According to the 'Star News", students of "Middle Eastern appearance" are excused from singing the National Anthem at a Victorian school - the Cranbourne Carlisle Primary School - as part of a "great tolerance and understanding of the heritage and culture of others" by the school principal.

At a recent assembly for Year 2-6 students at the school, a teacher stepped up and announced that any students for whom singing the Australian Anthem was against their culture, could leave the hall and return later. According to the principal who was questioned later, it was a month of mourning for some students who, in that month, could not attend parties, listen to music, or "paint their nails". Avoiding singing the anthem of your country was not mentioned, but there you go!

Anyway, up to 40 or these very young kids left the hall and returned after the anthem had been sung. Whether or not all kids of "Middle Eastern appearance" chose to leave is not reported.

I wonder: did the parents of these presumably ordinary suburban kids ask for the exemption? Given that we are told about the 'differences' in Muslims, did they even know that they were supposed to be in 'mourning'? Or, was it simply that a school princpal and her acute sensitivity, decided that these kids should be shown up in front of their mates as being 'different'?

When I went to primary school, we had saluting of the flag every morning. Seventh Day Adventists were exempted, and they stood against the wall looking hunted and miserable.

We don't seemed have moved very far, do we?

There you go ttbn, multiculturalism at it's finest.

Try to imagine how we would be treated if we were in some of these foreign countries and wanted to recite our religion, say chrisianity for example.

Need I say more!

Mind you, had I been offered a opportunity to skip certain activities as a kid my teacher would have been knocked over in the rush to the door. Ha ha!

But for other reasons.

So what's the alternative? Pulling those kids on the torture rack until they agree to sing? or having the kids stay and sing in a mocking squeaky tone, substituting dirty words for the original?

The teacher did well. The real question is, why are children forced to attend school in the first place?

Since when does the golden-rule not apply to children? Since when is it OK to do unto others what you would hate if done to yourself?

another failed leftist ideology which they now demand others fix.

It was an over-sensitive over-reaction that isolated them.

The pupils could have remained in the room in their usual places and sung or not sung as was their choosing. Nothing worse for children than noticeably being the odd one out. Nothing needed to be said. Of course even in that case there would be the fool of a teacher who would be looking very noticeably at the children to show how 'supportive' s/he was.

What BS.

At first glance it's appalling — not least because the whole point of multiculturalism is that everyone should be free to determine their own culture.

But thinking about it a bit more, it does make sense to allow those who want to avoid listening to musc during the mourning to leave the room while the others are singing. But I'm intrigued — who mourns under those conditions? And why?

//According to the principal who was questioned later, it was a month of mourning for some students who, in that month, could not attend parties, listen to music, or "paint their nails". Avoiding singing the anthem of your country was not mentioned, but there you go!//

I think most people would say that singing the anthem - presumably to musical accompaniment - counts as listening to music. Personally, I would say it's a bit of a stretch to call our anthem 'music' - especially the way some performers (usually at football matches) mutilate it. Which is why this should be our anthem instead:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xiEycVMKoJo

Genius.

Although we really ought to change the lines 'For those who've come across the seas/We've boundless plains to share' to something more appropriate: 'For those who've come across the seas/We've indefinite detention to share'.

Why Cannot Kids be treated Like Kids? ttbn...

Because parents always seem to insist on treating their kids as their property.

But in this instance I'm more encouraged that the kids are in a state school and not cloistered in a private religious school.

I don't know why the school didn't opt for reciting the national anthem which would have been inclusive of the tone-deaf and only discriminated against the stutterers.

Thanks for the laugh with, "Seventh Day Adventists were exempted, and they stood against the wall looking hunted and miserable."

Firearm ownership will do that sort of thing!

Admission: like some other Australians (more than a few, I suspect) I do not know the words to the current National Anthem. I do not sing - ever; it's too embarrassing as I sound like a chook being throttled. I can just about remember God Save The Queen, but I don't remember ever singing it. I can hum, I can move my lips to appear to be singing. I'm sure others do something when of the kind when necessary. But, I do stand and show the respect I believe my country and culture is due, no matter how wacky I think the song is, or how strong my horror of singing. If you go to a foreign country where you don't even know the language, you stand and show your respect for the people and their country.

But, in Leftstralia, kids with brown skins, supposedly Australian, are excused, or denied, the chance to show respect and loyalty to their own country.

I don't know what I dislike most: Islam or the Australian activist left. I don't dislike Muslim
kids, or any other kids; kids are going to be running this country one day, and they are not being shown how to do it. Embarrassing kids, as this school certainly did, and will continue to do, is really the worst offence of the lot; and the offensive behaviour here is all down, not to Muslims or Islam, but to a stupid Australian school principal

Wm Trevor,

You weren't mean to get a laugh. If you laugh at the humiliation of children, I hope that you don't have any kids of your own. Your gun comment is absurd.

As for for private schools, my wife used to teach at a Catholic college in a low socio economic area, which abounded with Muslims. And, yes, many of those Muslim kids were sent to the Catholic school by their parents who, like the non-Muslim parents of other kids, preferred to find the fees to get their kids a decent education rather them send them to the blackboard jungles of the free, state schools in the area.

