Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them

Muslims allowed to ignore hygiene rules

Is that still true, that article is over 6 years old.....
 
Is that still true, that article is over 6 years old.....
Ah! maybe not, the date at the top of that link is todays date but I didn't notice the date of the article when I read it so it could have been true at the time but different now.
 
I remember reading a few months ago of a surgeon (white European iirc) who quit because he was reprimanded for refusing to let a muslim nurse into the operating theatre . He claimed her burka was spattered with the blood of another patient and that presented an unacceptable risk to his patient .

Memory fails me so the above might not be accurate but the jist of it is there .
 
Right that article says
"So, in other words, this “relaxation” of the policy on bare arms actually boils down to this: impose on yourself whatever crazy restrictions you like, unless patients are involved, and providing that you adhere to a couple of other supplementary rules for the sake of patient safety"
There could, probably would, be instances where the nurse concerned would ignore the rules assuming the patient wouldn't know about them.
I think if a nurse cannot bare their forearms in the course of their job then they are in the wrong job, in a job like nursing hygiene should be of paramount importance.
 
Don't like the adverts?  Click here to remove them
I remember reading a few months ago of a surgeon (white European iirc) who quit because he was reprimanded for refusing to let a muslim nurse into the operating theatre . He claimed her burka was spattered with the blood of another patient and that presented an unacceptable risk to his patient .

Memory fails me so the above might not be accurate but the jist of it is there .
That does ring a bell Shayne and if true it shows just how important that particular Muslim considers cleanliness to be.
 
Why does no one focus on the BS the media publicize as fact?

Chas's link retells an article in the Mail on Sunday which Rob's link quite clearly shows is fictitious. That should be more of a conversation piece than the content of the article itself.
 
Why does no one focus on the BS the media publicize as fact?

Chas's link retells an article in the Mail on Sunday which Rob's link quite clearly shows is fictitious. That should be more of a conversation piece than the content of the article itself.
Sorry Mark but I can’t take seriously Ian Brassinton’s article, as he is obviously writing for laughs, he is being facetious when he writes
“Any citation the either the Daily Fail or the Wail on Sunday ought always to carry some sort of warning (“DANGER: BOLLOCKS AHEAD”); but I held my nose and followed the lead”
I don’t think that lends strength to his article.
He also says later in the article, if you got that far
“if you want to change the standard arrangements (Bare arms below the elbow my words), you have to get the approval of the infection bods. In other words, they have a veto on changes. This seems like the right approach”
Which obviously means he believed the rules have been ‘modified’ but could be over-ruled
Also he couldn’t find any links to verify the story which does not necessarily mean it’s fictitious.
 
he does have a good writing style :). but does anyone really believe anything originating from the Mail? TBH I'm surprised the telegraph republished an article from the mail without checking.
 
he does have a good writing style
You may call it good, I call it pathetic if a writer has to rely on snide humour to enforce his argument.
 
Lets not fall into bitter argument the crux of it is one rule for one and other rules for another which is very true of today's Britain . Pop down the bank with a balaclava on and see what happens .
 
the article is a blog not a serious journalistic article, imho nothing wrong with a humorous writing in blogs. It's certainly better than make stuff up and publishing it as fact.

Trouble is Shayne, the rules in the UK apply to everyone, equally. Unfortunately the press like persuade people otherwise and then you get the people who police/administer the rules who don't get it right and change their interpretation according to who they are dealing with.
 
If only it were true Mark .

If i learned my grandson was being taught at a school by someone wearing a burka i would be down there quick smart to demand he be moved to another class . Like as not i would wind up in a police van , be reported all over the news as a racist and just generally condemned for my intolerance .

A few months later i could explain to a judge that i will not have that boy taught to trust someone he cannot realistically identify and its the disguise i object to regardless of who is wearing it .
 
Are teachers allowed to wear (full-face-veil) burkas or even 1/2 face niqabs?

I thought they were not, though a hijab which is headscarf-like is quite common.

I may be wrong - so happy to be corrected.

And for the record, I wouldn't be happy for my childrens' teachers to wear burkas or niqabs either.

Add: Anyone arguing for the Mail's and other such papers' journalistic credibility is on really thin ice.....
 
Last edited:
Many years ago I had a Harley, we had Harley leathers, helmets etc etc (yeah I know) - we pulled into a petrol station to get some fuel, Wifey went in without helmet to pay whilst I attempted to fill up..........with helmet still on. The attendant wouldnt switch the pump on until I removed my helmet. IIRC he was of middle eastern origins. So, wifey came out of the shop, donned her lid and we rode to the next station! May not have had the same reaction if I had a face mask on.......
Having said that, many times we were told we dont serve bikers here...no room for your helmets in an empty pub........bike and gear were probably worth more than his pub!
 
That's a shame about the pub Steve - I suppose a case of the few "bad" giving the many "good" a bad name, combine that with people's prejudice......

In the case of the petrol station attendant - probably not his own personal view point but probably enforcing the the fuel company/franchise's policy - which his job security will depend on. Biker's in helmets (when away from the bike) do seem to get a hard time almost universally.

On a related note, I always thought the dispensation that certain ethnic/religious groups received WRT to motorcycle helmets was unjust. However when you realise that they are only risking their own safety and nobody else's, then it makes more sense and becomes easier to reconcile.
 
There are always exceptions given for all faiths in every aspect of society.
There always will be those who don't agree with them either in principal or when applied to a certain group.
Take sharia law as an example, It's the oft repeated "they will/are/have imposed their law on us" and although it's true sharia law runs alongside the law of the land and many minor disagreements between Muslims are resolved in sharia courts (Divorces/Property disputes etc), It doesn't undermine English law as that is applicable to all regardless of if they like it or not.
Now it's plainly obvious that this whole issue (and things like halal/mosque building etc) gets whipped up into a frenzy by newspapers, facebook groups and political parties to suit either their long term agenda or just to shift a few papers with an attention grabbing headline. The fact is, there is no compulsion to use the sharia court, you can go have a regular ordinary divorce or civil action.
An almost identical system of religious courts has been running in the UK since around 1700, It's called the Beth Din and its the Jewish version of shariah courts. for some reason newspapers seem to shy away from publishing headlines "bashing" Jews, perhaps it would evoke some dim and distant ugly memories if they did.
So if a nurse fancies her sleeves down when she isn't actually treating anyone as far as i'm concerned it's cool.
If Mr Singh wants to ride his crotch rocket with just his turban and his faith in Guru Nanak to protect him i'm equally happy.
If the papers had a genuine interest in clinical/patient safety and preventing the speread of MRSA, they'd do better to draw attention to the privatisation of hospital cleaning services by NHS trusts rather than some tiny little exception given to the 1 nurse in a million who may want to roll down her sleeves.
lets face it if you're a surgeon and a Muslim woman, you've overcome the gender bias that exists in Islam, you're stood in a room with lots of other men who aren't your husband/brother/father without a chaperone. It's fairly safe to assume you're wearing scrubs and a mask.
 
Back
Top