Is this not clearly anti-Christianity?

by Nathan Natas 20 Replies latest social current

• 

  Nathan Natas

  http://www.sky.com/skynews/article/0,,30000-13475163,00.html

  Anger Over Crucifix Ban

  Updated: 16:51, Tuesday December 06, 2005

  A row has broken out after a teenager was banned from wearing a crucifix at a school where Sikhs can carry ceremonial daggers.

  Sam Morris, 16, was reportedly sent home from Sinfin Community School, Derby, after she refused to remove a gold cross on a necklace.

  She was told wearing a crucifix was not compulsory for Christians, so the necklace breached dress codes.

  Other pupils are allowed to wear kirpan daggers and metal bracelets, as they are classed as religious symbols, said the Daily Express.

  GCSE student Sam missed two days of study before her mother Debra Saunders, 37, allowed her to return to school without the necklace.

  Christian and Conservative MP Ann Widdecombe insisted a crucifix was not costume jewellery.

  She said: "To persecute a young girl like this for her religious beliefs, whatever they are, is unacceptable."

  Sam, who had worn the necklace for the past three years, told Sky News the cross was not a "fashion accessory" and she felt "naked without it".

  Sinfin's deputy head Howard Jones said: "Most of our pupils understand allowing Sikhs to wear a bracelet is a compulsory part of their religion.

  "Christianity does not require followers to wear a specific symbols."
• 

  ozziepost

  A sign of the times!
• 

  VM44

  And if a religion says you must carry a weapon (in this, a knife) then Howard Jones says "That is OK, go ahead"

  Hmmmm, something is not right there!

  --VM44
• 

  funkyderek

  If they just taught these kids that their gods are imaginary and the amulets they prize so highly are just trinkets and baubles, then there wouldn't be a problem.
• 

  LittleToe

  Gawd forbid that anyone who take in material of a non-curricular nature too, like say, ooooh, Origin of the Species?

  Where do you stop the stupidity. Insisting it's an issue of faith verses atheism is hardly the solution. The problem would still be there and would just be manifested on equally stupid "Politically Correct" grounds.
• 

  gumby

  A sign of the times!

  What "times" Ozmeister? Did jesus tell his diciples something they would never see.....or did he tell them things they WOULD see? The "times" happened when Jerusalem fell to the Romans. Your late It wasn't Satan who decided he'd take god out of the pledge or keep god out of the schools....it was radicals who disect written laws and found a legal loophole that worked. Sad, but it worked. Gumby
• 

  LittleToe

  Gumby:That would be the "sign of the end-times", not the "sign of the times" in which we just happen to live. Not every phrase has biblical connotations
• 

  funkyderek

  Where do you stop the stupidity. Insisting it's an issue of faith verses atheism is hardly the solution. The problem would still be there and would just be manifested on equally stupid "Politically Correct" grounds.

  I actually think that the girl should be allowed wear her crucifix (or an ankh, or a pentagram, or whatever), but that a Sikh should not be allowed to bring a knife into school. Knives are dangerous, necklaces are not, despite what various people's gods may tell them.
• 

  LittleToe

  I quite agree. It's right up there with wearing orange.

  That having been said, should I complain if they attempt to stop me wearing my Sgian Dubh with my kilt?
• 

  stillconcerned

  i say ya SUE them.