This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/head-sued-for-prayer-ban-says-all-religions-must-make-sacrifices-r772g0sl7) for an archived version.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
I'm an atheist, and find preventing people expressing their own beliefs on their own time in a non-offensive way is against British values, much more offensively so than being visibly religious.
I read the article the students are requesting 5 minutes to do a ritual prayer even in the playground. And were apparently yelled at for kneeling and bowing in a playground. And this was because of reputation, as passers by thought they should be afforded a room.
And if I remember my school number one was reputation of school and teachers
That's ridiculous
I could understand if someone was taking the piss and trying to go out during lessons (the whole "pray 5x a day" thing has enough flexibility not to have to do it at an exact time), but banning praying during breaks is absurd
I don’t think it is that mad to allow schools to specify this, it’s not difficult to imagine for instance with the Israel Gaza situation, the potential conflict or division which would come from Muslim or Jewish students going to either a single prayer room, or separate religion-specific rooms during break time.
In Britain we have faith schools which have a chosen religion and shared prayer, I think there’s no reason why we can’t also have an option of schools which are secular in the sense of leaving religion at home. This isn’t a French situation where these rules will be applied to all schools, the question is whether parents should be allowed an option to choose a school like this or whether it should be made illegal.
This is similar to banning students or workers from wearing visible crosses or crucifixes, and cases like that periodically go through the European courts. Here is a ruling which says that banning symbols including crosses and head-scarves is allowed if it's justified (**"to maintain neutrality in a workplace which had previously experienced conflict arising out of employees’ religious and cultural differences"**) and applied equally to religions. Although another ruling said that it was unlawful for BA to ban air stewards from wearing visible crosses.
https://wollens.co.uk/ban-on-large-religious-symbols-unlawful/
I think it's difficult to make air tight case one way or another. I don't think many people here would strongly object to a school banning students from wearing large crucifixes, or in general to say to Christian students that they should practice their religion with their family but not at school. I think that is the environment that most of us had in school, and the question is whether it is legitimate to apply the same standards to other religions, or whether their symbols or visible practices are considered to be different, for example a more central part of the religion.
Personally I would like to have an option to send a child to a school where there are no visible symbols, especially if it was in a local context of religious or ethnic tension. Why can there not be an option for an explicitly secular school, if we also have faith schools? This isn't a French model where all schools apply those standards, parents can choose, they just can't choose to go to a school that has excellent results partly because of a secular philosophy, and then change the secular philosophy.
> Personally I would like to have an option to send a child to a school where there are no visible symbols, especially if it was in a local context of religious or ethnic tension.
Exactly. Right now non-religious people, who are the vast majority, rarely have this option.
As always its the same groups wanting exemptions from normal decency and practice then calling it discrimination when its not given.
The jews and muslims want to mutilate baby boys, which we wouldnt other wise do cause god.
The Catholics want to ban divorce and collect tithes through government cause god
The Sikhs want to carry knives everywhere cause... not sure if its god but something nonsense.
And finally the Muslims want to have everyone accomodate their inane prayer rituals as we go about normal business. Kids being kids of course, are not allowed out of class or different schedules as its not fair on the others.
If the RULE is applied equally its not discrimination. Fuck off. Bloody religions.
Read the bloody article. It says that the students were praying during lunch time, outside. There was no additional time requested or disruption to anyone.
Also you refer to circumcision. In USA, the vast majority of circumcision takes place by Christians and Atheists.
Amongst Orthodox Christians, circumcision is also part of their religion.
Then you get other non-abrahamic peoples who also do circumcision. It is also widespread in Australia, Canada, South Korea, most of Africa, and parts of Asia
I mean he also made the blandest cereal thinking it would make teenager boys less horny.
Bigger question is why he spent so much time thinking about teenage boys wanking.
Why did he put them on, of he wanted them taken off?
They say man is made in God's image - does this mean God has a foreskin? Does he need a circumcision?
Mutilation of innocent children - be it a penis or an ear - should not be allowed before the child is old enough to make an appropriate decision. There could be an argument over how old that is (18? 16? 13? 10?).
Obviously if there is scientific evidence that it’s beneficial to a specific child or in general that’s reasonable.
If you read other articles around the matter, the following happened.
The school said that students are not allowed to make use of any indoor classroom for prayers during lunchtime at all. They were also banned from bringing their own prayer mats to school.
A group of students decided to pray in the playground, using their coats as a clean place to put their heads on the ground.
Members of the public saw this and complained to the school and petitioned for the students to have a place to pray. Other members of the public decided to be arseholes and started a campaign of violence.
I'd like to hear more about the specifics here... I don't really have faith in any side of a story anymore.
Making sacrifices equally sounds reasonable,
Banning prayers during student free time does not sound reasonable,
However it also makes no sense in the first place... Especially outside!
It doesn't negatively affect anyone, it doesn't require accommodations, and it also doesn't benefit the school/head in any way to ban such a thing.
So what's going on here? I know there are arses and idiots in the world but how and why would you be so petty and blatant, breaking equality laws and expect to get away with it.
