10-05-2003 13:37									#1
	Female teachers aide suspended for wearing religious cross in school Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

OK so we all know the story. I don't want to focus on her. She knew the rules, and she violated them.

The more important issue is whether people can wear religious garb in a school. This includes muslim women. Can a muslim teacher in a public school wear a veil or burkha?

	10-05-2003 13:58									#2
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Yes, nor should there be a problem with her wearing a cross, or a veil, or an anarchy symbol, or a peace sign, or a hairnet, or a nose ring.

	10-05-2003 14:02									#3
	Support Apolyton

quote: Originally posted by orange Yes, nor should there be a problem with her wearing a cross, or a veil, or an anarchy symbol, or a peace sign, or a hairnet, or a nose ring.

How 'bout a swastika?

	10-05-2003 14:03									#4
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

i don't see a problem with that either, so long as she isn't talking hatred in her classes or passing it off on her students

	10-05-2003 14:03									#5
	Re: Female teachers aide suspended for wearing religious cross in school Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Dissident The more important issue is whether people can wear religious garb in a school. This includes muslim women. Can a muslim teacher in a public school wear a veil or burkha?

Veils and burkahs are not religious symbols- they are simply clothing worn in adherance to tradition and the Koran's direction to dress modestly (that applies to men too). The Bible has similar directives.

	10-05-2003 14:14									#6
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

What about a yarmulkah or a tzitzit?

I have no problem with people wearing religious artifcts as long as they're not being (excessively) sensationalistic about it. I don't know the exact details of this case, but wearing a cross is probably fine. A shirt that says something like "love jesus or go to hell" probably isn't....

	10-05-2003 14:21									#7
	Tired of ads?

bingo

A cross, in an of itself, worn by a person, cannot be considered a violation of Church and State separation

That's a matter of personal choice and freedom of speech/expression/whatever. It only becomes a problem when the teacher attempts to push his/her views onto his/her students.

	10-05-2003 14:43									#8
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

We had this discussion here in Germany some time ago.

For one there was a couple who went to court because the school their child went to had Crucifixes in every classroom (not unusual in Bavaria ).
The Court Decision was AFAIK that the school had the remove the Crucifixes.

One other case we had was a female turkish teacher who wore a headscarf because of her religion. In this case the court also decided, that this is a religious symbol and that teachers arenīt allowed to wear them at school.


My Opinion on the Matter?
Tricky. The most important thing for me is, that all those Religions are treated equally. For example, if Crucifixes are allowed(forbidden) within classrooms, religious symbols of other religions should also be allowed (forbidden).

If, for example a school has crucifixes in every classroom on display and the request of a jewish (or muslim) teacher, to also display a David Star (or wear a Headscarf) in this school and the Administration of the school rejects this request, the school should be forced by government, to either approve the request or to remove those crucifixes.

Normally however I tend to link it with the intentions, the school/teacher has with displaying the symbol. If the teacher/school displays the symbol with the intention to convert the kids to one religion it shouldnīt be allowed.
If itīs however just displayed / worn because religious usus dictates so, I see no problem with it.

	10-05-2003 14:46									#9
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

Apparently, the regulation against wearing the cross was from the turn of the century... Err, the turn of the last century...

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20030509-6652110.htm

From what I understand, based on what I've heard, is that it was designed to keep Catholics from teaching back when there was a high amount of anti-catholic sentiment.

It should be changed, and the teachers aide suspension should be undone.

Last edited by Edan on 10-05-2003 at 14:55

	10-05-2003 15:25									#10
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

I think that a public school should have no religious symbolics.

But if a person wishes to express his religion he obviously should be allowed to.

There's nothing "forecful" when a christian wears a cross, or a jew wears a yarmulka.

Freedom from religion means that the school can't force you to wear a cross, not that it can force to not wear one.

	10-05-2003 15:43									#11
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

quote: Veils and burkahs are not religious symbols- they are simply clothing worn in adherance to tradition and the Koran's direction to dress modestly

There's even more to it. It is comfortable. Yes, comfortable. The clothes are intendend to keep you from the heat of day and cold of the night. And are very comfortable.

Except Burkahs, I've never seen burkahs.

