classes/recess/lunch. The Sikhs wear their daggers. Catholics wear their crucifixes etc. etc.

There is no slippery slope that I can see. These people are just tryingto get an education without compromising their faith. The school would put a stop to any religious activity that is actually disruptive to the learning of the general student body, and that is fair enough.

We're not talking about your school... we're talking about Auburn Girls High School and the NSW Education Department.

It has been established that the school did everything in it's power to liaise with Muslim clerics to make the school's policy accepting of the girls' religious practices.

The mantoo is not an essential part of muslim worship... yet the school caved-in.

The girl has been rewarded for at least, making a fashion statement and at most, defiance of authority... I'm afraid that it is disruptive and divisive and has wider implications.

I support the secularisation of all government bodies. I don't want politicians making a farce of my religion .

What are you talking about?

 

[little_wing]

What are you talking about?

I support the abolition of opening prayers in Parliament and similar vestiges of Christianity in government.

 

[ebia]

I'll try to reply to both of you in one post...

Yes, I'm aware I employed the 'slippery slope' fallacy of relevance... however this is an example of the slippery slope in regards to school uniforms.

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/Schoolgirl-punished-for-Muslim-dress/2005/05/13/1115843374379.html

http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/School-backs-down-over-students-dress/2005/05/15/1116095857407.html

Seems to be a single instance - and one that (judging purely from the linked articles) was handled badly by both sides.

The 'sqeeky wheel'...the minority within a minority bucks the trend... after extensive consultation between the school and the Islamic community over uniform... they are appeased to avoid the rather liberal use of the term 'racist' these days (an example has been evident on this thread).

Once you've made a mess of things, it's hard to sort out.

This is an example of where the everything has been done to 'make life easy' and to aid them in 'observing their religion'.... but it is never good enough, some people will always want more.

"Never comply with reasonable request in case the person then makes an unreasonable one?" The slipery slope is a fallacy - each request must be judged on it's own merits.

As for my Green/Democrat comments... both (mainly the Greens) have been attempting to further secularise the parliament and society (ie objections to parliamentary prayers and the ability of Christian schools to hire staff on conditions of their faith and sexual preference).

And? Freedom to practice one's religion is an entirely separate issue to state supported religion.

I have no problem with children wearing hajibs (other than when it is involuntary) in public schools etc... but I believe that a truly secular system could quite rightly ban overtly religious imagery.

That's moving beyond secular into atheist.

My children go to state schools... if there was a ban on crucifixes, hajibs and skull caps etc... I would observe it.

Which of those do you personally feel your children must wear?

However, I would oppose pluralistic hypocrisy like which exists in Britian.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2005/12/06/njewel06.xml&sSheet=/news/2005/12/06/ixhome.html


Edit... I note that the school system didn't back down for the Christian in this case.

I know of no Christian denomination that believes children must wear a cross or crucifix. The school I work for did not (until recently) allow students to wear a cross or crucifix and this is a Christian (Catholic) school. We do, however, allow Muslim girls to wear the hijab as that is a requirement of their faith - and one we can easily accomodate. We now allow a small religious symbol (cross or whatever) to be worn around the neck. Comparing a religious symbol that is required to be worn with one that is a choice is a false comparison.