French Law Against Religious Symbols In Schools
DiscoZombie
Join Date: 2003-08-05 Member: 18951Members
Join Date: 2003-08-05 Member: 18951Members
in Discussions
<div class="IPBDescription">as seen in that other topic...</div> I skimmed the topic about those French hostages being held in regards to the French law forbidding religious symbols in school, and I didn't see anyone actually defend the law... I think it's a pretty good idea, ahead of its time. Religion is another tool people use to exclude and hate each other; banning them levels the playing field... granted it's just an annoyance for people like Christians who don't HAVE to wear crosses and whatnot according to their religion, but Muslims and Orthodox Jews are kinda screwed, since they believe they HAVE to wear their symbols...
I see the point that banning such symbols could be seen as a blow against freedom of expression, but then again, many schools require uniforms, don't they?
anyway, what do you think about the law and why? and whatever happened to those hostages anyway?
I see the point that banning such symbols could be seen as a blow against freedom of expression, but then again, many schools require uniforms, don't they?
anyway, what do you think about the law and why? and whatever happened to those hostages anyway?
Comments
The thing is, these kids werent doing anything wrong. It wasnt the Muslim kids beating up the other boys, it wasn't little Charles taking a crucifix to his neighbour's skull, if anything these kids got picked on. The problem was definately religious intolerance - but it wasnt the religious ones doing the stone throwing. But the French, in their wisdom, decided the best way to deal with religious intolerance was to state sanction it. gg.
I live for the day when people around here start realising that there is ONE CONSTANT in hatred, fighting, greed and exclusion - and every friggen time its people, religious or not.
The thing about censorship, is that everyone wants it, they just want to be the ones censoring other people. So you think religion is stupid, you want to censor it. Great. And what if I thought evolution was stupid and wanted to censor that? Oh no no no, you wouldnt like that one bit.
I think this rule is ahead of its time, because I'm pretty sure that as time goes on religions are going to get more and more oppressed, and it doesnt surprise me that the rot is starting in France. Secularism does not live alongside religion happily for long - despite the claims of its proponents, it is still a belief system that insists everyone disagreeing is wrong. It, like most religions, has intolerance written all over it.
I am amazed of how things can be distorted so easily and so quickly. Where did you hear that version Marine01?
yeah, schools should definitely avoid teaching a religion, making kids say a prayer or reference God (like in the pledge of allegience), go to church, etc, but I guess they're going too far when they tell kids what they cannot wear, if these kids aren't forcing their beliefs on others...
The problem this law is solving is not headscarves in themselves or any religious symbols but the behaviour it induced.
It's means aren't repression of religious symbols...
I am amazed of how things can be distorted so easily and so quickly. Where did you hear that version Marine01? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Whoa, thats dangerous logic. So its okay to enforce your beliefs on other people, so long as its written in your constitution? Iran is a religious state, so they should be able to enforce people in government positions/schools to abide by religious law? I think not. It is as I suspected - secularism does not equal tolerance.
Kids wearing headscarves refusing to participate in sports eh? Oh noes, teh evil nevar stops in France with kids who wont play sports cause their headscarves might fall off! If they assign such importance to wearing headscarves that they wont even wear them in a situation where they might fall off - then banning those scarves from school will certainly stop the problem, because they'll stop coming to school. But that's not discrimination right.... you know, the whole singleing out the religious people and slapping bans on what they wear....
Please, is that the best justification you can offer for this kind of direct interference in a persons life: <b>Some of them use it to get out of PE?</b> You're going to have to do a little bit better than that I'm afraid. All the fat girls in my highschool PE class mysteriously and consistently had period pain when it came time for physical exertion - care to slap a ban on that? I cant agree more that unbelieving school kids shouldn't be forced to say prayers - that's preventing people from forcing their traditions on other people. But to stop people practising/uphold PERSONAL religious beliefs/customs is flat out wrong.
me too
<a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3330679.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3330679.stm</a>
I was able to dig this up from the BBC website archives.
