• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

University Tells Student to Remove Cross Necklace

Absolutely not.

This is the USA not Nazi Germany.

The vast majority of people that wear a keffiyeh or hijab are Muslim. The vast majority of people that wear a cross are Christian.
The hijab is very much a religious symbol. The keffiyeh as well, to a much lesser degree.

To ban one and not the other is a violation of the persons rights. I don't care if it from an employer or not, fair across the board is the only way to play it.
If it were a Private institution, office, business, whatever.... then the employer has the right to set their own rules for wear. SSU is a public University, so that is not in play here.


(as a side note: I am atheist/agnostic, so I don't have a dog in the fight. No bias here at all. No "right wing agenda")
 
Actually, I have been to a few_ :prof

Uh huh.

In fact, I've earned degrees from as well as visited friends and colleagues at enough of them to know that the rules which are designed primarily for non-liberal groups are enforced to a much greater degree than those which are not_

Did you know that being disruptive and offensive is quite common for radical leftist students and even staff_

But there's rarely any serious consequences for their bad behavior, instead the university often defends them_

This is the selective tolerance rationale of those in charge at many institutions of higher learning_



You seriously believe "it's not personal"???

Yep.

Then what rational reason could there possibly be for such a "dumb rule"?!

Covering their asses, and directly related to tort law. Like how seat belts on planes come with instructions, or plastic bags come with warnings not to place over your head thus obstructing air flow.

Occam's razor would suggest "the simplest explanation is usually the correct one"_

This aint rocket surgery girls and boys___it's basic Common Sense 101_

Already followed Occam's Razor and arrived at the conclusion that bureaucracies are rule-crazy for usually ass-covering reasons. I actually believe their rationale for banning the religious accessories, that being they wanted to not offend new and prospective students. It's just mundane and asinine enough to be true -- it fits my experience with school administration's rule craziness.
 
The employer would be the student in this case, wouldn't it?
See this is what I get for reading in a hurry. I thought it was a teacher. It's a student, and it's a state university to boot. As a state school they are obligated to make reasonable accommodation for the free expression of religion.

I would call the student a client, not an employer, but that's splitting hairs and doesn't really matter anyway.
 
It will be my policy to point out that Christians do not follow their own creed when they cannot turn the other cheek especially after an apology was given.
Turn the other cheek means to level the playing field, not ignore or forget. It's a non-violent method of responding, not the absence of responding at all.

Back in the day if you wanted to insult someone severely you would backhand them on their right cheek with your right hand. This was not simply a strike, this was smiting and dominating their favored side with your favored side; the right side, which was also the hand you're supposed to print with, shake hands with, and accept a host's refreshments with.

The left side of the body was seen as sinful and unclean, which is why they use their left hand to wipe their ass, and why in ME conservative cultures left-handedness is like a deformity.

Sociopolitically if you are back handed on your right side you have just been made lower than the striker. Turning the other cheek forced the attacker to use their left hand to strike you, which lowers them to the same level they lowered you, making you equals again.

You do like equality, don't you Grimm?
 
Last edited:
I wonder if the Chancellor would ask a Muslim woman to remove her burka. The burka is an obvious religious symbol.
 
I wonder if the Chancellor would ask a Muslim woman to remove her burka. The burka is an obvious religious symbol.

So is a head scarf. I wonder if that would be acceptable?

If one religious symbol is not acceptable, none should be.
 
It's the same why Happy Hanukkah, Happy Kwanzaa, The Hindu Festival of Lights, and Ramadan can be plastered all over university walls but no Merry Christmas, that must be replaced with Happy Holidays.

Find me one instance where the bolded has actually happened.
 
I don't believe right-wing academia is really all that concerned where students pray_

And neither is left-wing academia, as long as the students aren't jews or christians_

Christians in this country are not victims. Example?

When's the last time you heard church bells? When's the last time you heard people complaining about them?
Now how silent would you and alllll these Christians remain if in that same neighborhood there was an applified muslim call to prayer?