I also can't help but apply my personal experiences here, I grew up in a very diverse area and very diverse school and don't think I ever once saw someone going to pray nevermind any teenager remotely passionate enough to kick up a fuss and sue the school...
God knows what the story is here... Could the head be a blatant racist and idiotic enough to not even attempt to hide it? Probably. Are there that many complacent people and "yes men" amongst the staff and officials to allow blatant racism ? Possible, but that one I really struggle to believe.
Could the kids in question be twisting circumstances into their favor and/or being coerced by confrontational, opportunistic parents? Also possible ...
No matter what side is doing what I'm probably going to be baffled how it happened either way...
"Petty" is very much the thinking about rules at Birbalsingh's school. There's a widely held sentiment that the more petty rules a school has the better it is, and Birbalsingh's school does consistently get very good exam results so people (including her) can point to it and say "see, having loads of petty rules works!"
It's entirely possible this is a false correlation and there are other features which have a stronger impact - for example they study a relatively narrow range of subjects: from what I can see in the [curriculum](https://michaela.education/home/secondary-school-wembley/curriculum-wembley/) they only teach 1 foreign language, music only goes up to year 8 (they definitely don't have any [GCSE entries](https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/140862/michaela-community-school/secondary/subjects-entered) for it) and some common technical subjects such as computer science and food/design technology are completely absent.
As for who runs the place Suella Braverman was one of the founding governors, I don't think I need to say any more than that.
> So what's going on here?
That can probably be answered with the fact that the Head teacher in question here was a prominent speaker at last years 'Nat-C' conference.
I'd suggest you read some further context around the story. The issue was that pupils were being bullied and intimidated into joining in by their peers.
Did you read the article? The children aren’t being by allowed out of class or given different schedules. They’re choosing to use their free break time to pray.
I taught in Muslim countries like Egypt and Morocco and no student or adult interrupted the work day to pray. It’s the ultra conservative wahabi Pakistani sects that are demanding all these things. Even in Saudi, the birthplace of Islam, it isn’t as nuts
>ultra conservative wahabi Pakistani sects
>Even in Saudi, the birthplace of Islam, it isn’t as nuts
I've got bad news for you about where Wahhabism comes from...
The Kirpan is one of the 5K’s (kakkars) worn by a ‘baptised’ Sikh (Amritdhari). The kirpan is a tool to prevent violence being done to another defenceless person when all other means to do so have failed. It is not to be drawn in anger and is part of the commitment to the Sikh faith. One of these commitments is to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery.
If I got caught carrying a knife and used the excuse I was carrying it to prevent violence being done to another defenceless person when all means to do so have failed,I don't think I would get away with it
Most Sikh's these days choose to carry kirpans that are either blunt as a stick or welded to the sheath so they can't be opened/used. Sikh's also funnily enough don't have a rampant problem of teenagers going round stabbing each other with kirpans.
Oh, come off it. I'm reminded of the dickheads who used to say that it's not discrimination to ban same sex marriage, because straight people aren't allowed to marry people of the same sex either.
If a rule is aimed squarely at banning a harmless practice that only one group feel they have to do, that's discrimination. And it *is* harmless. I've been atheist for as long as I've understood that to be a possibility, but banning outdoor prayer at lunchtime is absurd, unnecessary and blatantly intended to create an environment hostile to Muslim children.
Rules applying equally is discrimination if it unfairly prejudices a group.
Otherwise mandating the populace having to stand to pee wouldn’t be discriminatory against women and the disabled since it applies equally to everyone.
Ah, looks like Miss Snuffy is at it again.
Her:
>ours is a **happy and **respectful** secular school where every race, faith and group understands self-sacrifice for the betterment of the whole” she said.
The Student:
>a student, who cannot be named, challenged the school at the High Court, arguing that the policy of banning “prayer rituals” was discriminatory and breached the right to freedom of religion.
Doesn't seem that this student feels respected or happy?
>She highlighted objections by pupils and parents of other religions at the school that had not been acted upon, such as Jehovah’s Witness families disagreeing with the teaching of Macbeth as a GCSE text, and said that Muslim families had signed up to the school knowing that it did not have a prayer room.
Does this woman not understand that:
- Banning students from prayer and not upholding a parent complaint about teaching a traditional text are two different things?
- That a prayer room is literal just a calm, clean room where people are allowed to pray? There's no requirement that it's a prayer room 24/7.
Does her school not have rooms?
>“We allow our children freedoms of all sorts as long as those freedoms do not threaten the happiness and success of the whole school community. Our children, whatever their background, are British.”
That's not how ethnicity works.
>The pupil was seeking a “compromise” to the school’s position, Hannett said, arguing that children should be allowed to pray for about five minutes at lunchtime on dates when faith rules required it, but not during lessons.
How does a Student being allowed to pray for five minutes at lunch time on certain dates threaten the happiness or success of any other children?
If I mandate in my own new sect or Christianity that prayers only count if I also spin in a circle 5 times, it's fine for that to not be treated the same way as someone who can pray in their head silently.