	10-05-2003 17:29									#12
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

Actually, Dissident is giving you part of the story. I heard about this a few weeks ago. This woman was prostelesizing Christianity in her class. A few non-Christian students complained. The woman was forced to stop, but then started wearing her cross on the outside of her clothes, drawing attention to it regularly.

I am not against wearing religious things in school as long as you don't PUSH YOUR RELIGION ON OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS. This woman needs to be out of the public system. Here's how I'd break the news to her:

"The good news is, you can wear your cross... the bad news is... YOUR FIRED!"

	10-05-2003 18:57									#13
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

No religion. period.

	10-05-2003 19:09									#14
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

That's interesting coming from someone living in a religious state.

	10-05-2003 19:13									#15
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

well, not RELIGIOUS, but I resent religion, and esp. it's interference with the public here, as well.

	10-05-2003 19:16									#16
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

Israel isn't a religious state? Is this what you are saying?

	10-05-2003 19:21									#17
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

From the article:

"If people are concerned about the law, the place to address it is at the state legislature," Mr. Coad said.

Sounds about right. If what Sava said is true, then I have no qualms about the punishment she received.

She was not prohibited from wearing the cross, just in having it in open view. This is akin to teachers not being allowed to display religious symbols in their classroom. I have no qualm with the rule, as it in no way affects her ability to believe in her faith, nor violates any stipulation of Christian religious doctrine (doesn't the Bible forbid graven images, actually?).

If she wants to show off her faith at her job, I suggest she seek employment at a church or religious school. She now has a year off to do so!

Last edited by Boris Godunov on 10-05-2003 at 19:27

	10-05-2003 19:24									#18
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Originally posted by Boris Godunov From the article: "If people are concerned about the law, the place to address it is at the state legislature," Mr. Coad said. Sounds about right. If what Sava said is true, then I have no qualms about the punishment she received. She was not prohibited from wearing the cross, just in having it in open view. This is akin to teachers not being allowed to display religious symbols in their classroom. I have qualm with the rule, as it in no way affects her ability to believe in her faith, nor violates any stipulation of Christian religious doctrine (doesn't the Bible forbid graven images, actually?). If she wants to show off her faith at her job, I suggest she seek employment at a church or religious school. She now has a year off to do so!

She could also try to be a good Christian. I seem to recall some passages about preaching by being a good example.

	10-05-2003 19:30									#19
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

As a card-carrying member of the ACLU, I would like to see the aide sue the school district.

Article I of the Bill of Rights begins: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof . . ." These two clauses set up a tension between each other.

I see an aide--or any other government official--who wears a small religious symbol as a person who is exercising her freedom of religion. It is only when that aide/govt official attempts to induce others into wearing that religious symbol that the line is crossed.

The same goes for school prayer. Anyone who wishes to pray is school is free to do so. What may not happen is that officials cannot use their governmental powers to attempt to induce others to pray.

	10-05-2003 19:31									#20
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

quote: Actually, Dissident is giving you part of the story. I heard about this a few weeks ago. This woman was prostelesizing Christianity in her class. A few non-Christian students complained. The woman was forced to stop,

Now this is good.

She isn't allowed to preach in class.

quote: but then started wearing her cross on the outside of her clothes, drawing attention to it regularly.

Ooooh!!! The horrror!!!

Soon we'll fire jewish teachers who put on yamachas and grow beards, because they want to draw attention

The preaching part was very wrong. But I don't care if she wears a cross, a huge cross, on her head, made of pure gold, and covered with roses. It's her state given right .

The only thing I could possibly imagine that is covered by free speech but would be wrong IMO, is if she wore a t-shirt saying : "I'm a christian, but you're going to HELL!! REPENT NOW!!"

quote: I am not against wearing religious things in school as long as you don't PUSH YOUR RELIGION ON OTHER PEOPLE'S KIDS. This woman needs to be out of the public system.

for preaching -yes.

for wearing a cross - no.

	10-05-2003 19:49									#21
	Avatar Enlargement: We've got the solution

You seem to have misinterpretted my point as you echoed it under the guise of disagreement...

quote: for preaching -yes. for wearing a cross - no.