Gone are the days of nuns teaching. The best teachers are sought, irrespective of whether they are Catholics, Protestants., Taoists, Bhuddist or athiests or Muslims.

My wife, a non-Catholic, and all the other teachers and students, were merely expected to attend 'morning prayers' for a few minutes, at which time they could prayer, go blank, worry about whether or not they'd turned off the iron and so on. Catholism, relgion was NOT FORCED ON ANYONE.

And, yes, the Muslim students did eveything the others did. There were no complaints, no incidents, and no PC BS

I recall: Attending Catholic School in the 1960's, going to 'Confession' once a month on Friday mornings aged about 12. Reeling off the usual spiel to the old Irish priest. "Bless me father for I have sinned..."
Giving him my trumped up innocuous list of venial's, not that he was listening or interested. Then came the "juicy" part when the old B would say "any impure thoughts, or acts?" Hummm, after 'Confession' you always asked the kid next to you "did the old B ask you if you were jerking yourself?" "sure did" would come the reply, did you say "yeah", "nah", "me too". The Catholic Church passes that kind of behavior off as just being "part of the times" a poor excuse indeed.
Oh! What a wonderful church the Catholic Church was, and still is!

Only recently, an untrained Catholic Brother attached to a Catholic HS in Sydney was quietly removed following parental complaints that he was having inappropriate and unauthorized, private discussions, one on one, about sex with year 7 and 8 boys. that was in 2014, not 1960.

Yep well with have the homosexual/feminist lobby encouraging kids to try bum sex, multiple partners and to cross dress all in the name of safe schools programs. No wonder the muslims want no part of our 'culture'.

runner a perversion of Christianity!

"Prosecutors also told the court that evidence will show that Maybir "held extreme beliefs concerning religion ... one which seemed to be eliminating the devil from people".

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2015-10-07/christian-music-producer-subjected-boy-spartan-regime-court/6835224

care to comment?

I left school in 1969. At my Sydney suburb's primary school and James Cook High school, students weren't asked to sing national anthems or pay respect to any flags.

Cultural and religious rituals are distractions from thought provoking learning.

School's limited number of curriculum subjects while forced to sit in classrooms are a distraction from performing real thought provoking learning.

Schools controls what students learn. As school teaches a working class to work. Schools are little more than conditioning students to come to school every day. Students forcing themselves to perform work, students often don't want to do, for absolutely no financial rewards.

Universities educating badly educated high school students, charging students money for the honour.
Every person after mentioning how half the subjects learnt at universities had nothing to do with what students attended universities for. Every person agreed with the statement. Time wasting I strongly assume were the reasons.

Forum conversations should be more to do with the value of 13 years of education rather than singing national anthems.

'care to comment?'

well Paul 1405 it puzzles me where u get your moral base for calling this wrong. I mean if butchering the unborn is ok I fail to see you sitting in moral judgement on others.

runner, I'll puzzle you further. I actually oppose 'abortion on demand' so if you can find a post where I have supported 'abortion on demand' please put it up!

You had a shot at homosexual/feminist I simply asked you to comment on the actions of a Christian lunatic charged with murdering a childm because of christian perversion.

"Prosecutors also told that court that evidence will show that Maybir "held extreme beliefs concerning religion ... one which seemed to be eliminating the devil from people".

How many homosexual/feminist have been charged like this bloke? The moral credibility of Christianity is zero! We pay these grubs to educate our children in their schools! Where do you get your morals from?

Paul1405

You totally misread and misrepresent Christ and HIs teachings. I notice you also were unable to disagree that the 'safe schools program'put together by homosexuals/feminist don't encourage kids to try bum sex, multiple partners and to cross dress.

You then cite some weirdo who calls himself a Christian and acts like a pagan as if this has anything to do with the topic of what goes on in schools. I pount out the obvious that secularist like yourself have no moral base to call anything right or wrong except via you opinion coming from a very corrupt nature. Try again.

ttbn... the usual expression is 'haunted and miserable', my finding what you typed risible is withdrawn if it wasn't a slip of the keyboard and you meant hunted.

Also, it never occurred to me that my "But in this instance I'm more encouraged that the kids are in a state school and not cloistered in a private religious school." would trigger your Catholic recollections since what I intended - and accept was not made clear - was being pleased they were not in one of the increasing number of private Islamic schools which in my limited experience are competent academically but less socially mixed than I think is desirable.

runner. its not up to me to refute your rubbish, the onus is on you to provide the evidence that you nonsensical claims are true.

It is my contention that the evidence of child abuse in church run schools in Australia, is so overwhelming, and so wide spread, and systemic, that its only reasonable that all state support for these perversions be stopped, and those schools in question be placed totally under state control without compensation to church or individual.

Do you agree with me runner? If not, why not?

Paul1405,

What would a Statist such as yourself recommend as punishment for the State that was responsible for the horrific abuse of its Wards and orphans?

<The Forgotten Australians feel forgotten all over again

Those who lost their childhood to abuse and neglect still await justice.

