It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Originally posted by IBelieveInAliens
And if it was a male only class where a young Mother was turned away? There'd be outrage.
Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
Again. Read the full article.
It's not a muslim only class. It's a Female only class.
We have plenty of female only gyms and whatnot.
Were the class a religious class I'd be all over it.
As a Female only class then it's a different story.
Originally posted by MountainLaurel
reply to post by Rubic0n
You make an excellent point, and I don't know enough to comment on Muslim Religions....I did think the women wore these Burka things for religious reasons...so I learned something.....
If for whatever reason these women are uncomfortable swimming in a public pool around men, they need to get a private pool to swim in...and in my perfect World....ditch the "Burkinis" and try skinny dipping !
Men only swim classes are also available.
But I dont need to go perv at a pool to do it.
Originally posted by old_god
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorus
No to burst your bubble but that's how it is around here in the UK (in some parts). Muslims might the scourge of the Earth but we have a even bigger problem, pedophiles and I am worried sick enough knowing my kids are out there yet I am not allowed to keep guard of my own children.
It's a double edged sword, because our society has gone from extreme to extreme we have stupid rules created on top of misguided principles when a middle ground can be found (and does work).
The rhetoric on this thread suggests we should get Muslims to wear green badges, have separate travel arrangements and live out fenced camps?
Well sed...Nicely put.
Originally posted by ThirdEyeofHorus
reply to post by lnfideI
But I dont need to go perv at a pool to do it.
So are you telling us that the girl's own Dad is a perv for wanting to watch his own daughter have a swim lesson? Not to mention circumventing the natural daddy instinct to protect their own children from harm, which would include the possibility of a negligent lifeguard staff.
And you called the swim facility to get this information about pervs watching the lessons? The plain stark fact is that a group of people are trying to enforce drastic cultural practices on entire populations. Why did these people not just stay in a country where the practice is already enforced?
The answer is CONQUEST!
Also, this is not an isolated case. In the US a woman tried to have her driver's license pic taken with her hijab covering her face. The whole point of the pic is for identification. Another case in California was a woman who got employment at Disneyland, and when you are employed you have to sign that you will abide by their rules which involve things like earrings no bigger than a dime, no bizarre haircuts like a Mohawk, no obvious unnatural looking hair colorings, and even the nails have to be a certain length of shortness. This attention to appearance began when Walt Disney himself was alive. This lady decided that Disney has to abide by her religious needs and she insisted on being allowed to wear a head covering on the job. She filed a lawsuit.
So why get a job knowing the requirements, then proceed to try to break them legally? The same thing applies to Sandra Fluke at Georgetown, knowing the health insurance coverage, applying there, and then trying to break it.
This is the Rules for Radicals type of thing and it is deliberate.edit on 12-4-2013 by ThirdEyeofHorus because: (no reason given)
All they need to do is to explain and ensure that they follow the rules and regulations set forth by the Government of UK and the private sector businesses when they sign up for a job or seek asylum/residency/immigration visa. In the case of employees of different religious/racial background in a foreign country, they all generally receive a employee handbook/code of conduct book (which is required by law in US by most companies). The rules and regulations are explained briefly and it is understood the individual is capable of understanding them fairly well. If not, they can always approach the Human Resources to clarify before accepting the job offer. How many companies do you know that allows 'shorts' and 'tank tops' for women at work be it blue or white collar? (small businesses or certain types are exceptions if they're self/family owned such as restaurants/bars/landscaping etc). Should they start to protest and file law suits against the companies for violating their rights from being/feeling more feminine/down to earth/free/open/good about themselves in summer?
Originally posted by old_god
reply to post by ThirdEyeofHorusThe rhetoric on this thread suggests we should get Muslims to wear green badges, have separate travel arrangements and live out fenced camps?
Originally posted by doubtit
I keep reading more and more comments in this thread stating this is wrong. My previous posts seemed to fall on deaf ears as they still keep going about the "outrage"
Did it ever occur to anyone that the pool is rented for this female only course? The city of Toronto does rent time for swim classes as you can see on this site under indoor pools & outdoor pools. Since this is a specialty class, I wouldn't be surprised if the class was charged rent as it does not include anyone.
So maybe people here can stop jumping on it like its a crime and use some logic.
Originally posted by Rubic0n
Originally posted by doubtit
I keep reading more and more comments in this thread stating this is wrong. My previous posts seemed to fall on deaf ears as they still keep going about the "outrage"
Did it ever occur to anyone that the pool is rented for this female only course? The city of Toronto does rent time for swim classes as you can see on this site under indoor pools & outdoor pools. Since this is a specialty class, I wouldn't be surprised if the class was charged rent as it does not include anyone.
So maybe people here can stop jumping on it like its a crime and use some logic.
The man was denied access for religious reasons. End of file/
Originally posted by doubtit
And? If you pay pay rent on a government subsidized house does that mean anyone can sit in your living room because its publicly subsidized? Its a female only class, regardless of religion female only means female only.
Originally posted by doubtit
Some guy enrolls his daughter and finds out the rules for this class and has a beef with it.
Originally posted by ollncasino
Originally posted by doubtit
Some guy enrolls his daughter and finds out the rules for this class and has a beef with it.
A Canadian man enrolls his daughter in a swimming class and finds that a Muslim women objects to him watching his daughter from thew stands on the grounds that he may catch a glimpse of uncovered Islamic hair.
Couldn't she just have worn a bathing cap?
Originally posted by Irako
Too bad that's not what evidently happened. Or maybe you have something to back up your claim?
A Toronto area father is upset after being locked out of his daughter’s swim class for what he was told are “religious reasons,” according to the Toronto Sun.
“I spoke to a staff member and she told me that it’s because of Muslim women, that we’re not allowed to look at them or whatever,” 38-year-old Chris said Friday (he declined to give a last name). “I don’t think religion has a role to play in a public pool.”
Link