French MP's ban all overt religious symbols from the classroom

by yxl1 57 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  bebu

  I really like this law, the French are taking the lead in doing away with religious stupidity. We need some laws like this in our country but religion is too protected and religions use the umbrella of religioun to get away with far too many things. I think the most important thing about this law is protecting the rights of the girls who have to wear these silly head coverings. While some girls may like wearing the head coverings, I'm sure a lot of girls have to wear the head covers because of parental influence. So, if for 8 hours a day they can go without the head coverings, I say great. This will give these muslim girls a taste of freedom they otherwise would never have. Then, one day maybe they can grow up to be free of religion. I wish there was a law saying that I had to get involved in school sports or plays- that I couldn't just socially withdrawal because I was told all the "worldly" people at my school were bad for me.

  Wow, where is the charity in here? You are overreacting from your own experience, and would do more harm than good. It's been tried before, in countless ruined communist countries. Been there, done that. Study them!! Crushing individual beliefs and opinions ("Attila"?) doesn't create the utopia! It crushes the human spirit. You will not have freed anyone at all by forcing something on them. It's the same logic of the WT. And you'll get the same result. bebu
• 

  LittleToe

  ...and yet they all end up causing SO much trouble don't they?

  They'd best get to banning politics, as well, and then they need to evangelise the whole world with their new policies (oops, I used the evangelise word!).

  Oh, and soccer football, that one is going to have to be banned outright, too...

  Where does the madness stop?
• 

  DevonMcBride

  I disagree with this decision. People should have the right to wear religious headcoverings and crosses if they wish. Banning a Muslim scarf isn't going to stop terrorism.

  Devon
• 

  crownboy

  I totally disagree with this law.

  Now I'm as secular as the next non-religious guy, but if a religious fundy-nut like Pat Robertson started complaining about this law being anti- religious bigotry, I'd have to agree with him. A religious head scarf/ turbun, etc. does not force anyone to observe the other persons religion or anything like that, it's no different than if some secular person preferred to wear red everyday for good luck. This is a big time encroachment on freedom of religion and speech; the kids aren't trying to convert anyone nor endanger anyone with these religious symbols, they are simply trying to express their own religious faith (or their parent's, depending on the situation).

  Now I totally understand that France has been having some cultural clashes with its Muslim population (hell, which country doesn't? Let's just wait untill the US' Muslim population gets significant), but as some other posters have pointed out, this ban will not mitigate the situation in anyway. Hell, it will most likely make it worse. Find useful ways to deal with the situation instead of divisive ones like this. Poor Sheiks, Jews, etc. having to needlessly suffer.

  Let freedom (of religion) ring.
• 

  Sirona

  Atilla

  Then, one day maybe they can grow up to be free of religion.

  If we get the balance right, every person in society will have the choice of whether they want to follow a religion or not.

  It seems you'd rather just ban all religion entirely. That stand is wrong - just because you are not religious does not mean that others should think exactly like you. There would be more wars caused by anti-religionists enforcing their new "laws" !

  Sirona
• 

  Sirona

  I agree with Bebu, that crushing humans into a box isn't going to solve anything, and history tells us that.

  Someone else (sorry, can't see the post now...) made the very good point that religious beliefs are not something we switch on or switch off depending upon where we are. They are part of us, they are our lives. If someone said to me, "Don't be pagan" that would be an impossibility because its part of who I am. Now I don't push it onto anyone else, I don't "preach" it, but yet I would still be very offended if I was expected to discard all of my pagan jewellery for instance, just because someone else didn't like seeing it.

  Children need to learn to accept differences. Cultural differences and differences in the way people think - yes it would be good for a non-muslim child to try to understand the point of view of a muslim. Its clear that some of you would prefer that religion is labelled "stupid" and our children can grow up to despise those "stupid" religious people. When they grow up, what sort of world would that be?

  Sirona
• 

  LittleToe

  Taking the flip side of the debate, for a moment, though.
  I would hate to see someone parading around wearing a Swastika.
  Symbols do have history attached to them.

  Here in Scotland it's often as simple as a soccer football strip.
  If you wander into the wrong part of Glasgow, at the wrong time, with the wrong colours, you are just asking for trouble (I'm alluding to the Rangers / Celtic sectarian association with Protestantism / Catholicism).

  So, symbols that are designed to provoke should certainly be monitored.
  I don't know what the socio-cultural situation is in France, and so find it hard to comment with anything other than my own values, on this.
  Do certain garments tend to provoke violent reaction amongst the population?
  Maybe one of our French posters could comment.
• 

  talesin

  Personally, I've always felt that school uniforms were a good idea. Kids are VERY discriminatory.

  School is a place for learning, not for showing your family's religious 'colors'.

  On this specific issue, maybe Muslim kids are being targeted by other children because of the headgear? As LT said, some French input would be enlightening.

  avi,

  Europe and Canada are having a problem over there that we are just beginning to see over here. People refusing to assimilate, refusing to learn the language, expecting others to cater to their culture

  We are quite happy not to be BORG, thank you very much, and proud NOT to be a 'melting pot'. It may be a little more work, but it's worth it to be TOLERANT and have CULTURAL DIVERSITY.

  BTW, I think your comment about 'refusing to learn the language' is based in ignorance of the facts. The French-English bilingualism debate has nothing to do with landed immigrants from other countries refusing to learn English or French.

  We have many folks from many different cultures here in Nova Scotia: Arab, Asian, African, German, Icelandic, Aussie, Brits, etc. - and they all LEARN TO SPEAK ENGLISH, not vice-versa.

  A little edjamacation on your part about the historical basis for the French-English Canadian differences may be in order, since you feel qualified to speak as one who is knowledgeable of our problems.

  talesin
• 

  Yerusalyim

  Simon,
  

  You seem to be willing to trade the religious intolerance of a few radicals for the intolerance of religion. I think the communists in Russia tried that.

  There is a time and a place for it and school isn't it IMO. Kids can learn about religions and cultures but it isn't the place to be religious.For most you can't just be religious at home, that's like asking me to be white only at home, or male only at home...my religion is who I am as much as my gender or my color (and just like religion, both gender and color can be changed [see Michael Jackson for details])

  ATTILLA SAYS: Then, one day maybe they can grow up to be free of religion.

  Want a world free of religion, look at what the Russians created in their "workers paradise" where religion was systmatically assaulted...that's real comforting. The growing up should perhaps be done by those whose past has jaded them towards all religion.

  Edited because I'm an idiot.
• 

  Narkissos

  As some further French input has been requested (unless my previous post on first page was missed):

  The new law, projected and voted by the right wing majority, may appeal to a number of very different people:

  1) The anti-Arab extreme right wing, still very strong in France (as the last presidential election showed which opposed Chirac to Le Pen, allowing the former to climb from his 19 % in the first vote to an incredible 82 % in the second) since the decolonization of Algeria in the 60's, with subsequent rapatriation of the colons (including many Sepharad Jews) and Muslim immigration. However, this faction is very divided, since it also includes an older and still important antisemitic trend (as the dissentions over Near East policy clearly show).

  2) The secularist and feminist movements mostly associated with the left wing. The feminists' main problem with the Muslim headscarf being, of course, that it implies subjection of the woman (directly descending from Jewish and Christian tradition, cf. 1 Corinthians 11).

  The public argument for the law was of course targeted at the second group, but I'm pretty sure the first one was also in view...