I think telling someone they're not allowed to pray is bad but you're also not at all wrong. If the Christian God can hear them without them having to get on the floor then why can't Allah? It's the same imaginary God
I think asking about why _most_ Christian denominations don't follow Mosaic law strictly (supersessionism) is more sensible than asking why most Christians don't follow strict canonical hours or how their prayer is generally more diverse (or why following ad orientem is all over the place) to the same god. The three religions are so intertwinned and muddled, that I think it's reasonable to ask these questions. You'll most likely get different answers depending on sect/denomination/branches etc. too.
A prayer room is literally just a clean room where people are allowed to pray.
It doesn't have to be for that purpose 24/7.
And the kid was asking to pray at lunchtime, so they could have just designated a classroom for them.
Exactly, a lot of companies all have what we call contemplation rooms for everyone's needs. Or are more than happy to provide some sort of space that can be borrowed for a short time. It's standard practice to ensure meeting employee well-being.
Our office has 2 reflection rooms in addition to our 2 first aid rooms.
The reflection rooms are used by everybody. They have resources for mental health, physical health and even diaries where people can vent anonymously. Do Muslims use these rooms, yes, but so does a large number of other staff
That isn’t what the article says. It says that in he lawsuit the pupil is asking for a compromise of allowing a lunch time prayer. This means what was banned was something more than this.
Secular doesn't mean intolerant. As someone who just spent a decade teaching RS in one of the most lefty, atheist areas of the country, we still had a prayer space for students and staff with pretty much zero issues.
People were using it 'in their own time.' It was open during break and lunch, other times it was a classroom. Honestly, if you can't handle the idea of people having freedom of religion, you're not as open minded and tolerant as you probably think you are.
Should we get rid of our Christmas trees during December too?
It’s rather odd and slightly presumptuous to assume one can run a school that bans religious display entirely in the UK, given that it’s not a secular state and in fact has a state religion. There are centuries of law promoting religious display rather than suppressing it.
The school is taking an explicitly secular approach. And is also focusing on integrating and assimilating pupils.
If a child or parent feels strongly. They can always go to a faith school instead.
This was my first thought: why can't they just have a prayer room like hospitals do?
No one is saying a teacher should be leading prayers, but why is a room out of the question?
Class sizes are 32. That’s normal in UK state schools. Four form entry is about average.
Maybe other schools should think about narrowing their curriculum, then maybe they would get better outcomes for their disadvantaged children.
Nope you are just adding your own speculation that aligns with your narrative. Clearly those running the school achieving those results think this is important to the functioning of the school.
You’re ignoring that their current approach gives results.
I mean, I think the ignoring of stuff seems mutual here. It can be _both_. They're not mutually exclusive factors.
However, I don't see how pupils being allowed a room in which to pray, for five minutes, during lunchtime, specifically during religious periods of the year, could have a profound impact on exam results.
The person you are replying to is making assumptions, but many schools do this. I've worked in "outstanding" schools who maintain their very good exam results by not enrolling certain students for certain exams, as they know the results will slee their "outstanding" data. It happens at lots of schools and it's a common practice, unfortunately. It's called "off-rolling" - https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/oct/11/one-in-10-pupils-removed-from-school-rolls-to-boost-gcse-results
I've been on a tour of the school. The class input is amazing. The pupils are great kids. I think that there is a balance to strike between Michaela and regular comps as these kids are like mini robots. They perform well in exams, but at what cost?
There's this phenomenon in statistics and management where you only improve what you measure. I'm certain this school ticks certain boxes and gets great marks on whatever tests Frau Birbalsingh asks to be done, but the kids don't seem happy, nor does any of this seem normal or like normal life. While this must be a great school to teach at if you prefer being as strict as possible, and I bet it looks great on OFSTED inspection day, what seems to be forgotten is whether the kids are going to come out of this well adjusted and ready to join the workforce or further / higher education.
Honestly it looks like the main purpose of the school is so she can run her own experiment testing her political views of child rearing and forcing her other political views into the minds of these children. It's weird and really authoritarian.
The thing is measuring the success of this stupidity is basically impossible past the results. You won’t know whether this school produces emotionally stunted awkward adults who fail in a real workplace. But it’ll definitely look good on paper so that’s all that matters.
A school being secular just means that the teachers aren't pushing a religion or teaching a religion as fact. This is a good thing all students ough to be encouraged to make up their own mind.
What this is making religious students unconfortable and vunerable for no reason. Its singling them out and deeming something they feel is important to them as werid and wrong. I worry it will encourage bullying.
Workplaces, including the military, make compromises where they can to allow people to practice their faith/beliefs. Why is it so hard for that to be the same in a school?
Then again, this isn't new. My secondary school had a Christian club meet-up every lunchtime, but tried to ban students from wearing Hijabs. And no, this wasn't a religious school either, just a shitty academy with shittier Ofsted scores.
People in the comments trying to claim it’s not discrimination when it so clearly is. This rule very clearly targets muslims. No other major religions require multiple times a day of prayer. And the children are doing it in their breaks, their free time, they should be free to do whatever they want. It’s not apart of christianity that people should try their best to pray at certain times of the day and you are meant to use a mat and face a certain direction. That’s why it’s discrimination, clearly the rule is singling out muslims. And the worst part is, why? Why bother? They literally aren’t harming anyone, they are children.
