Leaving Cert. exam on a Saturday

I'm sure you've all heard - and are sick of hearing - about the whole English exam leak and it's movement to a Saturday (today).

One implication of it's movement to today is that Orthodox Jewish students weren't able to sit it (as it's on the Shabbat). So, the SEC, very kindly, have rescheduled the exam for the 10 or so affected students to tomorrow. The students will be kept in a media "quarantine" until tomorrow morning, when they will sit the paper. (I might add that this quarantine will consist of them being placed in the care of a rabbi. This, again, is placing a high level of trust on someone just because of their religious standing).

Now, I'm not going off on a rant about the Jewish or anything of the sort, I'm not even giving out about the SEC doing such a thing (as I'm not sure it's particularly a bad thing: I just think it raises interesting questions); but one thought keeps emerging in my mind about this occurrence.

Should a state organisation (metaphorically) bend over backwards to accommodate an outdated belief, such as the Jews not being allowed to use electronics on a Saturday?

In your idealistic secular society, would the state accommodate itself to such petty (no offense intended) reasons to postpone an exam? I mean, a student could be in a car crash the night before one of their exams and they wouldn't as easily get their exam moved to a later date.

Is this Ireland demonstrating how diverse and flexible it is in accepting other religions and other beliefs? Or is it Ireland bending over backwards to accommodate a religious belief as to not cause any religious uproar?

My own thoughts are confused: I'm not necessarily sure it's a bad thing for a state body to do, but, at the same time I'm not quite sure it's good either; like I said I think it just raises some interesting questions.

Thoughts?

(P.S. I know this doesn't particularly concern atheism itself; but, I think it's a topic which the people of this forum may be interested in discussing).

jhegarty

Given that the rescheduling happened because of the department mess up they should do everything in their power to help out where this causes difficulty for people.

Urizen

I'd say that's just the Dept. trying not to cause itself any more hardship. But it's a nice thing to do.

coffee_cake

I don't see any harm in it, and they are known to be incredibly strict about keeping sabbath tbh. Can't even turn on light switches etc.
I think it's a nice thing to do and really a non-issue, considering it's a once-off anyway.

Zombrex

It depends on if the Department are doing this for anyone else? Like can someone sit it on Sunday because they have something important to them on Saturday, or is it only if that thing is religious.

If so it shows the some what silly privilege we still give to religion but not to anything else.

I would imagine God would understand

Zillah

I think the department should do everything in their power to accommodate those who would find Saturday to be difficult considering that it was the department's own screw up that caused this problem in the first place.

But like Wicknight, I think they should accommodate anyone who has a problem with Saturday, and would consider it discrimination if it were only Jews getting this special treatment.

I also think these people should be monitored by official representatives from the Board of Education/Gardai rather than some Rabbi. I think the Irish of all people should have learned the lesson by now that just because someone is in a powerful and respected religious position it does not mean they are trustworthy.

coffee_cake

Zillah wrote: »

I also think these people should be monitored by official representatives from the Board of Education/Gardai rather than some Rabbi. I think the Irish of all people should have learned the lesson by now that just because someone is in a powerful and respected religious position it does not mean they are trustworthy.

Same goes for the board of education though right?
I don't think it's the same thing as some random guy though - the rabbis are obsessive about keeping to all these rules as well.

Zillah

bluewolf wrote: »

Same goes for the board of education though right?

Ok well you get back to me once you've finished work on your benevolent AI that will manage our exam system. I'll wait here

GirlInterrupted

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Should a state organisation (metaphorically) bend over backwards to accommodate an outdated belief, such as the Jews not being allowed to use electronics on a Saturday?

No, the State shouldn't bend over backwards to accommodate outdated beliefs, everyone should know better.

Yes, the State must bend over backwards, as you can't punish young students for the choices their parents made, and indoctrinated them into.

Húrin

Wicknight wrote: »

It depends on if the Department are doing this for anyone else? Like can someone sit it on Sunday because they have something important to them on Saturday, or is it only if that thing is religious.

If so it shows the some what silly privilege we still give to religion but not to anything else.

I don't see how you think that religion shouldn't be treated as exceptional in this regard, but when it comes to an English nurse talking about hers instead of her favourite football team, religion is a special case. Basically, it seems to depend on whether the circumstances present a chance to attack and persecute religion.

Rattlehead_ie

Why not have it on Sunday instead..........
Oh no wait the Catholic Church would have a go at that!

