The facts are somewhat different than your Herald quote would suggest. The rule does not apply on a racial basis at all. ANY student of ANY ethnicity can wear bone or pounamu carvings (aka taonga) because the school has determined that these will form part of the school uniform. This decision was taken on the basis that they are a part of general NZ culture* and that this should be encouraged.

Now, whether the school should be banning kids from wearing whatever they like *under* their uniform is another matter entirely. However, as per usual, right wing commentators continue to pretend the issue as one of race when it clear is one of personal choice and school uniforms. Don't be sucked in by Don Brash, he's not interested in a liberal agenda at all, just getting enough votes to get into government.

* In fact, kiwis travelling overseas are often identified as such because of the seemingly ubiquitous taonga (often a hook design) worn by them.

I'm the "right-wing commentator" you're so uptight about. I'm also Maori and Catholic — and very proud of both. I find it rather obnoxious being told that communities of faith aren't part of "general NZ culture". That would prove a rather superficial understanding Aotearoa's history and culture, in my view. You're welcome to disagree, of course.

I also attended a boarding school that had a very simple uniform code regarding jewellery. You didn't wear it, full stop — no pierced ears, necklaces or rings. The material or design was totally, and consistently, irrelevant.

And if we're talking about opportunistic inconsistency, I love lefties whose dedication to "personal choice" stops when their sensibilities are offended.

BTW, I'm not speaking for Don Brash unless he pays me a shitload of hard cash. Just thought I'd make that clear.

If everyone, or at least a majority, in NZ was a Catholic then you would be right in asserting that Catholicism is part of the "general NZ culture". The fact is it's not. On the other hand, the wearing of taonga is somewhat more prevalent, largely because it does not require commitment to one of our "communities of faith."

The school was making a policy decision based on whether they thought taonga met their requirements. As it happens, they applied a value judgement weighted towards indigenously developed jewellery. Nothing to do with race, and I can't see how it has any impact on Treaty of Waitangi requirements.

Now, you can hardly argue that Catholicism is anything other than an import. The same goes for its iconography.

My point is that Brash is accusing the school of applying a RACIST uniform rule. This is utter bullshit. It's just a uniform policy based on a value judgement.

You may have enjoyed going to a school with an oppressive uniform policy, but that's no reason to have a problem with a school being somewhat more liberal.

BTW, it's good to know that you'll pimp yourself to Brash, and that it's just a matter of settling on a price :P

Liberal ? If MGC was being truly liberal it would encourage open displays of iconic symbolism, irrespective of religous or cultural significance.
It is not - thus the choice applied to taonga is restrictive, not liberal.

hello! http://nissan-sentra-np.blogspot.com/ http://nissan-xterra-np.blogspot.com/ http://nissan-altima-np.blogspot.com/ http://nissan-350z-np.blogspot.com/