France is a sovereign nation. I seem to remember a lot of people saying that France shouldn't tell the U.S. how to conduct its foreign policy in the run up to the Iraq war. Well, the reverse applies in the case. Perhaps even more, since the matter is internal for France. I don't believe that France has a free exercise clause pertaining to religion in their consistution.
It's not the business of America, nor is it the business of any other nation. France is perfectly capable of running its own government, particularly concerning internal matters such as this. If you immigrate to France, you agree to abide by French law. I don't see the problem here.
I'll tell France where to shove it the second they tell the U.S. what to do with the First Amendment. Until then, meh.
<a href='http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3330679.stm' target='_blank'>http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/3330679.stm</a>
I was able to dig this up from the BBC website archives.
France is a sovereign nation. I seem to remember a lot of people saying that France shouldn't tell the U.S. how to conduct its foreign policy in the run up to the Iraq war. Well, the reverse applies in the case. Perhaps even more, since the matter is internal for France. I don't believe that France has a free exercise clause pertaining to religion in their consistution.
It's not the business of America, nor is it the business of any other nation. France is perfectly capable of running its own government, particularly concerning internal matters such as this. If you immigrate to France, you agree to abide by French law. I don't see the problem here.
I'll tell France where to shove it the second they tell the U.S. what to do with the First Amendment. Until then, meh. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
A long tradition of maintaining France's culture? Sounds like a rejection of multiculturalism, no matter how hard Chirac tried to make it sound in that bbc report.
I dont buy into the whole "We'll do what we like with our country so but out" philosophy. We saw what was happening in South Africa, and we told them to stop. We see what is happening in North Korea, and we are again insisting they stop. I believe countries should voice their concern and disapproval of other nations actions.
What is happening in France is not an internal matter - I consider it a human rights breach. The world will not stop spinning, the sky is not falling (although eggmac agreeing with me lends support to that theory <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo-->), and we'll all survive despite this legislation. But its not right, and everyone should condemn it.
On the plus side, its going to be reaaallllyyyy hard for French to talk about stupid, racist, backward American's with this kind of ban in the supposed "home of the republic and equality"
(not intended as a flame, i'm being serious).
There was some case where some headscarfed students refused to attend classes as well as wanted to change some of the classes just for them. But they cant; that is in the constitution since one century. If they really wanted to express their religious believes, they always can go to a "private" school. That's no big deal, there are plenty of religious "private" school which are just a tad more expensive than the free State school.
Some students (well to be honest parents of those students) absolutely refused to go to a private school and still wished to change public schooling. And the State cannot allow that, in any way. It is absolutely contrary to both constitution and principles of the French principles they owe so dear.
To finish this Marine01, my most important question: where did you hear all that? Dont take it as a personnal flame, but I am personnaly interested in having (another) proof of the US propaganda machine.
Maintaing french culture, and religious oprresion are two different things. Why can't you be muslim and french? People should be able to practice there religion freely and have access to basic human services such as schools and hospitals.
Also isnt the first ammendment all about freedom of choice?
*EDIT*
this got me thinking about a related topic. Here in the UK, we have the BNP (British National Party). Its basically a legal version of the Nazi party, formed by ex skinheads. It runs on the idea of 'multiculturism', saying that people should have pride in there own race and culture, and is opposed to the 'dilution' of cultures and races, although beliving in equality throughout.
This is the new face of the far right. Reinvented, non violent and community orientated. The frightening thing is that they are succesful. In british towns such as burnley, where there have been race related riots, they are winning seats. I guess the point of this, is to say that far right politics has gotten clever. Simple things such as banning muslims from wearing head scalfs have go to be stopped.
There was some case where some headscarfed students refused to attend classes as well as wanted to change some of the classes just for them. But they cant; that is in the constitution since one century. If they really wanted to express their religious believes, they always can go to a "private" school. That's no big deal, there are plenty of religious "private" school which are just a tad more expensive than the free State school.