I had to laugh Jews put into quarantine, that just a bit too dodge for my liking.

Zombrex

Húrin wrote: »

I don't see how you think that religion shouldn't be treated as exceptional in this regard, but when it comes to an English nurse talking about hers instead of her favourite football team, religion is a special case.

Because (and I imagine you didn't see this because you never seem to listen to the arguments actually being made at the time, rather you simply dismiss them based on who is making the argument) the nurse is representing a secular authority, just like the Department.

Neither should support, or appear to support, or give preference to one religion over any other while representing that authority

The Department providing Jews with Saturday off because of their religion but not allowing anyone else (for what ever reason) is making a special case of religion, particularly their religion. (I'm not sure that is what is actually happening here, but that is the principle)

A nurse offering to say Christian prayers to a patient is making a special case out of Christianity while acting in an official role representing a secular institution.

A person acting for or representing a secular organisation or state should not support or show preference to one religion in particular over others. It is non-inclusive to those who do not share that religion.

The mind boggles that this is such a difficult concept for some religious people to understand, particularly when I made the exact same points when discussing the case of the nurse.

Overblood

bluewolf wrote: »

they are known to be incredibly strict about keeping sabbath tbh. Can't even turn on light switches

What.

Zillah

Overblood wrote: »

What.

Yah.

Religion is hilarious. No starting fires! No putting out fires! No fire related activities of any kind allowed!

Hivemind187

Its an interesting one isnt it? I doubt very much that the Dept of Education would give two figs if you were scheduled to work that saturday etc. Having worked in the dept I am sad to say that religion is given an unfortunately "elevated" status when it comes to excuses. Sickenning but true.

Either way though, the DES is responsible for what hapened (ultimately) and frankly its a ballsup they should make every accomodation for. The LC is a stressful enough experience for any poor schmuck taking it - you literally feel as if your entire future rests on the things you say for two weeks in June when you are 17 - This debacle will cause yet more stress on already stressed students.

It seems that a rethink of the system at its fundamental levels might be in order. If a single mistake like this can cause such unbelievable havok then why are their no measures in place to prevent it happening?

toiletduck

I woke up to the news at 11 there. Hearing something about students "sitting the LC English this morning" made me totally disorientated. Just how much did I have after work last night, I was asking

robindch

Wicknight wrote: »

It depends on if the Department are doing this for anyone else? Like can someone sit it on Sunday because they have something important to them on Saturday, or is it only if that thing is religious.

Yep, that's it in a nutshell.

As it's a one-off thing caused by the DofE ballsing up, I think it's fair enough to accommodate people who have pre-existing commitments of one kind or another on Saturday.

Would have been interesting to see what would have happened if a non-jewish person had said that they'd something silly like an appointment with the dentist, or a game of tennis, yesterday and they demanded that the state exam be rescheduled to suit them too. I rather suspect they wouldn't have been accommodated.

aidan24326

robindch wrote: »

I rather suspect they wouldn't have been accommodated.

You can be certain they wouldn't. And that goes right to the heart of the problem, as Wicknight pointed out. That religion is always given this elevated position of importance over everything else, even if the actual reasons would seem bizarre in any other context. But invoke the magic word religion and even the most stupid (yes I said it) beliefs and superstitions are elevated to a position of respect that they do not deserve.

Overblood

Zillah wrote: »

Yah.

Religion is hilarious. No starting fires! No putting out fires! No fire related activities of any kind allowed!

Poor kids.

lostexpectation

its a mess up so it doesn't matter.

could any of actually imagine the exam being rescheduled on a sunday?

stevejazzx

It would've been a fascinating ordeal had the dfoe not made this concession. In which case perhaps this guy (scroll video to 106:46) could've helped

http://video.google.com/videoplay?do...07322683758535
__________________

Malari

I don't think it's a big deal, especially as it was the dept of education's fault. Still, they should be a little more accommodating for students with difficulties under normal circumstances too I think.

Interestingly, I heard on the news this morning that votes weren't counted yesterday in the North because of the Sabbath!

ScumLord

-JammyDodger- wrote: »

Should a state organisation (metaphorically) bend over backwards to accommodate an outdated belief, such as the Jews not being allowed to use electronics on a Saturday?

It's easier than listening to them bitch and moan about it.

Galvasean

Zillah wrote: »

Yah.

