Katharine Birbalsingh – the head teacher of Michaela Community School.

Thank you for answering again.
Actually, we didn’t always eat fish on Friday. My catholic relatives also ate cheese pie, cauliflower cheese etc.
So what’s the point?
What about all the omnivore pupils being obliged to eat a vegetarian menu to cater for other religions? Apparently, you only object to echoes of Catholic traditions.

Rosie51

Glorianny The teaching time finishes at 3.15pm, but then there are after school clubs, a compulsory homework club for some pupils Year9-11 and pupils on Referral for any matter are kept until 5.30pm which can be extended to 6pm
So pupils may be in the school up until 6pm

None of which is what you originally posted. You said the normal school day ended at 5pm which you said would cause a problem for Jewish children in winter. Now you're bringing in detentions etc. Nowhere is there a standardised 5pm finish mentioned.

Hooray! Exactly what I said, 2 days ago. School finishes at 3.15 pm.
Fact, not opinion!

I have attended several court hearings over matters relating to individual school establishments, admittedly private sector. They nearly always refer to and quote precedents, with the dates etc. What is interesting in this case, is that I don't believe there is a set precedent? Not being au fait with the judicial system, will the outcome of this case have future ramifications for all schools?

Mollygo

Thank you for answering again.
Actually, we didn’t always eat fish on Friday. My catholic relatives also ate cheese pie, cauliflower cheese etc.
So what’s the point?
What about all the omnivore pupils being obliged to eat a vegetarian menu to cater for other religions? Apparently, you only object to echoes of Catholic traditions.

I just find it very odd that a school ,which insists it is secular and adjusts its menus so that children of other religions are not offended, then introduces a dietary requirement that has its roots in Christianity, and actually states it is a tradition.

But you probably find that because it’s Christianity and as I’ve noticed, you like to skit some religions.
I’d find it offensive if my child’s school went vegetarian-regardless of the reason, religious or not, but I’d either choose not to send them or I’d provide a packed lunch.
I do love to read your responses.

Mollygo

But you probably find that because it’s Christianity and as I’ve noticed, you like to skit some religions.
I’d find it offensive if my child’s school went vegetarian-regardless of the reason, religious or not, but I’d either choose not to send them or I’d provide a packed lunch.
I do love to read your responses.

No I find it odd because secular means no religious or spiritual connection. And the wording in the school information refers to a "tradition" so linking the idea more closely to the Christian religion.
If there was something linking the Friday early closing to Jewish religious practice I'd find that odd as well.

I do love the way you follow me from thread to thread trying to pick holes in anything I post. But I worry about your obsession.

If a separate prayer room were to be established on school property the education authority would be encouraging a practice of ritual praying that is counter to the Enlightenment values that Islam missed out on but which are essential to modern education.

Eating fish on Fridays is no longer the custom of 40% of British adults (at least it wasn't in 2018 and I can't find any later statistics). The 55+ age group are almost twice as likely to be eating fish twice a week or more than the 18-24 age group.

If the school wants to be "traditional", it would appear there's no need to eat fish on Fridays. The reference to "tradition" seems to be pandering to a myth.

file:///C:/Users/suepb/Downloads/Seafish%20-%20State%20of%20the%20Nation%20full%20report.pdf

Caleo

If a separate prayer room were to be established on school property the education authority would be encouraging a practice of ritual praying that is counter to the Enlightenment values that Islam missed out on but which are essential to modern education.

But the issue in the court case isn't about the provision of a prayer room. Birbalsingh and the media are using it to deflect from the issue which is being judged.

Mollygo

But you probably find that because it’s Christianity and as I’ve noticed, you like to skit some religions.
I’d find it offensive if my child’s school went vegetarian-regardless of the reason, religious or not, but I’d either choose not to send them or I’d provide a packed lunch.
I do love to read your responses.

Why would it be offensive? Omnivores eat vegetables. They wouldn't be excluded. Incidentally, packed lunches aren't allowed at Michaela.

growstuff

Eating fish on Fridays is no longer the custom of 40% of British adults (at least it wasn't in 2018 and I can't find any later statistics). The 55+ age group are almost twice as likely to be eating fish twice a week or more than the 18-24 age group.