Some students (well to be honest parents of those students) absolutely refused to go to a private school and still wished to change public schooling. And the State cannot allow that, in any way. It is absolutely contrary to both constitution and principles of the French principles they owe so dear.
To finish this Marine01, my most important question: where did you hear all that? Dont take it as a personnal flame, but I am personnaly interested in having (another) proof of the US propaganda machine. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The US propaganda machine is obviously far reaching, because it has infiltrated The University of Queensland, Brisbane, Australia and perverted my feeble mind. The thoughts above are my own, I have read no website/material slamming the French decision past the odd newspaper article recording the incident and giving voice to the concern of many civil liberties groups. I would be very cautious in lumping me in with propaganda victims - I spend a lot of time on these forums defending what I believe and attacking other peoples beliefs, I dont just watch FOX and think I know it all.
In other words, if my words are those of the US propaganda machine, then I'm looking to join in on the publishing. I like to think I know and understand what I'm arguing, and if I dont, then I'd be very happy for you to point out where. I still dont think you've managed to do so.
I dont support students refusing to take part of the cirriculum, or insisting that certain classes be taught/changed. But these are requests/minor disobediences - and have precisely NOTHING to do with religious apparell. If they want special treatment - then they should get a big fat no. But they're not asking for special treatment, they are asking for the right to wear clothes demanded by their religious beliefs. In any other Western country in the world, that kind of freedom is taken for granted.
Here is what you are saying breaks down to: They want special treatment, they want to change our constitution and school cirriculum - so we took away their headscarfs; That'll teach em muhahahahahahah! The punishment in no way fits the crime - the only way you can link the two is: Its the religious folk pushing this, so we've targetted them. That's textbook discrimination, singling out a group and removing liberties.
I completely respect that you have an opinion, but denying the distortion role of the media is naive. You still havent answered my question: in which newspaper did you see the article you speak about? As i said before, it is only for my personnal interest and not to fuel a flame war in anyway.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I dont support students refusing to take part of the cirriculum, or insisting that certain classes be taught/changed. But these are requests/minor disobediences - and have precisely NOTHING to do with religious apparell. If they want special treatment - then they should get a big fat no. But they're not asking for special treatment, they are asking for the right to wear clothes demanded by their religious beliefs. In any other Western country in the world, that kind of freedom is taken for granted.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Did you read what i wrote? They can always express their religious belief in "private" schools. You have a choice when you put your children in school. If you choose a secular school, sorry but you have to abide to the definition of this word, as did Christians, Jews and Muslims for one century.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Here is what you are saying breaks down to: They want special treatment, they want to change our constitution and school cirriculum - so we took away their headscarfs; That'll teach em muhahahahahahah!<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Again that s what <b>you</b> are seeing. I dont have the time nor the energy to make you see the others points of view of this subject; but you are surely able to find them on your own.
Distortion by the media is easily worked out by debating your ideas in a public forum ie here. That's why I post. I read these articles in The Australian, the only national newspaper in Australia. They merely reported the ban, and didnt seek to argue it either way.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Did you read what i wrote? They can always express their religious belief in "private" schools. You have a choice when you put your children in school. If you choose a secular school, sorry but you have to abide to the definition of this word, as did Christians, Jews and Muslims for one century.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I read exactly what you wrote. You said that a) there were legal and legislative principles enforcing the separation of religion and education b) the French have had this separation for a very long time and c) if they dont like it, then they can go to private schools.
I understand the idea of a secular school. The idea is that you dont take specific religious beliefs and jam it down school kids throats. The idea is NOT that any religious activity or apparell be banned - thats why you guys are just implementing that idea NOW, instead of 100 years ago. This is new legislation - not old.
You've tried to point out the problem here - that some kids are trying to dodge certain classes, that some people want certain activities/changes to cirriculum that have a religious focus, that schools are supposed to be secular - but this new ruling doesnt address ANY of that. Its response seems like wild flailing - "Oh yeah, well how about no! And not just no, we're also gonna ban you from wearing your religious stuff too!" Religious clothing has nothing to do with any of the concerns you raised - which is why I suspect something more insidious behind this.