Religion is hilarious. No starting fires! No putting out fires! No fire related activities of any kind allowed!

So what happens if lightning hits the house and it goes on fire? Call the fire station? Oh wait, we're not allowed use phones. Perhaps I'll ask a neighbour to do it for me... Ah crap. we're in an all Jewish neighborhood!

stevejazzx

Galvasean wrote: »

So what happens if lightning hits the house and it goes on fire? Call the fire station? Oh wait, we're not allowed use phones. Perhaps I'll ask a neighbour to do it for me... Ah crap. we're in an all Jewish neighborhood!

All is explained in link I posted..it's really quite staright forward;).

TwoShedsJackson

Applying the finishing touch
Hebrew: מכה בפטיש (literally, striking with a hammer).

This melakha refers to an act of completing an object and bringing it into its final useful form. For example, if the pages of a newspaper were poorly separated, slicing them open would constitute "applying the finishing touch". Ribiat, infra. Using a stapler involves transgressing "applying the finishing touch" in regard to the staple, which is brought into its final useful form by the act. Ribiat, infra.

See further: Mishneh Torah Shabbos 10:16–18, 23:4–9; Chayei Adam Shabbos 44


[edit] Transferring between domains
Hebrew: מוציא מרשות לרשות

Chapters 1 and 11 of Talmud tractate Shabbat deals with the melakha of transferring from one domain to another, commonly called "carrying". The tractate distinguishes four domains: private, public, semi-public and an exempt area. It holds that the transfer of an article from a private to a public domain is Biblically forbidden; transferring an article between a semi-public to a private or public domain is Rabbinically prohibited; transferring of an article between an exempt area and any other domain is permissible; carrying an article four amos (about 1.7 m) may be forbidden in a public or semi-public domain and permitted in a private domain or exempt area; and carrying inside a private domain or between private domains may be permissible (see Eruv). For these purposes "transferring" means "removing and depositing", so that carrying an article out of a domain and returning to the same domain with it does not constitute transferring. This may fall into the category of "wearing".

Just two of the forbidden activities. Great that they put all this effort into telling you what you can't do :rolleyes:

electrogrimey

Holy crap...you can't seperate a newspaper leaf? Would they really have to sit in a burning house, or at least watch their house burn down without doing anything about it? I somehow find it hard to believe any modern 18 year old accepting this...Explains why there's only ten I suppose..

I think this would be more interesting to think about if you ignore the cock-up in the first place, and the exam was scheduled on a Saturday originally, would it still then be accomodated? Or if the media hype about the Leaving didn't exist? I also couldn't see this happening for college exams...

jhegarty

electrogrimey wrote: »

Holy crap...you can't seperate a newspaper leaf? Would they really have to sit in a burning house, or at least watch their house burn down without doing anything about it?

It's the sort of weird situations you get when you apply 3000 (?) year old rules to the modern world.

Zillah

Galvasean wrote: »

So what happens if lightning hits the house and it goes on fire? Call the fire station? Oh wait, we're not allowed use phones. Perhaps I'll ask a neighbour to do it for me... Ah crap. we're in an all Jewish neighborhood!

They are forbidden from interfering to save property, regardless of the cost, but in the case where lives are in real danger, they are explicitly required to act.

Húrin

Wicknight wrote: »

Because (and I imagine you didn't see this because you never seem to listen to the arguments actually being made at the time, rather you simply dismiss them based on who is making the argument) the nurse is representing a secular authority, just like the Department.

Neither should support, or appear to support, or give preference to one religion over any other while representing that authority

The Department providing Jews with Saturday off because of their religion but not allowing anyone else (for what ever reason) is making a special case of religion, particularly their religion. (I'm not sure that is what is actually happening here, but that is the principle)

A nurse offering to say Christian prayers to a patient is making a special case out of Christianity while acting in an official role representing a secular institution.

A person acting for or representing a secular organisation or state should not support or show preference to one religion in particular over others. It is non-inclusive to those who do not share that religion.

The mind boggles that this is such a difficult concept for some religious people to understand, particularly when I made the exact same points when discussing the case of the nurse.

All quite agreeable Wicknight. The authorities in question are also neutral on football teams of preference, as well as neutral on religion of preference. Is it not still a case of singling out religion as needing special treatment when it needs to be suppressed, but criticising such exceptionalism when someone is using it promote religion?

JC 2K3

I'm not sure of all the details or history of the argument, but I think I agree with Hurín here.