Is Mise,

You will find that schools have written requirements for uniforms, and you won't see turbans or religious regalia listed. I repeat that, if any person cannot comply with certain rules, they should make other arrangements. There is no reason why the host, majority culture should change its rules for a minority. It is one of the many faults of our lax immigration system that potential migrants do not have the rules explained to them before they come here.

ttbn,

No one is asking for a change to the rules only for a bit of flexibility; why is Sikh headgear a sudden problem?

ttbn,

You might prefer us all to wear some kind of quasi militarist uniform, a sombre outfit in khaki possibly. The extreme are always demanding total conformity, and allegiance to the Utopian society they supposedly create. The outward expression of this is seen in flag waving, patriotic song singing, reciting of pledges and oaths, rewards for the most loyal, and grand organized activities, like parades which portray the greatness and power of the state, they are a necessity. In a dictatorial utopia, by default, the greatness of the society can only be reflected through the greatness of the leader.

Issy, it is not the Sikh headgear that is the problem, it is their lack of conformity and expression of difference, which must be viewed with suspicion. If a minority is perceived as too big a threat, then you force them to identify themselves through some outward sign, like headgear, a good way to exercise control and place restrictions on them. If that is not enough, then you round them all up in one place, and keep an eye on them, "security" is the buzz word. You and I, might have a problem with that, but ttbn most likely approves.

Dear Foxy,

«All developed countries have laws that people are required to obey.»

Just to show how material development and moral development are hardly related.

«Why stop at a red light?»

Isn't this obvious? Otherwise you could run into another car or pedestrians!

«Why have a license for driving a car?»

Indeed why?!

«Why can't you poop in the street?»

Because others are likely to be hurt in several ways. Do I need to detail how?

«Why can't you wonder around naked?»

Indeed why?!

«Stop trying to make something out of what's being said here. You're intelligent enough to know - what is being talked about here - don't try to divert things.»

So you only enjoy discussing Muslims and how bad they are, because you find it flattering?

Your attitudes give you 2 out of 10 for tolerance of diversity, Ttbn gets 1 out of 10 and Muslims get 0 out of 10 - does it make you feel proud?

Dear Yuyutsu,

This is not about Muslims as you well know. This is
about people who refuse to acknowledge the rule of
law as laid down by our legislatures. In
order to have the rights and liberties of all protected
we have a responsibility to adhere to our Australian laws.
People who can't accept that can't accept the
fundamentals of what Australia is and what it stands for.

Before entering a mosque visitors are asked to take off
their shoes. This is a sign of respect. Anyone who has
a strong objection to walking in their socks should not
enter the mosque. Before becoming an Australian people are
asked to subscribe to certain values. If they have strong
objections to those values, they shouldn't come to Australia.
We need to be very clear on these issues. There are some
beliefs, some values, so core to the nature of our society
that those who refuse to accept them refuse to accept the
nature of our society. If someone cannot honestly make
the citizenship pledge, they cannot honestly take our
citizenship.

I proudly stand by my posting record and I find your inference
to my being anti-Muslim insulting. My record speaks for
itself.

Australia's immigration experience is a broad one. Originally
it was predominantly Anglo-Celtic but after the war our
immigrants came from other regions. In more recent times
Vietnamese and Chinese immigrants and others, have grown
considerably in numbers. And all of these immigrant
communities as I have consistently pointed out on this forum
have made successful contributions to Australian life. And yes,
of that I am proud.

However, the freedom and tolerance that we all share can be
protected only within a legal framework that is accepted by all.
And if you want to argue with that - well frankly
go find someone to argue with - I'm not interested.

Hi Yuyutsu and Foxy,

Yuyutsu, how do you score yourself, a big fat zero? You lost me when you wanted to maintain laws which denied rights to gay people.

Foxy, correct. To maintain a stable cohesive society you need some kind of enforceable rules/laws which in general the majority support and respect. How those laws are determined is what we question. In our Australian society we prefer the so called democratic process, which seems to work reasonably well, but certainly not perfectly.

I believe the vast majority of those who migrate here, already have the necessary "values" instilled within them, which will make them reasonable Australians in our multicultural society. It has nothing to do with what language they speak, what they eat, how they dress, or even what religion they practice. It has a lot to do with what kind of person they are, and what are their aspirations for themselves and their families, generally not much difference to that of the majority.

For some like these extreme posters here, the outward differences is enough to make them suspicious of those not from their "cultural background", whatever that is. Without evidence they create a totally distorted view of all within the minority, perceiving them as dangerous people. Intolerable acts by a few is enough of an excuse for the extreme to demand punitive action against all those within the minority.