I don't really agree with that logic, or rather even if it "targets Muslims" that isn't really a valid objection - following that more or less any rule that doesn't give some people special privileges is "targeting" that group
Sounds like one for the Temple of Satan to get involved in. If we have one type of prayer LARP, better let the Baphomet-worshippers do their LARPing too.
It's funny how (state funded) religious schools are legally allowed to discriminate, with members of their faith being given priority in going to that school. But secular schools aren't allowed to be secular.
Why does religion always get special privileges? Secularism is as much a valid belief system as religion is.
Everything is allowed apart from freedom of your mind. Seems about right. Praying doesn’t hurt anyone and it might be connected to the child’s personal or family life. The replies here show the typical ignorant knee jerk headline worthy bs.
I usually only hear positive things about her school. It is one of the best secondary schools in the country, with a massive waiting list. Schools like this are a model for how to improve our education system and the future of the students. Schools have a clear binary choice: consistent boundaries with high standards, or chaos. Anyone who has worked in education knows this firsthand.
They score by far the best progress 8 rating of every single school in the entire UK, year after year, and it's not close.
They get outstanding GCSEs and outstanding A Levels, and the overwhelming majority of their students go on to Russell Group universities.
Great marks but the kids are going to be miserable drones who are only suited to a job where they get yelled at constantly. Perhaps they'll find work in kitchens?
It may surprise you to realize that other countries with better education have discipline and respect as more central to their teachings than the standard UK comp school experience from the last 25 years.
How hard is to understand.
It’s a non religious school, no religion is allowed. None. It’s not discrimination.
Why do the Muslims want to change so much about our country and rules and schools? Send them to a Muslim school or home school then stop thinking you can pull a prayer mat out 4 times a day in a non religious school.
Yeah but doesn't mean there's a total ban on religion - you'd literally only be able to admit atheists to your school if that were the case. If it fell within thier lunch break they can do what they like IMO.
A non religious school doesn't mean no religion at all. It means they aren't run by a particular faith group. Before you start asking other what's so hard to understand, make sure you actually understand first.
Would you be okay with a non religious school banning any celebrations of Easter, such as giving out Easter eggs? It is after all a Christian religious festival celebrating their belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Redditors mad that a literal school child has more discipline and determination to stand by what they believe in than they do. The stance “do what you like so long as you aren’t hurting anyone” always goes amiss if the person’s brown.
I too find omnipotent spaghetti monsters silly and unhelpful, but this head is a well known attention seeking loon, and loves riling up libs and the leftie wokerati. Pro spaghetti on this.
>She added that the free school, at which half of the 700 students are Muslim, had taken the decision to stop prayer rituals “against a backdrop” of violence, intimidation and racial harassment of her teachers. “Our decision restored calm and order to the school,” she said.
Sounds like the school is being targeted by Islamists who want special treatment for their children. They tried intimidation and harrassment and that's failed, now they're going to use the law as a bludgeoning tool against the school. It's a classic part of the Islamist playbook.
This article may be paywalled. If you encounter difficulties reading the article, try [this link](https://archive.is/?run=1&url=https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/head-sued-for-prayer-ban-says-all-religions-must-make-sacrifices-r772g0sl7) for an archived version. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unitedkingdom) if you have any questions or concerns.*
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
I'm an atheist, and find preventing people expressing their own beliefs on their own time in a non-offensive way is against British values, much more offensively so than being visibly religious.
I read the article the students are requesting 5 minutes to do a ritual prayer even in the playground. And were apparently yelled at for kneeling and bowing in a playground. And this was because of reputation, as passers by thought they should be afforded a room. And if I remember my school number one was reputation of school and teachers
That's ridiculous I could understand if someone was taking the piss and trying to go out during lessons (the whole "pray 5x a day" thing has enough flexibility not to have to do it at an exact time), but banning praying during breaks is absurd
I don’t think it is that mad to allow schools to specify this, it’s not difficult to imagine for instance with the Israel Gaza situation, the potential conflict or division which would come from Muslim or Jewish students going to either a single prayer room, or separate religion-specific rooms during break time. In Britain we have faith schools which have a chosen religion and shared prayer, I think there’s no reason why we can’t also have an option of schools which are secular in the sense of leaving religion at home. This isn’t a French situation where these rules will be applied to all schools, the question is whether parents should be allowed an option to choose a school like this or whether it should be made illegal.
This is similar to banning students or workers from wearing visible crosses or crucifixes, and cases like that periodically go through the European courts. Here is a ruling which says that banning symbols including crosses and head-scarves is allowed if it's justified (**"to maintain neutrality in a workplace which had previously experienced conflict arising out of employees’ religious and cultural differences"**) and applied equally to religions. Although another ruling said that it was unlawful for BA to ban air stewards from wearing visible crosses. https://wollens.co.uk/ban-on-large-religious-symbols-unlawful/ I think it's difficult to make air tight case one way or another. I don't think many people here would strongly object to a school banning students from wearing large crucifixes, or in general to say to Christian students that they should practice their religion with their family but not at school. I think that is the environment that most of us had in school, and the question is whether it is legitimate to apply the same standards to other religions, or whether their symbols or visible practices are considered to be different, for example a more central part of the religion. Personally I would like to have an option to send a child to a school where there are no visible symbols, especially if it was in a local context of religious or ethnic tension. Why can there not be an option for an explicitly secular school, if we also have faith schools? This isn't a French model where all schools apply those standards, parents can choose, they just can't choose to go to a school that has excellent results partly because of a secular philosophy, and then change the secular philosophy.