I suspect that there is a fair dose of racial prejudice here, that the French are afraid of the Muslims because they are a growing ethnic group in France and they are often associated unfairly with terrorists.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Again that s what <b>you</b> are seeing. I dont have the time nor the energy to make you see the others points of view of this subject; but you are surely able to find them on your own.Again that s what <b>you</b> are seeing. I dont have the time nor the energy to make you see the others points of view of this subject; but you are surely able to find them on your own.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Actually - you are the first person I've ever met who actually attempted to defend it....
Thank you <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/smile-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
In answer to your post, i agree that this law is ill-written, and can be subject of various misinterpretations. The goal of this law is to prevent the causes instead of condemning the effect. However you have some misconceptions:
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I suspect that there is a fair dose of racial prejudice here, that the French are afraid of the Muslims because they are a growing ethnic group in France and they are often associated unfairly with terrorists.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
That s not true. France has a long history with North Africa, especially Algeria and Tunisia. Algeria was the last french dominion to be seperated from France in 1954 (as a side note, mostly because of US influence btw), and the blow of this separation is still now a heavy matter for France. France has heavily suffered from terrorist attacks in the previous 20 years, and very few of them originated from Muslim extremists. French dont generally associate Muslims with terrorists as you say.
However, i wont deny that there is in France, as well in most European countries, a growth of racial prejudice. But i really dont see how this badly written law can be endorsed to the influence of some right-wing extremists, given its context. If you pull out the context from this law originated, yes you can see it as a resurgence of racial prejudice, but in its context it isnt.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Actually - you are the first person I've ever met who actually attempted to defend it....<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Perhaps because i am the only people living in France you know speaking of it? For the record i am both from US and France.
This is important for the argument at hand. If the French government said "in these 10 public funded schools there will be 0 religion, but in these 10 public funded schools there will be religeous acceptance" and both were equally funded by government and equally easy for the students to get to - then YES - ban whatever you want in your own public schools.
However, if Muslim family X is paying tax dollars to send their kid to a public school and they are not allowed to wear a head scarf - and their only other option is a "private" school that costs more money, then that is inconsistant on the governments part. Here is why:
The government is making a statement - public schools free for all, state schools, good education - but wait - no religious symbols. If the government is truely separating church and state, then their separation has to be one of <b>not taking a position</b>. Forcing any sort of religiously orriented law is taking a postion against religion and is pulling together church and state - only the church is "no religion".
<b>Just because secularism isn't worshiping God doesn't make it any less of a religion</b>, and forcing that religion onto Muslims (or whoever) is wrong.
As a french person i can assure you this is untrue. France has been a multicultural country since the ~1900s and we all live more or less in harmony <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif' /><!--endemo--> . But to say there is a national fear against muslims... <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/confused-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->I have a question - do these "private" french schools cost more money to attend? Is the "public" school system there free to attend?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Thsi is how it works. Public schools are entirely free to attend (well... you pay taxes that fund them). Private schools demand a small fee. If your child is attending a private school you can ask that the taxes representing school fees be withdrawn.
<!--QuoteBegin--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The government is making a statement - public schools free for all, state schools, good education - but wait - no religious symbols. If the government is truely separating church and state, then their separation has to be one of not taking a position. Forcing any sort of religiously orriented law is taking a postion against religion and is pulling together church and state - only the church is "no religion".
Just because secularism isn't worshiping God doesn't make it any less of a religion, and forcing that religion onto Muslims (or whoever) is wrong.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I don't quite get what you wanted to say. French schools have been secular since 3rd republic, what that generates to is one should not put to light their religion. Not that religions are banned or a law against religion. Just that you should not show your religion in class. This was not respected, so it had to become a law.
