Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
User Journal

Journal FroMan's Journal: Secularism 15

Journal by FroMan

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105484,00.html
http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1008422.htm

Freedom or racism, France seems to be choosing racism.

France, in its effort to curb religious fundementalism is going to ban Islamic head scarves, Jewish skull caps and crucifixes at public schools. While it seems in the write-ups that I have read so far it is a purely racist reason behind this action, that is go curb Islamic fundementalism in France. I know that if I were a Muslim I would be seriously offended.

But, beyond that, is it the states job to control religion? I certainly say not, just as our founding fathers said here in the US. The bill of rights says specifically that congress shall make no law pertaining to religion, that has been misrepresented now by the courts to mean that the government may not allow its employees to even wear religious articles. In France though, it is not just the folks working in the state schools, it is the students themselves that cannot wear religious articles.

What we have here is a serious infraction upon a human right to practice their own religion. We have the state saying that its citizens cannot be Muslim, Jewish, or Christian at school. However, as any person who is religious will tell you, church is not Sunday morning, church is part of your entire life, it affects how you live, how you treat others, what you do, your morality, in short, every aspect of your life is affected by your religion.

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Secularism More

Secularism

Comments Filter:
  • France, in its effort to curb religious fundementalism is going to ban Islamic head scarves, Jewish skull caps and crucifixes at public schools. While it seems in the write-ups that I have read so far it is a purely racist reason behind this action, that is go curb Islamic fundementalism in France. I know that if I were a Muslim I would be seriously offended.

    An opposition to Islamic Fundamentalism isn't racist. And, seeing as how caps and crosses are getting tossed, it seems that, even if the new law is
    • Is the headscarf not a religious requirement for specific sects of Islam? As a turban is for Sikhs, and certain headcoverings for orthodox or Haisidic Jews. So, then, I could wear a Yarmulke to a French school, as long as I am not Jewish? A burqa, if I am not Muslim? A cross tattoo on my forehead, if I am not Christian? Seems a little odd to me. If they are forbidding the overt practice of religion in certain venues, then they should just say that. If they are forbidding specific practices, then I wo
    • An opposition to Islamic Fundamentalism isn't racist. And, seeing as how caps and crosses are getting tossed, it seems that, even if the new law is brought about by ethinic discrimination, its form won't be.

      As BW responds to UT below, note that it is specifically targeted to a religion that is predominately arabic. So, while it is not "racist" per-se, it is in effect. It would be like outlawing burritos in texas, not necessarily anti-mexican, but certainly it will be percieved that way.

      Even if the law
      • Does that make the law just, simpley because it does not take a single group? Certainly not.

        Oh, I'm not saying that the law's just. I'm just arguing that it's injust because it's wrong-stupid, not wrong-infringing-on-rights.

        (A good paralell to this is Germany outlawing the swatzica. Stupid, wrongheaded, but not a tragic abridgement of right deserving of revolution.)

        Islam I believe does have its rules of how covered a woman must be and such. Judaism (almost wrote jedism) does not as far as I know, but

  • Racism? (Score:1, Flamebait)

    by Uma Thurman ( 623807 )
    You're so stupid that you don't even know what racism is.

    Just a hint for you: religious faith != race, dumbass.

    • Re:Racism? (Score:2, Insightful)

      by blackwidowb ( 593965 )
      I know, I know, biting for the troll, but.... At least for Jews and Arabs, faith and race are very much linked. Yes, there are people who are not of Jewish decent who are Jews and people who are not of Arabic decent who are Muslim, but both of those religions are very much intermingled with their races. I agree that discrimination may have been a better word here, but that doesn't mean racism is totally out of the picture. Sort of like the "fact" that it could still be considered racism when liberals ar
      • Exactly.

        Gosh, that is simpley brilliant. Someone who understands that.

        Hey, did you want to go out for dinner tonight, like a date? ;-)

        Maybe afterwords I have some friends heading out to a kareoke (sp?) place, maybe you could come along for that too.
        • Wow, by some strange coincidence, I was already planning on doing this tonight! It's like you can read my mind or something.

          LOL

        • Re:Racism? (Score:1, Flamebait)

          by Uma Thurman ( 623807 )
          You still don't understand what race is at all, you ignorant slut. Arabs are caucasian. Jews are usually caucasian or negro. Christians are Caucasian, Negro, or Oriental. Get it moron?

          Being a particular ethnicity is not the same as being a particular race.

          • Re:Racism? (Score:2, Funny)

            by FroMan ( 111520 )
            race [reference.com]

            Bzzt. Wrong. The second entry of the first definition will do you some good. If you are going to troll, do better than this. I could setup a script to be more annoying than you.

            Are we to recind our comment from before about only saying the truth?
            • Your definition is better than mine then? You know nothing of definitions, you traitor. You get your definitions from Ann Coulter.

              (One wonders how long you will continue to say "Thank you sir, may I have another!" as I spank your little bottom.)
  • The quote is

    "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the government for a redress of grievances."

    For those seeking the text of the Constitution or its amendments, check out

    The US Constitution [house.gov]
    The Ammendments [house.gov]

    I always wondered what exactly the term "respecting" as used here was meant to mean. Not what modem cultu

    • respecting [reference.com]

      The "or prohibiting the free exercise thereof;" is the part that I am particularly interested in with this JE.

      You see, how I choose to practice my religion is up to me. If it includes wearing a cross or something, the the state has no right to tell me I cannot so long as I am not infringing upon another person's rights. Now, there will be people who argue that they have a right not to be offended by my outward display of religiousness. Here is the issue, who's right supercedes the other? W
  • Interesting web link:
    http://www.au.org/myths.htm [au.org]
    Americans United For Separation of Church and State

    Not saying that I support, or am against what these people have to say, but just putting it out there.

Slashdot Top Deals

Always leave room to add an explanation if it doesn't work out.

Close