Professor killed for opposing burkha

[Underseer]

Why are these groups still allowed to post on facebook?

I have a friend who was banned for three days from facebook just for jokingly saying, "Kill all atheists."

Facebook's policies are categorically insane. Even if you don't suggest killing people, simply expressing a view that other people disagree with means that you will be constantly fighting to keep your account active as your page becomes more and more popular. The same thing happens to Christians, atheists, liberals, conservatives, etc. Get enough such incidents and your account will eventually be banned.

 

[Sabine Grant]

IMO, this Faculty member decision to ban the wearing of burqhas in his class during instruction time is representative of what really motivates opponents to the wearing of a specific type of clothing symbolizing the imposition of religious practices on women in fundamentalist conservative Islam. Meaning not motivated by a concern that it makes other students feel uncomfortable or it somehow impairs the mental ability for the wearing burkha student to comprehend and assimilate the material presented during the lecture.

Should Faculty members establish such rules during their instruction time with an audience of adult students? Are they to be expected to project their personal like or dislike of various religious practices and what they symbolize by imposing their own rules on religious students adopting any religious practice the symbolism of which the Faculty member dislikes or disapproves of? The answer is no. Now, if the University Staff or Administration decided to ban the wearing of ANY clothing or artifact which dissimulate the student's face, it could only be justified for security reasons without targeting a specific group based on religious practices. Making it a generic ban rather than one focusing on the "burkha" wearing.

The above in NO way stated to condone the response of some fanatic extremist Islamic group engaging in criminal activities and murdering this Faculty member.

 

[Metaphor]

You don't see a difference between a burqa and a t-shirt, and you think negative reaction to each is equally valid?

I would not allow anyone to cover their face in any class I tutored. Ninjas belong in ninja movies.

Why would you need to see their face? This isn't high school, it's university. If they want to skip class, sleep through class, send a maidservant in wearing a disguise to take notes for them in class or anything else, they are adults paying to attend the class and can do so as they please, so long as they don't impact other students in any kind of legitimate way. The only time their identity actually matters is when they are doing exams and the like where they are being tested on the course material. When it was Halloween at my university, some students wore their costimes to class, complete with masks, and it didn't affect the instructors job in any way, shape or form - even when they were dressed up as a ninja.

I already explained the 80% attendance requirement for some classes. Whether you agree with that requirement or not, it's certainly the case that it's impossible to verify it if people are wearing face coverings. And even when labs aren't compulsory, there are often continuous assessment items (e.g. class participation or quizzes).

Notwithstanding the above, I am not willing to concede that negative reactions to burqas are exactly the same as negative reactions to t-shirts. A t-shirt does not dehumanise a person and conceal an identity.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Why would you need to see their face? This isn't high school, it's university. If they want to skip class, sleep through class, send a maidservant in wearing a disguise to take notes for them in class or anything else, they are adults paying to attend the class and can do so as they please, so long as they don't impact other students in any kind of legitimate way. The only time their identity actually matters is when they are doing exams and the like where they are being tested on the course material. When it was Halloween at my university, some students wore their costimes to class, complete with masks, and it didn't affect the instructors job in any way, shape or form - even when they were dressed up as a ninja.

I already explained the 80% attendance requirement for some classes. Whether you agree with that requirement or not, it's certainly the case that it's impossible to verify it if people are wearing face coverings. And even when labs aren't compulsory, there are often continuous assessment items (e.g. class participation or quizzes).

Notwithstanding the above, I am not willing to concede that negative reactions to burqas are exactly the same as negative reactions to t-shirts. A t-shirt does not dehumanise a person and conceal an identity.

What university did you go to? Attendence was never mandatory or taken at any that I was at. All the test dates are given in advance and those were the only times you actually needed to be there beyond labwork. You were stupid if you didn't attend, of course, but university students are adults and allowed to be as stupid as they feel like being.

Also, a t-shirt can conceal an identity if the boobs are nice enough. Nobody will ever see a face.

 

[Metaphor]

I already explained the 80% attendance requirement for some classes. Whether you agree with that requirement or not, it's certainly the case that it's impossible to verify it if people are wearing face coverings. And even when labs aren't compulsory, there are often continuous assessment items (e.g. class participation or quizzes).

Notwithstanding the above, I am not willing to concede that negative reactions to burqas are exactly the same as negative reactions to t-shirts. A t-shirt does not dehumanise a person and conceal an identity.

What university did you go to? Attendence was never mandatory or taken at any that I was at. All the test dates are given in advance and those were the only times you actually needed to be there beyond labwork. You were stupid if you didn't attend, of course, but university students are adults and allowed to be as stupid as they feel like being.

Also, a t-shirt can conceal an identity if the boobs are nice enough. Nobody will ever see a face.

My undergraduate university had compulsory classes in both psychology and law. My postgraduate university had compulsory classes for psychology (I don't know about the other subjects). A third university I've taught at does not have compulsory attendance requirements for the course I teach, but it did have in-lab quizzes (it's a stats course).

You and I simply disagree on the line where 'legitimately affected' is drawn.

 

[Togo]

My undergraduate university had compulsory classes in both psychology and law.

My university had compulsory attendance. Anyone who missed too many classes or lectures could be expelled.

They also relied on photo id for their security checks, entering or leaving the building, taking out books or equipment, accessing the big computers, and to determine that the students had passed any compulsory pre-requisites for practicals such as lab safety.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

By itself I am hesitant to support anybody who bans an article of clothing in a classroom, presumably because it is affiliated with a religion. That just isn't right. But then I find justification for it when things like this murder happen. It becomes almost essential to do, to show the thugs that we won't be intimidated. You can't encourage and reward such murders.