It is true that the main "victims" of this law are muslim girls but the law isn't directed to them only. I know some muslims girls which don't wear a headscarf and are still strong believers of their religion. Forcing people to not show their religious beliefs in schools is not forcing them to quit their religion nor push them aside.
Something that you just may not understand, in france we believe in equality and putting kids all at the same level, regardless of their religion, is the role of a secular school. If there are exeption to this, where is the equality?
Sorry if these wear answered before <!--emo&:(--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html//emoticons/sad-fix.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='sad-fix.gif' /><!--endemo-->
This is exactly the problem. As one who is religious, I answer to a higher power than the french government. I answer to God.
Now, if I were a Muslim (which I am not - but I must stand for all beliefs equally in this argument) and God requires that I wear a headscarf, I obey God, not the French governmet.
I am a Christian. If God requires that I speak the gospel to my "neighbor" (schoolmate / teacher) and the French government tells me I can't, who do I answer to? How would I as a student ask my teacher to teach creation? How could I get into a meaningful debate about morality, or politics, or anything else if I am force (by law) to disreagard religion?
So there is the difference. To be secular / accepting of all religions (as a government) is one thing, to persecute / outlaw religion is another.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><div class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But forcing them to uncover their heads is forcing them to choose between their education and cultural (/religious, but that's another debate) practices.
I find this whole issue interesting because it points out the diffrences between nations. If the same law was passed in the US the nation would grind to a halt as the entire population clogged all public areas in protest. In France this law is supported by (last I heard) something like 70% of the people.
I talked about this thread to a few friends (mainly jewish and muslim people) and they all agreed to say that the internationnal perception of this law is completly faulted.
So i shall repeat the reason of this law as clearly as i can.
In france, in a state school, religion mustn't intervene with education. Education musn't be biased in any way, may it be in a christian, jewish, muslim or any other religious way. It doesn't mean we can't talk about religion nor be religious, its just that religion is a personnal matter and has no means in the state's provided education.
So it was decided that when a child attends to school, he should not show his religion in any way. He/she can be any religion he/she wants or is educated to be by his familly, but it is not it's place in the state schools.
It is a fact that the muslim community is growing in france and they started to have several demands. The community leaders asked that the children be allowed to quit class at praying times. This was granted. Then that the school cantines serve only "purified" meat. This was also granted. Then that all classes stop at prayer times and that the children had a reserved room for praying, and classes restart once praying is finished.
How can one explain all this in a secular school? So the government decided it was enough and that things had to be put back in place. So this law was set, saying that state school is a secular place and should stay that way.
As a christian this is something i was always told to respect. I was always told to hide away my cross at school and to keep it hiden. Why shoudn't others that come to our country not have to respect our traditions? This is why this law is greatly supported, its because we have always been taught to not show your religion in school, so we find it normal.
<b>As it wasn't respected, the government deciced it had to become a law instead of just an agreement.</b>
And another thing, god never said anything about women having to wear headscarfs...
-----------------
And this is more related to the very first post. I read an article on the two hostages. At present all great internationnal muslim leaders (even the number 2 of al-quaida i heard) asked the "terrorists" to free the hostages, that (as i've explained) it's a french matter concerning our traditions and it must not have any internationnal effect as one outside france will surely not understand. So i guess they have been freed.
For the record, I wouldn't support this law at all, but I can fully understand why the French goverment decided to put it into place.
You made a decent argument and I have a little more respect for France's decision. However, I hope most French don't have the same attitude you expressed in the last comment. Its not your nor anyone else's place to judge the validity of people beliefs and values on the basis of whether they come from cultural or religious sources.
It doesn't really matter what the intent of the law is, the effect if it's enforced is certainly persecution.
Allow me to lay it out like this.<ul><li>In some sects of Islam, women must wear headscarves in order to be muslim.</li><li>In order to wear said headscarves, students must pay money to go to school.</li><li>Therefore this law, in effect, imposes a tax on muslims.</li></ul>q. e. d.