If the school wants to be "traditional", it would appear there's no need to eat fish on Fridays. The reference to "tradition" seems to be pandering to a myth.

file:///C:/Users/suepb/Downloads/Seafish%20-%20State%20of%20the%20Nation%20full%20report.pdf

Well then, my suggestion to KB would be to call it:
"Good old-fashioned fed to older people Fish on Fridays". Then no one is offended.

growstuff

Eating fish on Fridays is no longer the custom of 40% of British adults (at least it wasn't in 2018 and I can't find any later statistics). The 55+ age group are almost twice as likely to be eating fish twice a week or more than the 18-24 age group.

If the school wants to be "traditional", it would appear there's no need to eat fish on Fridays. The reference to "tradition" seems to be pandering to a myth.

file:///C:/Users/suepb/Downloads/Seafish%20-%20State%20of%20the%20Nation%20full%20report.pdf

So it was still the custom for 60% of British adults in 2018? Why does it matter if it's a custom that's falling out of favour? Would you be OK with them offering the fish alternative every Wednesday, or would that offend your sensibilities?

I can't comment on your link because it isn't actually a link, ie it doesn't work! Even pasting it into google results in a "did you mean....." which had multiple offerings.

Omnivores eat vegetables, but it might not be their preferred choice.
On choosing the school, parents make their choice to follow the rules, not change them to suit their own personal preferences, whether based on diet, religion, start and finish times etc.
The desire to do that is what this thread is about.

Glorianny

Mollygo

Thank you for answering again.
Actually, we didn’t always eat fish on Friday. My catholic relatives also ate cheese pie, cauliflower cheese etc.
So what’s the point?
What about all the omnivore pupils being obliged to eat a vegetarian menu to cater for other religions? Apparently, you only object to echoes of Catholic traditions.

I just find it very odd that a school ,which insists it is secular and adjusts its menus so that children of other religions are not offended, then introduces a dietary requirement that has its roots in Christianity, and actually states it is a tradition.

It is not a requirement.
Where did you get that idea?

We ate fish and chips yesterday(😯 Thursday!); it was served, as seems to be the trend in more upmarket restaurants, on a board on greaseproof paper printed like an old newspaper.
On mine it said that fish and chips was probably introduced to Britain by Jewish immigrants in the 1700s and became more popular in the 1800s.

I did think of you when I read it.
😁

I

Now you've done it Callistemon 'some people' will be apoplectic at this double religious whammy!

growstuff

Caleo

If a separate prayer room were to be established on school property the education authority would be encouraging a practice of ritual praying that is counter to the Enlightenment values that Islam missed out on but which are essential to modern education.

But the issue in the court case isn't about the provision of a prayer room. Birbalsingh and the media are using it to deflect from the issue which is being judged.

The issue is whether pupils should be allowed to pray on school premises.

The pupil claims she made a modest request to be allowed to pray.

It was refused on the grounds that allowing one group of pupils to observe their religion risks “undermining inclusion and social cohesion between pupils^" and was only brought in after ^a “vitriolic campaign of abuse, harassment and threats^” against staff by those pushing for some Muslim pupils to observe prayers.

Was the request reasonable? Was it modest?
If modest, why were there demands, threats and intimidation of staff?
Should threats, intimidation and abuse of teachers and of other pupils be allowed?
Should schools give in to the demands of a few because of such threats and fear of the consequences?

I don't know, but it is worrying.

Rosie51

Now you've done it Callistemon 'some people' will be apoplectic at this double religious whammy!

We've got fish again tonight. Well, it is Friday!

Did you know that KB was a vegetarian for over 20 years?

Callistemon21

growstuff

Caleo

If a separate prayer room were to be established on school property the education authority would be encouraging a practice of ritual praying that is counter to the Enlightenment values that Islam missed out on but which are essential to modern education.

But the issue in the court case isn't about the provision of a prayer room. Birbalsingh and the media are using it to deflect from the issue which is being judged.

The issue is whether pupils should be allowed to pray on school premises.

The pupil claims she made a modest request to be allowed to pray.

It was refused on the grounds that allowing one group of pupils to observe their religion risks “undermining inclusion and social cohesion between pupils^" and was only brought in after ^a “vitriolic campaign of abuse, harassment and threats^” against staff by those pushing for some Muslim pupils to observe prayers.