It is now two years since then prime minister Kevin Rudd's national apology gave emotional acknowledgement to the lifetime of suffering faced by many of the so-called Forgotten Australians: those who survived unhappy childhoods in Australian orphanages.

But after a burst of publicity at the time, it seems there is still unfinished business facing them. In fact, it almost seems like they've been forgotten all over again.

The details are worth a reminder, and should break even the hardest of hearts: small children beaten to the point of broken bones for trifling transgressions; tied into bed then whipped for wetting it; and being force-fed insect-infested food and then, unbelievably, made to eat their own vomit when they were unable to stomach it. It is treatment that belongs more in a torture chamber than an orphanage, but it is just a small sample of what was meted out to more than half a million childhood care-leavers who were subject to neglect and abuse in orphanages, homes and other institutions during the 20th century.
..
These were kids who had done nothing wrong and yet were subjected to the most appalling treatment imaginable at the hands of church and state. Many of them are now elderly and carry a lifetime of shame and stigma.
..
Some care-leavers think they have been forgotten because no one is interested in the suffering of poor white children, but perhaps that's not so. Maybe it's because the details of what those children went through are so disturbing that people now find it difficult to comprehend what happened in this country while other families were living happily behind white picket fences.

But happen it did. We as a society need to acknowledge that, own it and do what we must to help others move on.>

http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/the-forgotten-australians-feel-forgotten-all-over-again-20111215-1owop.html

Beach,
Why do you call me a Statist? What is a Statist?

First and foremost the priority must be the victims, their welfare, their rehabilitation. If, and most likely this includes financial compensation then that is how it must be. The state cannot negate its responsibility to those that have been grievously wronged by acts perpetrated by responsible persons in the name of the state. There should be no statute of limitations.
Like with war criminals, if there are person living today who were directly or indirectly responsible for these wrongs, they should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law.
If the state apparatus still exists that allowed these crimes to be carried out, then if it shows no change, no contrition from those within, then such an apparatus should be dismantled, and if necessary replaced with an appropriately acceptable state institution that puts the care and welfare of children ahead of all other considerations.

Beach, your post presents what is undeniable fact, as a society we must own up to our responsibility, no matter how painful or how distant these unpalatable events may be.

Why am I calling for the takeover of Catholic Schools by the state? Because I believe here and now in 2015 that the hierarchy of the church in Australia has not met, by any reasonable measure, the necessary criteria to allow it to continue to operate child care in schools under its control. The church continues to limit its responsibility, minimize its culpability, not acknowledge its accountability, and continue to blame the victims. No matter what it says to the contrary, no matter what pious words come out of the Pope. The facts remain the church first and foremost is protecting its own ass, and to hell with the victims.

cont.

cont

I gave a small example of church failure concerning a brother in a Catholic School in Sydney in 2014, who was quietly moved because of his inappropriate behavior. Was this bloke grooming young boys for future personal gratification, or was he naive, I don't know. What I do know is the churches action in 2014 was not dissimilar to its actions of the 1960's. What has really changed? Can anyone here give a 100% guarantee that the Catholic Church and other religious organisations have made real and lasting changes to their school operations in regards to child welfare. Or have they simply become more sophisticated at hiding the truth. Again I don't know, but is it worth the risk?

Dear Paul,

You suggest two remedies:

1. "that its only reasonable that all state support for these perversions be stopped,"

So far so good, I couldn't agree more.

2. "and those schools in question be placed totally under state control without compensation to church or individual."

Now this is excessive and introduces two problems:

First there's a conflict of interest and the smell of corruption - it's as if a judge ordered the accused to pay a fine to himself.

Second, besides the perpetrators it also punishes the innocent, meaning the children, their parents and the perhaps 90% of teachers who have not done any wrong.

The children would be confused; the parents would be betrayed, who went out of their way and paid (even the poor among them who possibly went hungry to gather the private-school fees) to save their children from being indoctrinated by a state-school; while the teachers would lose their jobs when ordered to teach things that are contrary to their conscience.

This is collective punishment. The world screams and accuses Israel of ulterior motives when it destroys houses in the West-Bank of families whose son/daughter, unbeknownst to them became a suicide-bomber, so what's different here?

No, Wm Trevor, I meant hunted. I saw the look in their eyes. And, if you really didn't mean just 'private scools' but Isamic "private" schools, then the word Islam is too important to be left out!

Scott Morrison has called the school staff "pathetic do-gooders."

The Islamic Council of Victoria is disappointed in him, particularly since their Mr. Turnbull was out to mend relations with Muslims. The 'mourning' was about the death of Mohammed's grandson! One would have thought that they would have been over it by now.

The spokesman merely thought that it was unfortunate that it was mixed up with the anthem affair. None of that mending relations with US for the Muslims.

I hope that Morrison, sooner rather than later, does to Turnbull what Turnbull did to Abbott.

ttbn,

"I hope that Morrison, sooner rather than later, does to Turnbull what Turnbull did to Abbott."
You and Bill Shorten both!

But by now most people have heard the full story, and I don't think it's anything to worry about. Neither the kids nor the teachers had any objection to our national anthem. But for cultural reasons some of the kids were uneasy about listening to any music at that time, and the teacher intervening to avoid a disorderly walkout.