Michaela School - court case
Discussion
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-68731...
"A Muslim student at a London school has lost a High Court challenge against its ban on prayer rituals.
Michaela School in Wembley was taken to court by the girl over the policy, which she argued was discriminatory..."
The school is a non faith school and has defended its ban on no prayer time during school hours.
Thoughts?
For me it's the right decision
"A Muslim student at a London school has lost a High Court challenge against its ban on prayer rituals.
Michaela School in Wembley was taken to court by the girl over the policy, which she argued was discriminatory..."
The school is a non faith school and has defended its ban on no prayer time during school hours.
Thoughts?
For me it's the right decision
Mr Penguin said:
I don't see the problem. Why did they ban it?
It's a completely secular school as the head teacher noted that different religions created intolerance and segregation so all religious ceremonies were not allowed. They could practice them in their own time and place but there would be no formal area for them. This worked very well until some particular individuals became involved which lead to the court case.
There are schools which have areas for prayer, and schools that don't - including some secular schools such as Michaela.
The mother isn't withdrawing her daughter from the school after the ruling, according to the article.
The mother isn't withdrawing her daughter from the school after the ruling, according to the article.
Headteacher said:
If parents do not like what Michaela is, they do not need to send their children to us.
Nutshell. Full statement in the speccie, including thus observation
."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
williamp said:
Full statement in the speccie, including thus observation
Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
Indeed.Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
And the extraordinary thing is that this consumed literally hundreds of hours legal time across the legal system.
It should have been cut and dried from the word go.
king hell.williamp said:
Full statement in the speccie, including thus observation
."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
Don't they have to pay it back?."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
I have some sympathy for them. She was already at the school when pray was banned. Unless I got it wrong she and some other pupils took it upon themselves to pray outside. If it is not disrupting classes/study what is wrong with allowing them to pry in school?
Edited by Oliver Hardy on Wednesday 17th April 02:00
Oliver Hardy said:
williamp said:
Full statement in the speccie, including thus observation
."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
Don't they have to pay it back?."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
I have some sympathy for them. She was already at the school when pry was banned. Unless I got it wrong she and some other pupils took it upon themselves to pry outside. If it is not disrupting classes/study what is wrong with allowing them to pry in school?
https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2024/jan/16/lo...
The nonsense is nonsense and no if the school says no to prayers than that should be the end of it.
williamp said:
Full statement in the speccie, including thus observation
."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
Probably cost the school the same to defend the claim.."Can it be right for a family to receive £150,000 of taxpayer-funded legal aid to bring a case like this? The judge is clear that the child’s statements were not written by her alone. Indeed this mum intends to send her second child to Michaela, starting in September. At the same time, this mum has sent a letter to our lawyers suggesting that she may take us to court yet again over another issue at the school she doesn’t like, presumably once again at the taxpayer’s expense..."
Interesting take on religion and legal aid. And that the parent wants to fight from within. Rather than what normal people would do: move to a school which does allow your needs. Its like they hsve an agenda or something, and are using their own children as pawns
Killer2005 said:
I like Katharine Birbalsingh, seen a couple of her previous TG interviews. Generally speaks sense and is happy to stand up for her principles. Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff