Will France cave into terrorists?
- Thread starter rudder
- Start date
Define "cave in." The decision about head scarves was a bad one. I don't think reversing that decision is necessarily "caving in."
i don't think they will reverse the decission and i view it as a good one.
it is mainly directed at headscarves, but it includes banning ALL religious symbols from public school. that's a good thing.
i think that any Islamic attack on France will be "justified" as an attempt to gain freedom of religion.
- Nov 9, 2000
- 19,441
- 86
- 91
In cave in, I mean, if there is a terrorist attack will the first thing that the French government will do is reverse the head scarf ban. They seemed adamant that this thing pass. There has been no large scale public outcry that is passed (or I could have missed it). So if the muslim terrorist community keeps writing threatening letters will they reverse their decision based on those threats.
Define for me what freedon of religion is for you? They are fvcking free to wear whatever they want in public. The only place they are banning it from is PUBLIC SCHOOLS.
got it? it's not hard, really.
My religion says I should bring a gun to school...Should I be allowed to do that? No, I shouldn't. Keep religion out of schools.
a few rules;
1. when beothch slaps become ineffective or obviously inappropriate counter measures french men run for their women to protect them.
2. if it goose marches at all competently they know from experience what to do...
3. if it comes from anyother neighbouring country, they know what to do...
4. if they get defeated at any turn of events and victory looks uncertain, its all over bar the mongoose costumes.
you are kidding right? are you joking or are you honestly that ignorant? Because i get the feeling you actually agree with me, but just forgot the <sarcasm></sarcasm> tags.
in case you are serious:
would you be kind enough to explain how it is that head-scarf is the same thing as gun?
Tell me, by what right ANY government's should be allowed to regulate the religious behavior of people that does no harm?
they are not required to attend public schools. if they so wish they can attend private schools which have different policies.
the state however does not want to promote any religion.
this started as a safety issue also. the girls were wearing the headscarf in chemistry classes/labs and it posed a danger in cause they caught on fire, etc...
DivideBYZero
Lifer
- May 18, 2001
- 24,117
- 2
- 0
they are not required to attend public schools, there are also private schools
there goes your logic
The fact that half the French muslims and around 70-80% of french citizens supported the ban seems to have go over the heads of many here.
Wow, are you serious?
Imagine trying to make that argument in the US...I don't think it would go over very well
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Wow, are you serious?
Imagine trying to make that argument in the US...I don't think it would go over very well
what is wrong with my logic???
the French govt. wants its public schools to be secular just like we think that teaching creationism as a valid science in schools is ridiculous
Their is a VERY big difference between not promoting a religion * and keeping people from following their religion **Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Wow, are you serious?
Imagine trying to make that argument in the US...I don't think it would go over very well
what is wrong with my logic???
the French govt. wants its public schools to be secular just like we think that teaching creationism as a valid science in schools is ridiculous
private schools and home schooling have major costs, public education is free; as in every civilized country the children are required to be schooled, so if you are a poor Muslim girl you have no choice but to have your religious freedom taken from you.
*ie not teaching creationism
**ie not allowing a cross, head-scarf, or Yahmkah(sp) to be warn by a child
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Their is a VERY big difference between not promoting a religion * and keeping people from following their religion **Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Wow, are you serious?
Imagine trying to make that argument in the US...I don't think it would go over very well
what is wrong with my logic???
the French govt. wants its public schools to be secular just like we think that teaching creationism as a valid science in schools is ridiculous
private schools and home schooling have major costs, public education is free; as in every civilized country the children are required to be schooled, so if you are a poor Muslim girl you have no choice but to have your religious freedom taken from you.
*ie not teaching creationism
**ie not allowing a cross, head-scarf, or Yahmkah(sp) to be warn by a child
Man, you really have problems understanding.
Here it is again, try to follow:
They ARE NOT keeping people from following their religion. They are telling people not to display their religion in STATE institutions.
It's against their religion to not ware the head-scarf while in public; Their religion requires that they ware the head-scarf; It's a requirement that they not follow their religion that the head-scarf isn't allowed;Originally posted by: InfectedMushroom
Originally posted by: LordMagnusKain
Their is a VERY big difference between not promoting a religion * and keeping people from following their religion **Originally posted by: freegeeks
Originally posted by: b0mbrman
Wow, are you serious?
Imagine trying to make that argument in the US...I don't think it would go over very well
what is wrong with my logic???
the French govt. wants its public schools to be secular just like we think that teaching creationism as a valid science in schools is ridiculous
private schools and home schooling have major costs, public education is free; as in every civilized country the children are required to be schooled, so if you are a poor Muslim girl you have no choice but to have your religious freedom taken from you.
*ie not teaching creationism
**ie not allowing a cross, head-scarf, or Yahmkah(sp) to be warn by a child
Man, you really have problems understanding.
Here it is again, try to follow:
They ARE NOT keeping people from following their religion. They are telling people not to display their religion in STATE institutions.
it's a state institution that they are required to go to;
When did it become OK to keep people from doing what their religion peacefully requires of them while in a government building?
It's being dis-allowed because it's religious, not for any practical reason, but to keep people from following their religion.
One may not like religion, but it's a human-Rights violation to keep them from practicing their religion when it hurts no one.
So back to the US parallel. How well do you think a headscarf ban would go over in the US?
Do you think we're wrong as a country because there are schools that don't ban headscarves? And would you vote for a law to ban headscarves in public schools here?
You should keep context in mind. The ban would not fly in the US because its not that secular of a country. It would not fly in Canada because freedom of religion is one of the most paramount freedoms here (you remember that woman in florida that wanted to wear a burqa on her driver's licence photo, but was not allowed? In Canada, they allow these things...). France however takes their secularity very seriously, to the point where its a part of their national motto (the Laicite part). In their case, there is nothing unconstitutional about the ban, because secularism, along with freedom and equality, is paramount there.
To give you another example, there is no affirmative action/positive discrimination in France because it violates another one of their principles, equality (also part of their motto).
Also, the US doesn't have a massive influx of Muslims who are slow to adopt to French society (language and other aspects). These Muslims bring along extremists who defame synagogues and the like, and then Americans whine about those anti-semitic Euros. Somewhat similar to the Mexican influx in the US, except Mexicans aren't torching synagogues, aren't writing extremist-Bin Laden-praising newspapers, often aren't obviously immigrants (no headscarves etc.), and Mexicans are also concentrated in certain areas, industries, farm fields, etc (out of site, out of mind in some aspects). Maybe the US is simply more tolerant. But it seems that a major part of this ban is about perserving "French culture" in the face of massive immigration of a significantly different society.
Zephyr
It is hard to judge a society that's watching itself crumble from within because of mas-migration and a lack of social adaptation.. but i still believe in regards to this:
freedom of religious expression is a basic human right, to go against this IS a violation of our basic human rights.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter