We pride ourselves on being a tolerant nation, but....

Eleoethan, an excellent post. Customs come and customs go. As you state it is not a criminal offence not to shake hands and, last time I looked, you are not required to touch another person physically unless you choose to do so. Even a doctor must ask permission. I enjoyed several years of visiting this headteacher's school and neither of us had a problem with the lack of physical contact. It did not stop him running a very good exam centre and it did not stop me doing my inspection with the thoroughness required. Perhaps at these formal ceremonies such as the citizenship one, one should have to fill in on the form whether you want the physical contact of the handshake or a simple respectful bow to one another. It would certainly save on court costs.

Day6 wrote:

"This woman was making a stand for her religion, which imo was totally unreasonable given the circumstances. "

Islam as interpreted by many Muslims IS an unreasonable religion. Any authoritarian fundamentalist religion is by definition unreasoning on the part of its faithful servants.

I read in The Guardian only this morning that it was a group of fundamentalist Roman Catholics who imposed their faith upon Alfie Evans's suffering parents.

Refusing to shake hands is trivial compared with a lot of what religious fundies do. I'm what most people would call atheist but when I visited a mosque I was happy to cover my head with my prettiest and most suitable Paisley patterned stole thing and remove my shoes in the foyer.

Since most people in the UK are sort of atheists, agnostics, or conventional religionists it's up to that sort of person to accommodate those who are unable to widen their religious horizons. Within the law ,of course.

Did you know there was a case of 2 Syrian school boys in Switzerland who refused to shake the hand of female teachers ?

Apparently it is custom in Switzerland to shake the hand of your teachers at the beginning and end of the school day.

The outcome is they must shake female teachers hands or they will face fines of 5,000CHF (£4,000) .

www.thelocal.ch/20160525/basel-muslim-schoolboys-must-shake-hands-or-face-fine

In a statement, the department of education, culture and sport in Basel-Country said:

“The public interest with respect to equality between men and women and the integration of foreigners significantly outweighs the freedom of conscience (freedom of religion) of the students.”

Refusing to shake hands on religious grounds would be to involve others in a “religious act” and is therefore different from the wearing of a headscarf or refusing to take part in swimming lessons, it said.

“The social gesture of a handshake is important for the employability of the students later in their professional lives,” it added.

What many 'Liberals' fail to recognise when supporting extreme interpretation of custom or religion is that they are effectively supporting the 'bullies in the playground'. They are the ones who ignore or dismiss those with these tendencies. The bullies develop a growing gang until they control the playground.
We frown on school or workplace bullies yet if anyone attaches custom or relgion to their actions then it become 'aaah but'.
'It was only a handshake' could easily be 'it was only a small push or rebuff',

It was only a handshake' could easily be 'it was only a small push or rebuff',

Seriously?!

When I worked in Thailand I greeted people in the Thai way. It would never have occurred to me to refuse because it wasn't part of my culture, religious or otherwise.

Wherever I have lived I have complied with required customs and etiquette. Even if visiting a different country I have usually pre-researched the same so as not to offend.

Joelsan once again your post could be interpreted as being against those who preach intolerance. They are the bullies in the playground determined that everyone must play the game their way. I do not support extreme interpretations of any religious belief. I do think an individual should be allowed to practice their religion as they choose as long as it is not imposing or interfering with the lives of others. France has a long history of restricting religious practices and in Europe is second only to Russia in the number of restrictions it imposes.

Not sure France is second only to Russia in the number of restrictions it imposes.

Switzerland has imposed a ban on building minarets, the burka ban/partial face covering ban is upheld in many countries such as Belgium, the Netherlands Germany.

I mentioned the hand shake scenario in Switzerland .

Pogs you may like to look at this map www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/entry/pew-global-religious-restrictions_us_58ed070be4b0ca64d919ab12
the UK is low, France is high and Russia is the highest.

Trisher Your post 11:20:52
Yes, I am against intolerance and extremism
As mentioned before I have lived and worked many years abroad until 2015 I lived very happily in a Muslim country. The multi national expat community was larger than the local. There was every faith (apart from Jews) and culture. There were discrete churches, Temples etc. Outward display of any other religion than Islam were prohibited except for Christmas which was fabulous in terms of festivities and glitz. Jesus is a prophet so they see no problem in celebrating.
All communities lived in harmony because the local population dictated how everyone should behave and the expats obeyed or were imprisoned or sent home. Knowing the boundaries led to social cohesion. There were some difficult quirks but that was how it was.
Extremism within their own faith was quickly stamped on. The covert intelligence was very efficient and effective. Although traditionally many local women covered their faces many employers stipulated that they would not be employed if they were not prepared to uncovered their faces. Additionally within the workplace only the national dress of the locals or business dress could be worn, no saris, shalwar khamese etc.
There was great respect from the expat community for this country and its rulers and knowing and respecting the boundaries led to a great multinational experience for many and a deeper understanding of differing cultures and faiths.

Joelsnan wrote:

"Wherever I have lived I have complied with required customs and etiquette. Even if visiting a different country I have usually pre-researched the same so as not to offend."

That was your privilege as a free educated woman . Many Muslims in the UK come from rural villages and those religious observances yield only to quite expensive education which frees the younger emigre generations from fundamentalism.

Eloethan you have no idea what the true situation actually was, and neither do I.
I have read ( before now) that all that will take place at the ceremony is explained beforehand to any new citizen.
All we can do is speculate what people would do.If it had been explained about handshakes of congratulation, then gloves could be worn.If anyone simply cannot shake hands, gloves on or not, then it would have to be made known beforehand and it would be up to the laws of that country surrounding citizenship, to decide if it was acceptable or not.
I do think that any country good enough to allow you to become a citizen there with all the rights it confers, may set it’s own rules.

How hard it is - I know that if I took the decision to become a citizen of another nation, I would do my utmost to absorb and observe their customs, and learn their language. Presumably if I did not approve of their customs I would not have chosen to live there

I agree with that statement Luckygirl - and it is noticeable that many British ex-pats have come under fire (not least on here) by living in their own 'communities' and not bothering to learn the language of the host country or their customs.

If we are to become more tolerant then perhaps taking more steps towards learning the customs of a country where we choose to live would be appropriate - unless we wish to live in an enclosed community within that country and not to integrate at all.

When some of my family became citizens of another country they had to swear an allegiance and even to promise to defend their new country in times of war.

By coincidence this popped up on my Newsfeed today:

metro.co.uk/2018/04/27/self-confessed-drunk-man-tells-passenger-drinking-beer-abide-english-laws-get-7503470/

Alexa
It is actually the second and third generation Muslims who have adopted the dress and social practices. These are not illiterate country folk but raised and educated within the UK. The first generation arrivals have maintained the dress of their country of origin. No face cover, and a sheer scarf either thrown over the shoulder or draped lightly over the head.

I do think that it is up to each country to make their own decision about what their citizenship conditions are.

Some countries may make conditions that we do not like; but it is their right.

We may dislike the rules (or one in particular) that France have made, but we cannot condemn them; or we must also condemn other countries whose rules we wish to appear to accept on the grounds of wishing to appear tolerant.

We are in a real tangle about tolerance/racism/religion - and that does not surprise me. It is a complex issue. It really is not as simple as some represent it - limitless tolerance results, for instance, in babies being mutilated on our own doorstep. We do not speak out because it seems intolerant and we do not want to offend.

How to uphold the principle of tolerance whilst also protecting the vulnerable and caring about the principles we hold dear, for very good reasons?

Luckygirl sorry we can (and should) protest about the mutilation of children, whatever the reason behind it. Tolerance does not mean abandoning all principles and giving everyone carte blanche to do as they wish. It means examining carefully what is being done, considering how important it is and accepting that individuals have the right to practice their religion as long as when doing so they do not harm anyone or subject others to pain and discomfort.

as my son would say dont sweat the small stuff ,theres a huge difference between a custom ie. shaking hands and a vile practice FGM .By all means stand back if /when someone doesn't want to shake hands or wants the choice to wear/not wear a veil but standing back and allowing FGM is the same as condoning it and thats something we cant do .Customs and cruelty are worlds apart

It does seem to be rather a strange condition to apply when considering whether or not someone is suitable for citizenship. Perhaps there is more to it than has been reported or perhaps the media are making something out of nothing.

trisher - I am talking about boys as well as girls. The principle is the same. It is a religious/cultural practice that involves cutting off part of a baby where there is no medical indication. It is happening around us all the time. We tolerate it because speaking out is seen as being intolerant of another's beliefs.

I think it is intolerant of a child's rights.

Granny23 Thanks for that link. I was so impressed with the courage of that young woman to speak out.

I wonder if the young man who confronted the Polish man for drinking alcohol would have complained to an English person in such a way. Perhaps he thought he would get some applause from other people in the carriage and hadn't bargained on a young woman telling him exactly what she thought of his behaviour. Bravo to her.

When I visit family in New Zealand I "rub noses" as a

welcoming gesture with Maori and Kiwis (not the birds) ha.

Slainte +

Joelsnan wrote:

"t is actually the second and third generation Muslims who have adopted the dress and social practices. These are not illiterate country folk but raised and educated within the UK. The first generation arrivals have maintained the dress of their country of origin. No face cover, and a sheer scarf either thrown over the shoulder or draped lightly over the head."

You may be right . I myself have seen young men and women wearing ostentatiously religious clothing, and I suppose that truly nasty customs like male genital mutilation accompany many religiosities.

I suspect that the power of the family remains strong among some ethnic groups and it's the power of grandparents and parents and other older relatives which is the conduit that perpetuates the various customs and their supportive myths.

I hope that education will win in the end.

Luckygirl wrote:

"We may dislike the rules (or one in particular) that France have made, but we cannot condemn them; or we must also condemn other countries whose rules we wish to appear to accept on the grounds of wishing to appear tolerant. "

I do! I condemn the French for encouraging foie gras which is the cruellest food it is possible to imagine. I also condemn Muslims, Jews, and others for encouraging and practicing genital mutilation of their children.

Whenever the opportunity arises for me I condemn cruelty .