I had many Jewish teachers over the years, none wore yamachas or prostelesized in class. Again, I'm sure things are different in Israel (a religious state). While Israel may have democracy, freedom of religion, and be tolerant; it still is a religious state. America is not a religious state. There are some that want to make it one, and that should be stopped. Every job has rules and guidelines that must be adhered to. If your beliefs make you unable to follow said rules, well, find another job. This woman is perfectly capable of teaching at a private school if she wishes to push what she believes is "God's message".

EDIT: I almost forgot. If it's okay to display religious icons, is it okay for someone who believes in Nazism to where a Swastika in plain view? If the Nazi can't, then the standard should be the same for everyone regardless of their beliefs.

	10-05-2003 20:28									#22
	Tired of ads?

IF she stopped proselytizing (inappropriate as a paid employee of governement in a public school) as ordered, then wearing the cross visibly in and of itselft should not be grounds for disciplinary action.

Sava - non-Orthodox Jews don't wear yarmulke (At least the standard US sects), so the fact that Jewish teachers didn't wear one is pretty inconclusive.

Swastika or Nazi paraphernalia are not Establishment Clause issues, they're political speech, which is in a slightly different category of protection.

In Parker v. Levy (1986) SCOTUS held that military uniform regulations overrode free exercise rights due to the unique nature of the military setting and requirements for discipline. That is, AFAIK, the only SCOTUS restriction on passive free exercise under the Establishment Clause.

There is a more extensive legal framework and plenty of precedent, for regulating various forms of passive political speech in a school setting, where the manner of the political speech, or the message, was reasonably considered to be disruptive to the educational purpose of the school.

	10-05-2003 20:30									#23
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

quote: America is not a religious state.

So how come people say it's so religious compared to Europe.

quote: EDIT: I almost forgot. If it's okay to display religious icons, is it okay for someone who believes in Nazism to where a Swastika in plain view? If the Nazi can't, then the standard should be the same for everyone regardless of their beliefs.

Several thoughts:
Nazism isn't a religion.
Even if it were, you'd probably be far more likely to see classroom disturbances and complaints due to a swastika being in plain view than a cross, which, for me, means that the bar is lower.

While I think people should be allowed to wear non-"flashy" religious objects (ie, for religious reasons than to wear it simply for the sake that others will see it and scare or otherwise try to get someone to convert...), if it's preventing the classroom from being an effective teaching enviornment, it's probably going too far.

	10-05-2003 20:45									#24
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

And to reiterate my point...
I don't care about wearing religious symbols. The Nazi thing was a bad example.
I care about prostelyzation. She was using her cross not as a passive part of her outfit, but as a symbol to refer to while preaching.

	10-05-2003 20:56									#25
	Support Apolyton, buy Call to Power 2

quote: Originally posted by Sava And to reiterate my point... I don't care about wearing religious symbols. The Nazi thing was a bad example. I care about prostelyzation. She was using her cross not as a passive part of her outfit, but as a symbol to refer to while preaching.

From what I understand, they're two separate issues. She stopped active proselytization, she continued visibly wearing the cross. As long as she actually stopped the former, she shouldn't be suspended for doing the latter, if that's all she did after the initial warning.

	10-05-2003 21:41									#26
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

It's a grey area. Under the separation of church and state, a country cannot favour a religion over another. Allowing the passive display of religious symbols by workers of said state can be construed as favouring that religion.

	10-05-2003 22:01									#27
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Allowing the passive display of religious symbols by workers of said state can be construed as favouring that religion.

Only if they are passively displaying it over an officially-sanctioned uniform. If no uniform is involved, she can hang a lead penis from her neck if she wants to and teach like that. However, the moment she starts preaching, she should be fired.

	10-05-2003 22:37									#28
	Support Apolyton, buy GURPS/ Alpha Centauri

anyone who preaches in school should be fired and blacklisted.

	10-05-2003 22:55									#29
	Increase the size of your Attachments

The fact that she began wearing the cross after being reprimanded for preaching might be construed as a sort of thumbing the nose at the authorities who disciplined her. Schools are often very sensitive about that for some reason.

	11-05-2003 01:39									#30
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: anyone who preaches in school should be fired and blacklisted.

That's the last thing I thought I'd hear from a Communist .

--

I agree with MtG, there is nothing wrong with wearing the cross in public, but there is a problem is pushing your religious beliefs.