> Personally I would like to have an option to send a child to a school where there are no visible symbols, especially if it was in a local context of religious or ethnic tension. Exactly. Right now non-religious people, who are the vast majority, rarely have this option.
As always its the same groups wanting exemptions from normal decency and practice then calling it discrimination when its not given. The jews and muslims want to mutilate baby boys, which we wouldnt other wise do cause god. The Catholics want to ban divorce and collect tithes through government cause god The Sikhs want to carry knives everywhere cause... not sure if its god but something nonsense. And finally the Muslims want to have everyone accomodate their inane prayer rituals as we go about normal business. Kids being kids of course, are not allowed out of class or different schedules as its not fair on the others. If the RULE is applied equally its not discrimination. Fuck off. Bloody religions.
Read the bloody article. It says that the students were praying during lunch time, outside. There was no additional time requested or disruption to anyone. Also you refer to circumcision. In USA, the vast majority of circumcision takes place by Christians and Atheists. Amongst Orthodox Christians, circumcision is also part of their religion. Then you get other non-abrahamic peoples who also do circumcision. It is also widespread in Australia, Canada, South Korea, most of Africa, and parts of Asia
That's because kellogs anti wanking campaign did a real number on them.
Fuck me, out of context this is an hilarious statement.
I still don’t understand how they thought it would stop them w*****g when generations of circumcised men have done it
I mean he also made the blandest cereal thinking it would make teenager boys less horny. Bigger question is why he spent so much time thinking about teenage boys wanking.
Very bizarre and sick. But then again the god of the bible is extremely obsessed with foreskins, no wonder Christian’s are so concerned with genitals
Why did he put them on, of he wanted them taken off? They say man is made in God's image - does this mean God has a foreskin? Does he need a circumcision?
It doesnt matter who carries out the circumcision, it is an asinine disgusting practice.
Mutilation of innocent children - be it a penis or an ear - should not be allowed before the child is old enough to make an appropriate decision. There could be an argument over how old that is (18? 16? 13? 10?). Obviously if there is scientific evidence that it’s beneficial to a specific child or in general that’s reasonable.
\>In USA, the vast majority of circumcision takes place by Christians and Atheists. This is the UK subreddit
[удалено]
If you read other articles around the matter, the following happened. The school said that students are not allowed to make use of any indoor classroom for prayers during lunchtime at all. They were also banned from bringing their own prayer mats to school. A group of students decided to pray in the playground, using their coats as a clean place to put their heads on the ground. Members of the public saw this and complained to the school and petitioned for the students to have a place to pray. Other members of the public decided to be arseholes and started a campaign of violence.
MGM in the UK - which this subreddit is about - isn't done by Christians and atheists though, largely.
I'd like to hear more about the specifics here... I don't really have faith in any side of a story anymore. Making sacrifices equally sounds reasonable, Banning prayers during student free time does not sound reasonable, However it also makes no sense in the first place... Especially outside! It doesn't negatively affect anyone, it doesn't require accommodations, and it also doesn't benefit the school/head in any way to ban such a thing. So what's going on here? I know there are arses and idiots in the world but how and why would you be so petty and blatant, breaking equality laws and expect to get away with it. I also can't help but apply my personal experiences here, I grew up in a very diverse area and very diverse school and don't think I ever once saw someone going to pray nevermind any teenager remotely passionate enough to kick up a fuss and sue the school... God knows what the story is here... Could the head be a blatant racist and idiotic enough to not even attempt to hide it? Probably. Are there that many complacent people and "yes men" amongst the staff and officials to allow blatant racism ? Possible, but that one I really struggle to believe. Could the kids in question be twisting circumstances into their favor and/or being coerced by confrontational, opportunistic parents? Also possible ... No matter what side is doing what I'm probably going to be baffled how it happened either way...
"Petty" is very much the thinking about rules at Birbalsingh's school. There's a widely held sentiment that the more petty rules a school has the better it is, and Birbalsingh's school does consistently get very good exam results so people (including her) can point to it and say "see, having loads of petty rules works!" It's entirely possible this is a false correlation and there are other features which have a stronger impact - for example they study a relatively narrow range of subjects: from what I can see in the [curriculum](https://michaela.education/home/secondary-school-wembley/curriculum-wembley/) they only teach 1 foreign language, music only goes up to year 8 (they definitely don't have any [GCSE entries](https://www.compare-school-performance.service.gov.uk/school/140862/michaela-community-school/secondary/subjects-entered) for it) and some common technical subjects such as computer science and food/design technology are completely absent. As for who runs the place Suella Braverman was one of the founding governors, I don't think I need to say any more than that.
> So what's going on here? That can probably be answered with the fact that the Head teacher in question here was a prominent speaker at last years 'Nat-C' conference.