- - - Updated - - -

My university had compulsory attendance. Anyone who missed too many classes or lectures could be expelled.

Why? Sounds more like a prison than a University.

 

[Warpoet]

By itself I am hesitant to support anybody who bans an article of clothing in a classroom, presumably because it is affiliated with a religion. That just isn't right. But then I find justification for it when things like this murder happen. It becomes almost essential to do, to show the thugs that we won't be intimidated. You can't encourage and reward such murders.

So, you think that it's OK to punish people who haven't done anything wrong (female students who wear burqa) because of the actions of extremists who resort to violence?

I had mandatory attendance at both colleges I went to, so it's not unreasonable that someone being covered head-to-toe would present a problem, but as Sabine notes, those reasons are usually not the real motive. The "ban the burqa" crowd in France tried to use "security" as a justification, when it was obvious what the real agenda was. Impossible to say in this professor's case without more information.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

By itself I am hesitant to support anybody who bans an article of clothing in a classroom, presumably because it is affiliated with a religion. That just isn't right. But then I find justification for it when things like this murder happen. It becomes almost essential to do, to show the thugs that we won't be intimidated. You can't encourage and reward such murders.

- - - Updated - - -

My university had compulsory attendance. Anyone who missed too many classes or lectures could be expelled.

Why? Sounds more like a prison than a University.

Why do you assume it was banned for religious reasons and not because the professor wanted to be able to see the students in his class? Like little details such as if the student taking the test was really the student enrolled in the class?

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I dont know. I presume because the above said the particular garment was banned by name.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I dont know. I presume because the above said the particular garment was banned by name.

What other normal garment hides the face of the wearer?

 

[Juma]

I dont know. I presume because the above said the particular garment was banned by name.

What other normal garment hides the face of the wearer?

What has that to do with anything?

 

[Tom Sawyer]

What other normal garment hides the face of the wearer?

What has that to do with anything?

What if somebody wanted to wear a burkha in clown college? Their faces are all hidden anyways.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What other normal garment hides the face of the wearer?

What has that to do with anything?

The point is that naming the garment need not be a religious thing.

 

[Juma]

What has that to do with anything?

The point is that naming the garment need not be a religious thing.

Ah. Ok.

 

[Sabine Grant]

The point is that naming the garment need not be a religious thing.

Ah. Ok.

Which is what I brought up earlier. Under "for security reasons" would pass.It remains generic and does not point to a specific attire or artifact worn for religious reasons. It eliminates the conflict created by a ban targeting religious speech/expression.

If that case had happened in the US to where a Professor would have prohibited the wearing of the burkha in his classroom, burkha wearing female students would have a justified case for a lawsuit. Keeping in mind that religious speech/expression is protected under the First Amendment. However ( and as I mentioned earlier) if a University/College were to ban the wearing of any artifact/clothing dissimulating facial traits under "security reasons", it would extend to any and all such artifacts/clothing rather than targeting a form of religious speech/expression by specifically naming "burkhas".

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Ah. Ok.

Which is what I brought up earlier. Under "for security reasons" would pass.It remains generic and does not point to a specific attire or artifact worn for religious reasons. It eliminates the conflict created by a ban targeting religious speech/expression.

If that case had happened in the US to where a Professor would have prohibited the wearing of the burkha in his classroom, burkha wearing female students would have a justified case for a lawsuit. Keeping in mind that religious speech/expression is protected under the First Amendment. However ( and as I mentioned earlier) if a University/College were to ban the wearing of any artifact/clothing dissimulating facial traits under "security reasons", it would extend to any and all such artifacts/clothing rather than targeting a form of religious speech/expression by specifically naming "burkhas".

But what other garment hides the face?

 

[Juma]

Which is what I brought up earlier. Under "for security reasons" would pass.It remains generic and does not point to a specific attire or artifact worn for religious reasons. It eliminates the conflict created by a ban targeting religious speech/expression.

If that case had happened in the US to where a Professor would have prohibited the wearing of the burkha in his classroom, burkha wearing female students would have a justified case for a lawsuit. Keeping in mind that religious speech/expression is protected under the First Amendment. However ( and as I mentioned earlier) if a University/College were to ban the wearing of any artifact/clothing dissimulating facial traits under "security reasons", it would extend to any and all such artifacts/clothing rather than targeting a form of religious speech/expression by specifically naming "burkhas".

But what other garment hides the face?

Motorcycle helmet, long hair, baseball caps (properly worn..) etc

 

[bilby]

But what other garment hides the face?

Motorcycle helmet, long hair, baseball caps (properly worn..) etc

Suit of armor, bandit mask, neckerchief pulled up over the nose to protect against dust, Halloween mask, monk's habit with hood pulled forward, Japanese stage-hand outfit, space-suit, diving helmet, welding mask...

Sounds like an entertaining group of students. I would love it if I turned up to give a lecture and everyone had on a different face-concealing outfit. It would be a scream.

 

[Sabine Grant]

Motorcycle helmet, long hair, baseball caps (properly worn..) etc

Suit of armor, bandit mask, neckerchief pulled up over the nose to protect against dust, Halloween mask, monk's habit with hood pulled forward, Japanese stage-hand outfit, space-suit, diving helmet, welding mask...

Sounds like an entertaining group of students. I would love it if I turned up to give a lecture and everyone had on a different face-concealing outfit. It would be a scream.

Though I will tell you that if a student were to enter a classroom or auditorium on an American campus wearing a "balaclava", it would immediately attract the attention of Campus Security because such face dissimulating garment is often associated with a criminal intent.