Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Off-Topic' started by Nastie_Bowie, Feb 3, 2004.
France and moslem schoolgirls
Is this carrying things too far?
it's their country *shrug*
Carrying what too far?
France's secular society? Yes.
The Western bias (perceived, at least) against those who practice Islam? Yes.
The fact that this will apply to Sikhs, Jews, Christians and every other group that displays outward symbols of their religions? Yes.
I thought we could only have one religious thread on the front page at a time.
I don't see where this is discussing religion.
This could be construed as a cultural bias.
Or do you have an issue with me starting a thread speaking negatively about the french? Twist away!
Despite their protestations about "egalitarianism, brotherhood and liberty," the French have quite clearly shown themselves to be anti-Jewish and anti-Muslim. Probably more of the latter than the former because the Muslims are in much larger numbers.
Last I heard, the Turkish government similarly banned women's head scarves. Then again, fundamentalist Muslims have been slowly gaining in their legislature, so that may have been changed by now.
I think nationwide bans on displays of religion are really odd, but hey, those are democracies and it's not for me to tell them how to run their own countries. *shrug*
Okay, for a start this legislation bans all outward religious signs, including headscarves, Skullcaps and Crucifixes. Thus, rather than anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish I have to conclude that it is anti religious expression. A rather distinct difference I feel.
Do I think they are right to do this? No, IMO not. But then, French cultural identity is being percieved to be reduced, and thus they feel that it should be preserved. I am not sure though that such legislation will serve that purpose, and rather it willl only serve to inflame the influential religious communities in France and western Europe.
However, as Underseer mentioned, they are a Democratic nation, and hopefully the French populace will vote against this by voting in a more sympathetic government if the majority is against this move. I will not hold my breath however.
Sorry, I should have been more clear.
My statement about France being anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish isn't directly related to this recent decision about outward expressions of religion, but from reports of harrassment, beatings, vandalism, job discrimination, etc. that have been coming out of France, particularly in recent years.
ok, and how is this at all relevant?
France's anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish sentiments are relevant, because I think they are the real driving force behind the passing of this law.
(I edited out the first paragraph because it was a confusing mess... I'm really tired right now. Sorry.)
Tyranny of the majority is still tyranny.
(although I wouldn't classify the specifics of this case as tyranny . . .)
Underseer, I don't doubt you, just clarifying my own personal position. I agree with you that reports from France indicate a marginalisation of minorities, especially in the Nationalistic South, but cannot fall back on any first-hand experiences to confirm the reports. Due to this, I tend to take any reports with a pinch of salt (if a small pinch).
Nice ancedote, and I agree. Doesn't do much to address the problem though, a problem that can likely only be addressed by the election of representatives that hold the opposing view.
There are good and bad teachings in each religion
i do believe there are many bad teachings in the kuran
Sharia represents vile islamic customs,and so is hiding hair with chadors (islamic scarf);i highly doubt there is a God wise enough to allow or inspirate such oppressive customs (unless Allah is not the same God as the Bible's or Moise's)
Chadors are special religious signs,because unlike other religious signs,they show iniquity,they mean women are submitted to men,in other words,women are inferior beings;and iniquity is against the ideals of french republic;this custom is just the oppression of a category (women) by another one (men)
It can be described as oppressive perhaps, but vile? You dont need a trouting, you need a sperm whaling (where's that exploded whale corpse when you need it?)
Vile is indeed the right word for Sharia,no need to change it
Sarcasm is not a good argument in any discussion by the way
What next, they gonna ban people from wearing crosses?
I guess let France be France...very very odd...
I don't have first-hand knowledge of France in this regard, but the reports are simliar enough to reports I've heard from West Germany, and I do have first hand experience with how West Germans treated black Americans and Jewish Americans. Suffice it to say I'm inclined to believe the reports of French anti-Muslim and anti-Jewish sentiment.
From what I saw, they already do.
I'm from England.. thus have a natural dislike of the french anyway...
The law is stupid, and mean, and just down right wrong.. in my opinion, people should be allowed to show whatever religious symbol they wish, its their religion and doin nobody else any harm.
However, at least it IS equal.. nobody can show such symbols, not just jews or muslims, but nobody.. ultimately, not much diffferent from saying you have to wear school uniform, after all, if you make everyon wear the same uniform.. but then let some people have accessories, isnt that wrong on the people who dont have religion to back up their claim to why they should?
just out of curiosity, what specifically are you calling the bad teachings in the quran? also, the head coverings in in muslim societies were based on the idea of the woman "saving her beauty for her husband (or future husband)" in egypt where women have the same rights as men and can hold all the same jobs, female professionals will sometimes choose to where head coverings for this reason. head coverings are NOT required by the quran or mainstream Hadith.
I live in a town with a large Moslem community. The ladies wear such things more from thier culture than religious beliefs (head scarves). The ladies who cover thier faces, are the devout followers.