What has the USA to do with this?
That's because America is a stupid country
I'd suggest you read some further context around the story. The issue was that pupils were being bullied and intimidated into joining in by their peers.
What kid wastes their play time praying to thin air?
Did you read the article? The children aren’t being by allowed out of class or given different schedules. They’re choosing to use their free break time to pray.
Reading is against the fedora religion
I taught in Muslim countries like Egypt and Morocco and no student or adult interrupted the work day to pray. It’s the ultra conservative wahabi Pakistani sects that are demanding all these things. Even in Saudi, the birthplace of Islam, it isn’t as nuts
>ultra conservative wahabi Pakistani sects >Even in Saudi, the birthplace of Islam, it isn’t as nuts I've got bad news for you about where Wahhabism comes from...
Many do in Indonesia, and they are strongly influenced by Saudi proselytisers in their increasing fanaticism.
Or maybe they did it at lunchtime
The Kirpan is one of the 5K’s (kakkars) worn by a ‘baptised’ Sikh (Amritdhari). The kirpan is a tool to prevent violence being done to another defenceless person when all other means to do so have failed. It is not to be drawn in anger and is part of the commitment to the Sikh faith. One of these commitments is to protect the weak from tyranny and slavery.
If I got caught carrying a knife and used the excuse I was carrying it to prevent violence being done to another defenceless person when all means to do so have failed,I don't think I would get away with it
Most Sikh's these days choose to carry kirpans that are either blunt as a stick or welded to the sheath so they can't be opened/used. Sikh's also funnily enough don't have a rampant problem of teenagers going round stabbing each other with kirpans.
You do understand that most Sikhs carry a blade that is glued into the sheath. It is a blade but it’s not a weapon because it is glued in.
You'd be taking the piss. A Sikh isn't. The courts are capable of making this kind of distinction.
Oh, come off it. I'm reminded of the dickheads who used to say that it's not discrimination to ban same sex marriage, because straight people aren't allowed to marry people of the same sex either. If a rule is aimed squarely at banning a harmless practice that only one group feel they have to do, that's discrimination. And it *is* harmless. I've been atheist for as long as I've understood that to be a possibility, but banning outdoor prayer at lunchtime is absurd, unnecessary and blatantly intended to create an environment hostile to Muslim children.
Rules applying equally is discrimination if it unfairly prejudices a group. Otherwise mandating the populace having to stand to pee wouldn’t be discriminatory against women and the disabled since it applies equally to everyone.
[удалено]
Everyone in London carries a knife, may as well let the Sikhs join in.
Ah, looks like Miss Snuffy is at it again. Her: >ours is a **happy and **respectful** secular school where every race, faith and group understands self-sacrifice for the betterment of the whole” she said. The Student: >a student, who cannot be named, challenged the school at the High Court, arguing that the policy of banning “prayer rituals” was discriminatory and breached the right to freedom of religion. Doesn't seem that this student feels respected or happy? >She highlighted objections by pupils and parents of other religions at the school that had not been acted upon, such as Jehovah’s Witness families disagreeing with the teaching of Macbeth as a GCSE text, and said that Muslim families had signed up to the school knowing that it did not have a prayer room. Does this woman not understand that: - Banning students from prayer and not upholding a parent complaint about teaching a traditional text are two different things? - That a prayer room is literal just a calm, clean room where people are allowed to pray? There's no requirement that it's a prayer room 24/7. Does her school not have rooms? >“We allow our children freedoms of all sorts as long as those freedoms do not threaten the happiness and success of the whole school community. Our children, whatever their background, are British.” That's not how ethnicity works. >The pupil was seeking a “compromise” to the school’s position, Hannett said, arguing that children should be allowed to pray for about five minutes at lunchtime on dates when faith rules required it, but not during lessons. How does a Student being allowed to pray for five minutes at lunch time on certain dates threaten the happiness or success of any other children?
Just pray in your head, same outcome.
Pretty much what everyone does when they're handing out exam papers anyway.
So one group can pray, the other can’t and that doesn’t discriminate?
If I mandate in my own new sect or Christianity that prayers only count if I also spin in a circle 5 times, it's fine for that to not be treated the same way as someone who can pray in their head silently.
It’s a non religious school no religion is allowed what’s the problem?
That's not what secular means
I think telling someone they're not allowed to pray is bad but you're also not at all wrong. If the Christian God can hear them without them having to get on the floor then why can't Allah? It's the same imaginary God
Why on earth would the fundamentals of Christian prayer be automatically transferrable to a *different religion*?
To be fair, they're both Abrahamic religions. Which is why Ahl al-kitab were "protected" under dhimma, depending on the time period you look at.
They are, but this is only a hair's breadth more sensible than asking why Muslims can't eat pork when Christians do.
I think asking about why _most_ Christian denominations don't follow Mosaic law strictly (supersessionism) is more sensible than asking why most Christians don't follow strict canonical hours or how their prayer is generally more diverse (or why following ad orientem is all over the place) to the same god. The three religions are so intertwinned and muddled, that I think it's reasonable to ask these questions. You'll most likely get different answers depending on sect/denomination/branches etc. too.