Again... you are not a victim. Please stop volunteering to be one.
 
So is a head scarf. I wonder if that would be acceptable?

If one religious symbol is not acceptable, none should be.

I'd just show up naked. Say it's my religious duty to have Naked Wednesdays.
 
When's the last time you heard church bells?
Last Sunday, as mass was about to begin.

When's the last time you heard people complaining about them?
Last Sunday, by natives who dislike everything da'white ma'an brought to "their" land.

Now how silent would you and alllll these Christians remain if in that same neighborhood there was an amplified Muslim call to prayer?
Pretty silent, actually, as long as their song met the same noise ordinance as the churches, public bands everything else.

Again... you are not a victim. Please stop volunteering to be one.
It's true, I, as a Christian, am not a victim...I am the one who knocks.
 
poweRob said:
Now how silent would you and alllll these Christians remain if in that same neighborhood there was an amplified Muslim call to prayer?

Pretty silent, actually, as long as their song met the same noise ordinance as the churches, public bands everything else.

Let's take the word "you" out of my quote and replace it with the "Christians in the area". Do you think Christians would stay silent about an amplified Muslim call the prayer at the same volume as church bells?

I think it's more likely that we would be faced with Fox News doing thorough exlusive reporting about how Christians in that community are all under Muslim attack in that neighborhood with loads of locals expressing their outrage... all while Fox is complaining about how atrocious it is that no other news organization is giving it the same amount of coverage.
 
Let's take the word "you" out of my quote and replace it with the "Christians in the area". Do you think Christians would stay silent about an amplified Muslim call the prayer at the same volume as church bells?
You're changing the question. You asked "how silent" and I said "pretty silent". Every group has members who will speak out, Christians included. A few will object, a few will file complaints, but the main body of Christians in my State wouldn't. Most of us are going to preach tolerance and make friends with our Muslim neighbors.

I think it's more likely that we would be faced with Fox News...
I don't even own a TV, so I'm not "faced" with any such thing.
 
Last edited:
You're changing the question. You asked "how silent" and I said "pretty silent". Every group has members who will speak out, Christians included.

Agreed. However, my point is that those who whine about being a victim are the first to cast stones when the tables are turned.

Jerry said:
A few will object, a few will file complaints, but the main body of Christians in my State wouldn't.

I'd like to see a test case scenario.
 
How is wearing a cross different than sporting a confederate flag? One person thinks their interpretation of the symbol is the only one that is valid and they don't take any time to think of how their hateful symbols affect others. People have ancestors who were brutalized and oppressed over both symbols. She needs to save the crosses for her church. Universities should be bastions of inclusion and welcomeness for diverse individuals.

If she's jewish and sees a photo of Hitler in her history textbook, she can ask the university to remove all these books from campus. Thank you.
 
Absolutely agree.


Let us know when you publish it.


Don't get me wrong, I'd be pissed too. Just as I was pissed in Phoenix when the street behind my house had a house converted to a small church where the asshole would go out and put his amplifier system in the yard and start screaming hellfire and brimestone in Spanish.

Religion isn't under attack. Religion is generally the attacker.
 
Find me one instance where the bolded has actually happened.

Pick any State University. I use to work for one, I can name you 8, the 8 years that I worked for one.
 
Pick any State University. I use to work for one, I can name you 8, the 8 years that I worked for one.

I don't buy that. Been at more than a few myself, and that has never been true. I think you need to back this claim up, showing it to be in a significant number of universities.
 
I don't buy that. Been at more than a few myself, and that has never been true. I think you need to back this claim up, showing it to be in a significant number of universities.

You don't have to.

anecdotal evidence is just that.

Believe or don't believe, I do not care.
 
You don't have to.

anecdotal evidence is just that.

Believe or don't believe, I do not care.

I don't. And have no reason to accept it.
 
Back
Top Bottom