Intolerance In France

Many school districts here in the US have adopted dress codes ( including many schools that I pass during my daily peregrinations), primarily I believe, to sidestep tricky issues of modesty and gang affiliation. Here in Jefferson County ( home of the infamous Columbine HS), the dress code bans all headware.
I don't recall there being much brouhaha raised when this was implemented, in fact, the general sense that I got was a major sigh of relief from parents as "keeping up with the Jones's" ( or, more likely,"dressing like Britney") was no longer an issue.
I'm not sure if there is a religious exemption from this code, I suspect not...I don't remember seeing any yamulkas (sp?) or Amish bonnets or Islamic headscarves on the playgrounds, but, then again, a person my age hanging around schoolyards would be promptly arrested, so my observations are only casual.
Personally, I don't see what the big deal is.
Aren't Muslims supposed to pray, facing Mecca, like six times a day also?
Should public schools also accomodate this?

In terms of the head coverings i don't think it is neccesary to ban them they affect know one except people who will not tolerate 'others'.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+19 January 2004 - 17:06--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 19 January 2004 - 17:06)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-lynx@19 January 2004 - 14:50
Not only that, if you disregard the fact that the hijab is worn for religious reasons they would still not be acceptable, in exactly the same way that wearing baseball caps would not be acceptable.

---

To disregard the reason for the article being worn is ludicrous. That is the whole point of the discussion. Otherwise we would only be discussing dress codes and to use your own example baseball caps being worn in school.

To liken it to wearing a baseball cap is both preposterous and offensive. As I said earlier, I have no knowledge of it&#39;s significance, however I accept that it is a genuinely important part of their religious beliefs.

As such just to ban it is harsh and insensitive, unless someone else has a reason for that ban. Then a balance and compromise must be found. I don&#39;t think that is the case here, there is no suggestion of complaints from other pupils or parents, or have I missed that. [/b][/quote]
You have (deliberately?) misinterpreted my statement and your comments twist it&#39;s meaning. The use of the word &#39;if&#39; means to examine a possibility which is not the case. I did not liken the hajib to a baseball cap, I merely pointed out that it would be equally unacceptable as headgear, much as Clocker has stated is the case in many American schools.

It is hardly ludicrous to disregard the religious issue, if the headgear would be unacceptable without it. It is irrational to permit a mode of dress simply because of a religious desire. As with the Samurai sword, if it is unacceptable without religious grounds there is no reason to permit on a religious pretext.

Had this issue been directed solely at Muslims I could understand their displeasure, but it applies to all religions. I believe that the act has been restated to emphasise that this sort of display of religious fervour has not been acceptible in French schools for a long time, and they are not about to bend the rules just for one religion.

Many Muslim women do not feel the need to wear any form of headgear, and there is a worry that some parents are ordering their daughters to wear the hajib as an overt expresssion of their Muslim faith. This is exactly what is prohibited in French schools. However, I accept that many are wearing them of their own wishes.

I believe there is an option available, namely to start their own private schools and withdraw their children from the state system, but of course the costs may make this prohibitive.

It is indeed ludicrous, given that it is worn for entirely religious reasons. So to disregard it&#39;s religious significance is to totally miss the point. In fact, as I understand it the ban is exactly because of it&#39;s religious significance.

Circular argument I&#39;m afraid. If you remove the religious aspect, the ban is no longer appropriate and therefore no ban.

However my point remains that (in my opinion) we should adapt to a changing world. If the French chose not to do that and in the process alienate children from their own society that is a matter for them.

I simply think it strikes of religious intolerance, with no-one actually having any complaint, other than the state itself. I honestly feel that, before something is banned there should be a reason for it. Someone should be hurt or offended.

This is a total removal of freedom of expression, just as not allowing someone the right to express themselves in words is. We burn books yet again, or at least they do.

On the contrary, assuming that France has similar dress codes in its schools as the rest of us, the hajib would still be banned even if it was not seen as a religious artifact. What is ludicrous is when exceptions are made to a standard dress code to permit excessive religious expression.

If we are to make exceptions on religious grounds, it is equally justifiable to say we should make exceptions on sporting grounds and permit the baseball cap. After all, it is merely freedom of expression, or are you claiming that only religious exceptions are valid?

If we were to follow your line of argument then we should also permit the Samurai sword. Or is that not permissible in your eyes, in which case perhaps you would explain at what point things become unacceptable, and who decides? And if it is a matter of there being a complaint, how do you know that there have been no complaints? How many do there have to be, or is a single complaint enough?

Far from burning books, these laws are making sure that the books remain in their proper place, and are not used to batter into submission those who do not wish to read certain volumes.

On my council estate in UK i live amongs a number of Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi families. i assume most, if not all, are, Muslims. i see them every day
going about their normal business, school, work etc, they all wear the same type clothing as we do, except the elderly ones they always wear traditional clothing.
On certain days, they all wear traditional clothes. possibly their equivalent to our
sunday. it&#39;s not a problem, except to the racists.
as for the long black dresses and headscarves being worn all the time the old ones
probably would feel undressed in anything else but i suspect the young ones would rather wear miniskirts and show bare midriffs like our teenagers.
given a few years the old mode of dress will die out when the youngsters take control of their own lives and become westernised.
my point is leave them alone. they can&#39;t possibly be doing any harm.

Quote:

---

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 15:50


However my point remains that (in my opinion) we should adapt to a changing world.

---

And how much adapting do you require from the Muslims?

Quote:

---

Originally posted by clocker+20 January 2004 - 05:17--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (clocker &#064; 20 January 2004 - 05:17)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 15:50


However my point remains that (in my opinion) we should adapt to a changing world.

---

And how much adapting do you require from the Muslims?[/b][/quote]
They form an integral part of the society. Therefore I expect them to adapt in the same way as everybody else.

I see no reason to specify how much each individual group needs to adapt. We all must adapt.