not sure wrote:
Mookie, you're an idiot. Did she complain about the US? No, she complained about a meet. What if this was a good Christian girl who was told she couldn't wear a cross when she ran? Would you feel similarly?
If the Christian girl in your question were in a muslim country, I don't think she or anyone else could really bitch about it. Reverse it though, and these f***ing "peace loving" muslims think they can do anything.
After looking at the pictures, as a track coach I can't figure out what the uniform violation would be. I don't coach on the East Coast, so maybe things are different there then here in the Midwest. What about her uniform would disqualify her from running? The more I read the article the more I felt like the official saw a different uniform, figured it must be wrong some how, and then refused to change his mind.
oftenrunning52 wrote:
the official saw a different uniform, figured it must be wrong some how, and then refused to change his mind.
Did you miss the part in the original thread where the official saw the violation well before the race and gave them an opportunity to comply? Why did the coach and competitor decide to make it a religious battle, instead of making a quick adjustment and running? Why did the girl, coach and parents refuse to change their mind?
Although I'm sympathetic and think officials often go overboard with the uniform violations, did anyone else notice the line about how she just had to get a letter saying she had a religious exemption from the uniform requirements? I can't believe her coaches went that long without getting one. We had a girl on my cross-country team who wore full Muslim garb, and all the coach had to do was get a letter at the beginning of the season from the governing board, and she showed it to the officials every time we were checking in. Not a big deal at all (and not something that the coach ever thought was particularly onerous, in fact, I think it's fairly routine). I would think a coach worth their salt would have thought about this a while ago
I saw where that is what the official now says, and I also saw where the parent and competitor both disagree with the official about what happened. I doubt that there was a lot of time before the race that they are offering her alternatives to change. The article says that the heat before theirs is running when the uniform issue is noticed and brought up. That can't leave much time at all. I would also question how hard officials tried to get a hold of the coach while all this was transpiring. It still sounds like an official went too far and is now trying to cover himself for a bad call.
I must also admit that I have disdain for nitpicky uniform rules. They have never made sense to me.
oftenrunning52 wrote:
After looking at the pictures, as a track coach I can't figure out what the uniform violation would be.
I haven't see pictures but it was her multicolor undergarment. Are there pictuers online? I'd like to see them if you have a link.
uh duh wrote:
oftenrunning52 wrote:the official saw a different uniform, figured it must be wrong some how, and then refused to change his mind.
Did you miss the part in the original thread where the official saw the violation well before the race and gave them an opportunity to comply? Why did the coach and competitor decide to make it a religious battle, instead of making a quick adjustment and running? Why did the girl, coach and parents refuse to change their mind?
I don't think she was having any difficulty understanding the problem. I'd be more concerned, however, if she was putting her faith in an over zealous official ahead of her faith in God (or at least who/what she believes is God). If you are a Christian you should be able to understand that. If you are an atheist would you not object to a race official mandating that you MUST wear religious insignia in order to compete?
"No to 2012" Xenophobic is not a noun. Perhaps you are not ready for the Telegraph just yet. Anyway, I can't be bothered to click on your links. I am sure there are muslims causing problems in the UK. There are whites doing the same.
"Mookie" you REALLY, REALLY, REALLY don't understand the concept of freedom do you? I wish there was some feasible way to send you to the middle east in exchange for someone that would really appreciate the freedom that we have in the USA.
i want pictures wrote:
I haven't see pictures but it was her multicolor undergarment. Are there pictuers online? I'd like to see them if you have a link.
There's a You-tube video making the rounds which clearly shows the multi-colored undergarment. And THAT is the issue, nothing more, nothing less. If Joe Secular Speedster would have worn a pair of UnderArmours with one white leg and one blue leg, he'd get disqualified too.
As a HS coach, I make it very clear (and I'm sure most of my colleagues do too) that anything under the uniform must be of a single color. And that relay teams/cross country must all be wearing the same color underneath their uniforms. It sounds like the young lady was given bad advice if she was under the impression that this undergarment was acceptable.
just wondering, would a full body suit that some sprinters wear be acceptable for Muslims?
No one on this thread has mentioned the fact that the coach punched the official in the face.
Instead of the girl and her family crying to the press about her dq, she should be worried about losing her coach as he should be fired.
Another vote for the Mookie camp, huh? Your logic is that because there is no freedom in some middle eastern countries there should be no freedom in the USA? Do you even stop to think before you type?
no freedom is all well and good but when you practicing your religious faith breaks the rules (albeit sometimes stupid rules) then you have to pick. I have faith in myself family and friends and I try to live a morally good life but not according to JC, Budda or whomever. i was raised catholic and believing and faith and stuff like that is important but alot of people are way to swayed by that belief system and the forget that they are accountable and they make things happen.
here is sort of an example if you will - i don't know exactly if or where in the bible it says that being a homo is "against the rules" but a lot of people say it does so i'll use that as the base of the example. Now say you have some homosexuals who are upset by this well instead of them trying to come in and change this why not just go to another religion or whatever...why would you want to be part of something that says you're doing something bad anyways?
PRACTICING HER RELIGIOUS FAITH DID NOT RESULT IN HER DQ!!!!!
If she had worn a single-colored garment under her uniform instead of the multi-colored one, there never would have been a disqualification.
Get over your false outrage and look at the facts, for crying out loud.
A lawsuit is in the works against the meet and the official for picking on the girl. Civil Rights applies to religion, sexual orientation, and physical characteristics. We will be hearing about this case for years to come.
Lawsuit pending wrote:
A lawsuit is in the works against the meet and the official for picking on the girl. Civil Rights applies to religion, sexual orientation, and physical characteristics. We will be hearing about this case for years to come.
I suppose that if the lawsuit is upheld, that this will invalidate all uniform rules.
She could have honored her religion by wearing a single-colored garment and this never would have happened.
I certainly hope that fact is considered.
Selective enforcement of rules based on sexual orientation, religion, physical attributes, etc. is a violation of the Civil Rights Act of 1968.
but they're ultimately going to say it was religious discrimination....and thats what they're stupid lawsuit will be about.
This is also like that other muslim woman who refused to take off her veil(only showed her eyes) for her drivers license picture. She complained all about it...
http://www.boston.com/news/nation/articles/2005/09/08/court_upholds_ban_on_veil_in_license_photo/
curioser wrote:
Another vote for the Mookie camp, huh? Your logic is that because there is no freedom in some middle eastern countries there should be no freedom in the USA? Do you even stop to think before you type?
Dude, you're letting your emotions argue for you. Nobody is persecuting her because of her religious beliefs. No official said that she couldn't cover her body how she saw fit, none. They simply said that she has to comply by the rules as they're written. Those rules say that any undergarments have to be a single solid color. It is her perogative to comply to those rules, and she did not.
Turning this into an issue of religious freedoms is inflammatory and completely misses the point here. Whether or not this is a good rule is not for us to decide- leave that to the body that makes those rules. There is nothing in this rule that descriminates against any person or any religion, it simply lays out uniform rules. These rules do not exclude Muslim women from covering their bodies, so there is no violation of rights here.
Basically a girl got disqualified for the same reason as the numbskulls who I used to race with boxers hanging out below their shorts or for wearing earrings or necklaces(yes, even crosses, we had to take those off too). Religious expression has nothing to do with it, but some of you seem intent on reading it into the situation.
Why don't you read the post I was responding too? The poster was saying that if she wants to practice her religion she should go to a Muslim country. That is the "logic" (or lack thereof) that I was responding to.