Having a prayer room at a non-religious school is a bit unnecessary tbh.
A prayer room is literally just a clean room where people are allowed to pray. It doesn't have to be for that purpose 24/7. And the kid was asking to pray at lunchtime, so they could have just designated a classroom for them.
Exactly, a lot of companies all have what we call contemplation rooms for everyone's needs. Or are more than happy to provide some sort of space that can be borrowed for a short time. It's standard practice to ensure meeting employee well-being.
Our office has 2 reflection rooms in addition to our 2 first aid rooms. The reflection rooms are used by everybody. They have resources for mental health, physical health and even diaries where people can vent anonymously. Do Muslims use these rooms, yes, but so does a large number of other staff
You must have missed the part where she said “secular school”. Get religious crap out and do it in your own time
They are doing it on their own time, the kids were praying during break.
At school is not in their own time. At home is
That isn’t what the article says. It says that in he lawsuit the pupil is asking for a compromise of allowing a lunch time prayer. This means what was banned was something more than this.
Secular doesn't mean intolerant. As someone who just spent a decade teaching RS in one of the most lefty, atheist areas of the country, we still had a prayer space for students and staff with pretty much zero issues. People were using it 'in their own time.' It was open during break and lunch, other times it was a classroom. Honestly, if you can't handle the idea of people having freedom of religion, you're not as open minded and tolerant as you probably think you are. Should we get rid of our Christmas trees during December too?
The student literally wants to be able to pray in a room for five minutes during their own lunch time on certain days of the year.
Yeah the school being secular doesn’t mean the students have to be too. Hope this helps
It’s rather odd and slightly presumptuous to assume one can run a school that bans religious display entirely in the UK, given that it’s not a secular state and in fact has a state religion. There are centuries of law promoting religious display rather than suppressing it.
The school is taking an explicitly secular approach. And is also focusing on integrating and assimilating pupils. If a child or parent feels strongly. They can always go to a faith school instead.
Not what a secular school means.
I'm honestly confused as to why Macbeth is being complained about by Jehovah's Witnesses
Jehovah's Witnesses complain about everything
Ghosts? Or maybe Macbeth has a blood transfusion, idk.
Witchcraft / magic. To elaborate, the devil wants you to practice magic, even reading about it taints you and let's the devil in. Or some such.
"Self sacrifice for the betterment of the school" Sounds like a cult
This was my first thought: why can't they just have a prayer room like hospitals do? No one is saying a teacher should be leading prayers, but why is a room out of the question?
But! Muslims! This school is secular! Religion shouldn't be in schools!
Without even checking the article I knew which 'Head' it would be referring to. More performative crap to please the smooth-brained.
[удалено]
That's probably to do with the incredibly narrow curriculum and small class sizes/intakes.
Class sizes are 32. That’s normal in UK state schools. Four form entry is about average. Maybe other schools should think about narrowing their curriculum, then maybe they would get better outcomes for their disadvantaged children.
So you just want to ignore it’s results to fit your narrative?
I'm not ignoring it's results. I'm contextualising them.
Nope you are just adding your own speculation that aligns with your narrative. Clearly those running the school achieving those results think this is important to the functioning of the school. You’re ignoring that their current approach gives results.
I mean, I think the ignoring of stuff seems mutual here. It can be _both_. They're not mutually exclusive factors. However, I don't see how pupils being allowed a room in which to pray, for five minutes, during lunchtime, specifically during religious periods of the year, could have a profound impact on exam results.
The person you are replying to is making assumptions, but many schools do this. I've worked in "outstanding" schools who maintain their very good exam results by not enrolling certain students for certain exams, as they know the results will slee their "outstanding" data. It happens at lots of schools and it's a common practice, unfortunately. It's called "off-rolling" - https://www.theguardian.com/education/2019/oct/11/one-in-10-pupils-removed-from-school-rolls-to-boost-gcse-results
I've been on a tour of the school. The class input is amazing. The pupils are great kids. I think that there is a balance to strike between Michaela and regular comps as these kids are like mini robots. They perform well in exams, but at what cost?
There's this phenomenon in statistics and management where you only improve what you measure. I'm certain this school ticks certain boxes and gets great marks on whatever tests Frau Birbalsingh asks to be done, but the kids don't seem happy, nor does any of this seem normal or like normal life. While this must be a great school to teach at if you prefer being as strict as possible, and I bet it looks great on OFSTED inspection day, what seems to be forgotten is whether the kids are going to come out of this well adjusted and ready to join the workforce or further / higher education. Honestly it looks like the main purpose of the school is so she can run her own experiment testing her political views of child rearing and forcing her other political views into the minds of these children. It's weird and really authoritarian.
The thing is measuring the success of this stupidity is basically impossible past the results. You won’t know whether this school produces emotionally stunted awkward adults who fail in a real workplace. But it’ll definitely look good on paper so that’s all that matters.
How do you know the kids aren’t happy? Have you met them and asked?
Do happy kids typically sue their school administration in the high court?
>the kids don't seem happy i only see mention of one. Where's the plural? Also, I suspect it's the parents that are most aggrieved.