Was the request reasonable? Was it modest?
If modest, why were there demands, threats and intimidation of staff?
Should threats, intimidation and abuse of teachers and of other pupils be allowed?
Should schools give in to the demands of a few because of such threats and fear of the consequences?

I don't know, but it is worrying.

I don't know either, but hopefully the judge has been able to establish the timeline accurately.

My personal opinion is that the whole situation has been mismanaged. My guess is that there isn't a school in the country which doesn't have a handful of pupils and parents who at some stage haven't complained that the school is violating their human rights (whether it's about going to the toilet during lessons or wearing the wrong socks) and any competent headteacher ought to be able to deal with it. Attempting to stop pupils in the middle of praying, especially during Ramadan, is insensitive and asking for trouble. Not only that, but the facts and context have been embellished by the media.

There were threats etc as a result of the ban and the way it was done, not as a result of the praying. The school has to respect the Human Rights Act and its own policies.

If the pupil really threatened somebody with a knife and threatened to bring the school down, I don't know why (s)he wasn't excluded because exclusion would have been justified.

Callistemon21

Rosie51

Now you've done it Callistemon 'some people' will be apoplectic at this double religious whammy!

We've got fish again tonight. Well, it is Friday!

You'll be one of 60%! (I'm having pork.)

Joseann

Did you know that KB was a vegetarian for over 20 years?

No, I didn't, but that's fine. I've worked in a vegetarian school and nobody ever complained. There were pupils form a number of different backgrounds and it meant we didn't have to provide halal and kosher meat.

No, schools shouldn't give in to unreasonable demands, but they need to handle complaints legally and sensitively.

Attempting to stop pupils in the middle of praying, especially during Ramadan, is insensitive and asking for trouble.

I think that some pupils were praying in the playground, something fairly recent, and were being hassled by passersby.
It was probably stopped for their own safety.

Callistemon21

Glorianny

Mollygo

Thank you for answering again.
Actually, we didn’t always eat fish on Friday. My catholic relatives also ate cheese pie, cauliflower cheese etc.
So what’s the point?
What about all the omnivore pupils being obliged to eat a vegetarian menu to cater for other religions? Apparently, you only object to echoes of Catholic traditions.

I just find it very odd that a school ,which insists it is secular and adjusts its menus so that children of other religions are not offended, then introduces a dietary requirement that has its roots in Christianity, and actually states it is a tradition.

It is not a requirement.
Where did you get that idea?

We ate fish and chips yesterday(😯 Thursday!); it was served, as seems to be the trend in more upmarket restaurants, on a board on greaseproof paper printed like an old newspaper.
On mine it said that fish and chips was probably introduced to Britain by Jewish immigrants in the 1700s and became more popular in the 1800s.

I did think of you when I read it.
😁

I

Sorry Callistemon Did you miss where I posted it was a tradition in the Christian church from 1st century and the rules were only changed in 1966. Nothing to do with fish and chips by the way which is a completely different subject and possibly only became widespread after the advent of the railways meant fish could be moved from sea ports inland quickly and easily,
Before that people living away from the coast ate fresh water fish like trout, pike or eels were very popular
And actually the practice has been reinstated in England and Wales
Catholics in England and Wales are expected to abstain from eating meat, described as the flesh of warm-blooded animals, on Fridays if they are able to do so, a practice that has been observed for a number of centuries, and is regarded as a penance to remind people of past wrongs and to identify with those who are suffering. Although no food is suggested as a substitute, fish became a traditional alternative for Catholics. The practice was discontinued in 1984, and for a number of years Catholics were instead given the option to replace it with another form of penance.[38][39] Current norms for England and Wales, issued by the Bishops' Conference in May 2011, re-introduced the expectation that all Catholics able to do so should abstain from meat on all Fridays of the year, effective Friday 16 September 2011.[8] The practice was reinstated to coincide with the first anniversary of Pope Benedict XVI's state visit to the UK, which had occurred in September 2010

What the school website says
WHAT DO CHILDREN EAT?
At Michaela, we serve a variety of vegetarian dishes with traditional fish on Fridays. In addition to lunch, pupils have snack food at morning break. Pupils with allergies are catered for.