philperth2010
Gold Member
Offline
Australian Politics
Posts: 19617
Perth
Gender:
|
Auggie wrote on Dec 9 th, 2017 at 9:38pm: philperth2010 wrote on Dec 8 th, 2017 at 7:06pm: Auggie wrote on Dec 8 th, 2017 at 12:20pm: philperth2010 wrote on Dec 7 th, 2017 at 9:13pm: Auggie wrote on Dec 7 th, 2017 at 3:38pm: Mr Hammer wrote on Dec 7 th, 2017 at 3:05pm: Non-Muslim staff told to wear headscarves in Adelaide 5 An Islamic College in Adelaide has threatened to dismiss its non-Muslim female staff if they don't wear headscarves, as critics say it's wrong to compel women to identify with a religion they don't practice. Updated Updated 26 August 2013 An Adelaide school's dress policy has exposed a grey area in Australia's discrimination laws.
The Adelaide Islamic College has long had an unwritten rule that female staff would wear hijab or if they weren't Muslim, headscarves.
The last principal had relaxed that rule. Now the board has reinforced the dress code policy in writing. The school has been told by its lawyers not to comment. SBS understands one staffer was warned of dismissal if she didn't abide by the new code.
The union says this is plainly wrong. "People who've been employed at that school for many years have been able to dress modestly without any particular problem, but this redefining under the threat of sacking is quite extreme and we don't agree with it", says Glen Seidel from the Independent Education Union. "People who have been quite openly employed as not Muslim are being forced to identify within the community as if they are," added Mr Seidel. "There has to be a more sensible way of getting the modesty requirement sorted without the religious identity". Minister for Education and Multicultural Affairs Jennifer Rankin says this situation highlights a grey area in the legislation. "Our ambulance officers wear uniforms, our nurses wear uniforms, this is slightly different as in this is a religious school and obviously they have standards they want upheld, so it's an unusual circumstance where we've got a situation allegedly where someone is being asked to wear hijab rather than remove the hijab". "Whether it's the equal opportunity act in terms of discrimination or the Fair Work Act, I think it's premature to say," said Ms Rankin. "I think it could be a test case in one or two jurisdictions and yet to be clear about which or both". There are also implications for the school's funding. "We provide them with something like 23 per cent of their funding, and in that contract obviously it is an obligation to abide by the laws of South Australia," said Minister Rankin. The school is facing a tricky task, balancing its religious ideals with the individual's right to choose what, if any, religious identity they display.
Source: SBS They're a private school; they can set whatever rules they want for their staff. Isn't religious freedom to discriminate what some people want??? Private individuals and small businesses should be allowed to discriminate against whomever they wish. If I walked into a baker's shop, and the owner said to me: "sorry mate, your skin colour is brown, get out of my shop, I would be slightly upset, but I would respect that person's right to kick me out of his/her shop. Now, corporations, which are incorporated objects have no natural rights - natural rights only applies to individual persons, and also small businesses which have an individualised component. For e.g. the government would be well within its rights to regulate the rights of Google as a company but not the actions of a independent baker; but not 'Baker's Delight' or another chain, which has an 'individual' component to it. You don't know what respect is mate....Not so long ago in the United States they had a system you are advocating for where Negro's where not allowed to ride on a bus with white people, drink from the same fountain or allowed into certain shops / stores (n!ggers keep out)....If this is the type of Society you want then you are going to be disappointed because it ain't gonna happen mate....Perhaps you should migrate to South Africa!!! You’re conflating two different things, Phil. First, segregation was about denying equal access to public facilities. I wasn’t talking about public facilities, I was taking about private individuals and small/family businesses only. Large corporations shouldn’t be allowed to discriminate since corporations aren’t people. A small/family business refusing to serve me doesn’t mean that I can’t travel on a public bus. I used an example of a private enterprise refusing to provide services to minorities that covers your proposition....A shop owner refusing to serve a minority is not respect unless it is respect for everyone's right to be a bigot....You are proposing a General Store in a country town can refuse to serve Aborigines not because they have done anything wrong just because of the colour of their skin....You are proposing we set back the civil rights movement 50 years why, because gay people can get married and you think this is a small way to continue the persecution or is their a more sinister motive???
|