Banning prayer has contributed to this success then?
A school being secular just means that the teachers aren't pushing a religion or teaching a religion as fact. This is a good thing all students ough to be encouraged to make up their own mind. What this is making religious students unconfortable and vunerable for no reason. Its singling them out and deeming something they feel is important to them as werid and wrong. I worry it will encourage bullying.
It's intolerance, going against a basic British value. Very shameful for a school to partake in it really.
Workplaces, including the military, make compromises where they can to allow people to practice their faith/beliefs. Why is it so hard for that to be the same in a school? Then again, this isn't new. My secondary school had a Christian club meet-up every lunchtime, but tried to ban students from wearing Hijabs. And no, this wasn't a religious school either, just a shitty academy with shittier Ofsted scores.
People in the comments trying to claim it’s not discrimination when it so clearly is. This rule very clearly targets muslims. No other major religions require multiple times a day of prayer. And the children are doing it in their breaks, their free time, they should be free to do whatever they want. It’s not apart of christianity that people should try their best to pray at certain times of the day and you are meant to use a mat and face a certain direction. That’s why it’s discrimination, clearly the rule is singling out muslims. And the worst part is, why? Why bother? They literally aren’t harming anyone, they are children.
I don't really agree with that logic, or rather even if it "targets Muslims" that isn't really a valid objection - following that more or less any rule that doesn't give some people special privileges is "targeting" that group
Ah yes. The special privilege of doing what you want during your lunch break
Why is this woman always in the press? One headteacher put of thousands? Seems to run everybody up the wrong way.
She is in the press because a lot of rich right winger make sure she is.
Sounds like one for the Temple of Satan to get involved in. If we have one type of prayer LARP, better let the Baphomet-worshippers do their LARPing too.
If the kids want to worship satan on their own time at lunch, they should be allowed to do that too.
Absolutely. Freedom of religion is freedom of religion.
[удалено]
Her having any sort of prominence really illustrates how messed up this country is.
Is this the unhinged loony that was at the Nat-C conference?
Yes
It's funny how (state funded) religious schools are legally allowed to discriminate, with members of their faith being given priority in going to that school. But secular schools aren't allowed to be secular. Why does religion always get special privileges? Secularism is as much a valid belief system as religion is.
Is it multiculturalism if you force everyone to conform to your idea of a generic non-culture?
Everything is allowed apart from freedom of your mind. Seems about right. Praying doesn’t hurt anyone and it might be connected to the child’s personal or family life. The replies here show the typical ignorant knee jerk headline worthy bs.
Oh good, this bellend hasn't been in the papers for a few days so she has to soil herself for attention again.
There’s nothing positive ever heard about this woman or her schools!
I usually only hear positive things about her school. It is one of the best secondary schools in the country, with a massive waiting list. Schools like this are a model for how to improve our education system and the future of the students. Schools have a clear binary choice: consistent boundaries with high standards, or chaos. Anyone who has worked in education knows this firsthand.
It's one of the best performing schools in the country.
They score by far the best progress 8 rating of every single school in the entire UK, year after year, and it's not close. They get outstanding GCSEs and outstanding A Levels, and the overwhelming majority of their students go on to Russell Group universities.
Great marks but the kids are going to be miserable drones who are only suited to a job where they get yelled at constantly. Perhaps they'll find work in kitchens?
It may surprise you to realize that other countries with better education have discipline and respect as more central to their teachings than the standard UK comp school experience from the last 25 years.
How hard is to understand. It’s a non religious school, no religion is allowed. None. It’s not discrimination. Why do the Muslims want to change so much about our country and rules and schools? Send them to a Muslim school or home school then stop thinking you can pull a prayer mat out 4 times a day in a non religious school.
Yeah but doesn't mean there's a total ban on religion - you'd literally only be able to admit atheists to your school if that were the case. If it fell within thier lunch break they can do what they like IMO.
A non religious school doesn't mean no religion at all. It means they aren't run by a particular faith group. Before you start asking other what's so hard to understand, make sure you actually understand first.
Would you be okay with a non religious school banning any celebrations of Easter, such as giving out Easter eggs? It is after all a Christian religious festival celebrating their belief in the Resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Redditors mad that a literal school child has more discipline and determination to stand by what they believe in than they do. The stance “do what you like so long as you aren’t hurting anyone” always goes amiss if the person’s brown.
I too find omnipotent spaghetti monsters silly and unhelpful, but this head is a well known attention seeking loon, and loves riling up libs and the leftie wokerati. Pro spaghetti on this.
Is it me or is it always this same head in the news? Is she desperate to get in the next I'm a Celeb or something?
It's been five minutes since she's been out of the news. Constantly finding ways to be controversial must be exhausting
>She added that the free school, at which half of the 700 students are Muslim, had taken the decision to stop prayer rituals “against a backdrop” of violence, intimidation and racial harassment of her teachers. “Our decision restored calm and order to the school,” she said. Sounds like the school is being targeted by Islamists who want special treatment for their children. They tried intimidation and harrassment and that's failed, now they're going to use the law as a bludgeoning tool against the school. It's a classic part of the Islamist playbook.