Intolerance In France

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by 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'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't think that is the case here, there is no suggestion of complaints from other pupils or parents, or have I missed that.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+19 January 2004 - 18:06--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 19 January 2004 - 18:06)</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]
I take it you would have no difficulty with a Japanese (or other) student of Samurai..(which is a form of Buddism with strong Shintoism influence) carrying his sword then?

The sword is linked to the soul in this faith, which is a stronger link to their belief/religion than skull caps, scarfs and crucifixes i would think....

Playing devils advocate here btw..

In my view, if it does no harm then let it be.

Skull Caps, Skarves, Crucifixes...so what? Let people wear them, they have a right to their beliefs and a right to free expression under EU law I believe, so France may not be able to implement these proposals anyway.

The Sword thing...maybe not a good idea

[Guillaume]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:06
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.

No, no complaints from parents or pupils, just from teachers and headmasters...

See, as Lynx said, there is a tradition of secularism in France&#39;s educational system. In fact there already is a law guaranteing (spelling?) this. It is a clause in the law of 1905 which officially separates Church and State.

That clause has been ignored many times over the years, leading to a tense situation with the more traditionalist religious groups. This "new" law is only a "reminder" of the previous one.

The compromise is: all religions are to be kept out of public schools and administrations, not only Islam.

[J'Pol]

RF

Does he have a rule that he must carry it at all times when in public ?

If so I would have to consider the views and genuine concerns of all interested parties.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:30
RF

Does he have a rule that he must carry it at all times when in public ?

If so I would have to consider the views and genuine concerns of all interested parties.

Irrespective of whether that is the rule, the carrying of such a weapon would break State Laws.....and I do not believe in the right of any religion to break the laws of the country in which the followers of that religion have decided to settle.

It is upto the settlers to make sure that they can adapt to where they want to live, not the hosting country to change its laws to accomodate the religion.

If we dont have this:

Well there are "Religions" where cannabalism is acceptable...so that guy in Germany shouldnt be getting arrested

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Gurahl+19 January 2004 - 19:30--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Gurahl @ 19 January 2004 - 19:30)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:06
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.

No, no complaints from parents or pupils, just from teachers and headmasters...

See, as Lynx said, there is a tradition of secularism in France&#39;s educational system. In fact there already is a law guaranteing (spelling?) this. It is a clause in the law of 1905 which officially separates Church and State.

That clause has been ignored many times over the years, leading to a tense situation with the more traditionalist religious groups. This "new" law is only a "reminder" of the previous one.

The compromise is: all religions are to be kept out of public schools and administrations, not only Islam. [/b][/quote]
I don&#39;t believe anyone is proposing teaching religion, merely wearing something which is significant to them.

If there have been no complaints then I don&#39;t see the issue. I prefer it when a state is able to adapt to circumstances and see that sometimes change is a good thing. I am sure the demographic has changed significantly since 1905.

I have no particular axe to grind. It is not something that affects me in any way. I just prefer to see religious tolerance (other than rangers supporters obviously).

If the people of France are happy with the situation it is a matter for them. In my view it does not portray you in a particularly good light. However given recent political events in France it is not that surprising.

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by Rat Faced+19 January 2004 - 19:36--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (Rat Faced @ 19 January 2004 - 19:36)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:30
RF

Does he have a rule that he must carry it at all times when in public ?

If so I would have to consider the views and genuine concerns of all interested parties.

Irrespective of whether that is the rule, the carrying of such a weapon would break State Laws.....and I do not believe in the right of any religion to break the laws of the country in which the followers of that religion have decided to settle.

It is upto the settlers to make sure that they can adapt to where they want to live, not the hosting country to change its laws to accomodate the religion.

If we dont have this:

Well there are "Religions" where cannabalism is acceptable...so that guy in Germany shouldnt be getting arrested [/b][/quote]
I think you will find, though I am not sure, that when in full Highland dress a Scotsman can carry a fairly substantial and sharp knife, known as a Skean Dhu.

Please see my earlier (and other threads) position re photographic driving licences, wearing crash helmets etc. In these circumstances - don&#39;t comply don&#39;t get the licence - don&#39;t drive the car / bike. I think we agree on that.

I think this is different as educating children is not an optional thing. It is a basic human right in my opinion, so the argument is not as clean cut as the other things.

I only ask that France show a little tolerance, if they are not able then as I said a few moments ago, that reflect badly on them.

There may also be ECHR issues, I haven&#39;t checked that.

[hobbes]

Originally posted by Rat Faced@19 January 2004 - 19:27

I take it you would have no difficulty with a Japanese (or other) student of Samurai..(which is a form of Buddism with strong Shintoism influence) carrying his sword then?

The sword is linked to the soul in this faith, which is a stronger link to their belief/religion than skull caps, scarfs and crucifixes i would think....

The Sword thing...maybe not a good idea

Why not let them bring swords to school? This is just ridiculous&#33;

We allow students to carry "pens", do we not, which we all agree are mightier than the sword.

en garde&#33;






I&#39;ll get me purse.

[Rat Faced]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:46


There may also be ECHR issues, I haven&#39;t checked that.

As this was the whole basis of the UKs marvelous "Human Rights Act" which includes a freedom of expression clause that has caused most school Heads nightmares...I believe they will be unable to implement their proposals under EU Law.

However, when i say this you must understand that we are talking about France. They break EU regulations when it suits them (Remember their illegal banning of British Beef?) and point to the moral highground and International Law when it suits them otherwise.

In other words, France will do what France wants and stuff anyone else

[Guillaume]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@19 January 2004 - 18:39
I just prefer to see religious tolerance (other than rangers supporters obviously).

Lack of religious tolerance would be to try to ban Islam or Judaism or Buddhism or whatever religion, just as Protestantism was in the Renaissance period, which is not the case here...