- Joined
- Feb 4, 2005
- Messages
- 3,579
- Reaction score
- 980
- Location
- European Union
- Gender
- Female
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Urethra Franklin said:The British courts have ruled that a moslem girl was discriminated against in being asked to remove her Islamic outfit, and that she has a right to attend school veiled.
Fundamental difference here between the British and French approaches to 'equality'
Britain: allow all to display their crucifixes, kippas, headscarves, turbans etc.
France: no religious symbols in schools, symbols of christianity included.
Who's right? Either? Both? Neither?
vauge said:. Everyone should have the right to freedom of religion.
vauge said:It would seem that France, like many states in the US, is muting freedom of expression in schools.
How is that a good thing?
Urethra Franklin said:Quite the contrary.
The most fervent supporters of the ban on religious symbols in French schools are moslem women.
Young girls who have the veil forced upon them by fathers and brothers get "time off" when they go to school. Given what the veil represents, how do you give a young girl a sense of worth and the feeling that she's equal if she can't even show her face? Many of these girls, when interviewed, say they feel they can express themselves MORE freely without the veil - especially in classes where it matters (philosophy, political science, sociology etc). Unlike where I went to school, French kids get philosophy classes in place of religious indoctrination (which is what I had). They are taught to think for themselves, analyse and debate. I can't speak for the US states you allude to, but if you think French schools don't allow the kids to express themselves, you've been watching too much Fox news. Girls who want to cover up can do it the minute they leave the school gate. And they don't get beaten up for being moslem, as happened to US moslems after 9/11.
Urethra Franklin said:I think perhaps they're both right according to their situation, but I prefer the philosophy of the French secular state.
So you would agree with the teaching of Religious History? :duel ~~~Naughty Nurse said:I, too, would prefer a secular state. I think comparative religion should be taught as an academic subject, as religion is (sadly) still a major force in the world. But I disagree with holding religious services in state schools.
There is another advantage to transforming the UK into a secular state: we'd have to get rid of our main parasites, AKA the Royal Family!
I do believe in religious freedom, but don't think the state should promote religion in any way.
gordontravels said:So you would agree with the teaching of Religious History? :duel ~~~
Excellent! Let's kick the butts of those that disagree :duel ~~~Naughty Nurse said:Yes, if it was treated as an objective academic subject and included all of the world's major religions. I don't think you can look at history without looking at religion as part of that history.
gordontravels said:If a Muslim father directs his own daughter to wear a veil, are you the one to tell her to go against her father's wishes? If the girl doesn't want to wear the veil, are you the one to tell her it's alright? Are you the father, government or the god (not capitalized for obvious reasons).
Contrarian said:There are fundamental basis which must be adhered to when looking at this question. As someone stated, if Great Britain is truely an Anglican nation they can ascribe the same religious freedoms that might be available in Tehran. Since the Queen, as the head of the Church of England (geez, you gotta love the power trip!) theoretically call the shots for their subjects. She can say, if you don't like my religion... get out (or follow that good ol' fashioned Christian love and kill 'em).
The French, while a mystery to me (great food and wine... the rest?) have chosen to recognize that they are a secular DEMOCRACY, which means an absolute seperation of church and state (W hasn't figured that one out yet). So, if you want to go to their tax payer funded schools, you need to keep your religious artifacts at home. If you want to wear a veil... go to a Muslin school.
While people like Vauge advocate allowing everyone to express their religiousity in public, they really mean, if it happens to conform with their accepted ideas of faith. It might get alittle messy if a Haitian VooDoo worshipper decides to exercise his rights by dragging a decapitated bleeding rooster to class... or I might have caused a stir if I brought a Viking broad sword to school with a flaggon of Aquavit to celebrate the glory of Odin. I have my rights just like the cross wearing, kippa topped, veil drapped apostates of the other fairy tales. In an environment of religious "freedom" everyones bull sh*t is equal... no? If they can display their trinkets... so can everyone else. Therefore, the only reasonable thing to do, is stop everyone from strutting there stuff while learning to read and write on the dime of the public. If that isn't acceptable, pay tuition at a religious school.
Urethra Franklin said:And they said the perfect man didn't exist...........
Contrarian said:While people like Vauge advocate allowing everyone to express their religiousity in public, they really mean, if it happens to conform with their accepted ideas of faith. It might get alittle messy if a Haitian VooDoo worshipper decides to exercise his rights by dragging a decapitated bleeding rooster to class... or I might have caused a stir if I brought a Viking broad sword to school with a flaggon of Aquavit to celebrate the glory of Odin.
vauge said:I appreciate the kind thoughts of guessing what I think, but it is a little off. Sure I am a Chirstian and make no bones about it. But, I am also no Jesus freak. If asked, I say what I believe and go my way.
This is exactly my point.. you have adapted a reasonable code of behavior that conforms to societal norms. But what if your religion required you do something outside the "norm"? I can think of quite a few real zingers but I will reserve it to the Mormons practice of poligamy, which our government forced them to give up in return for statehood. How does a society that promotes religious freedom allow all the variations?
"The two examples you cited are illegal in public schools. It is illegal to bring a dead animal to school, as well it is illegal to bring a weapon. As such, it would be illegal to bring a cross that is sharpened to a point that could be used as a weapon."
It is also illegal to cover your face in drivers license photos, but Muslims have gone to court to preseve that "religious freedom". For a devout believer of VooDoo, they must make a blood sacrifice to avoid hell and damnation (pretty scary stuff for them). And for believers of the ancient religion of Asatru (Norse Paganism), the sword is not a weapon but a religious necessity because if they die without a sword in their hands they lose the opportunity of going to Valhalla (heaven) forever. As I said, people of Judeo-Christian faith are supportive of religious expression as long as it conforms with their definition of "normality".
"I have no issues if someone wanted to wear a shirt that said: "I [heart] voodoo" or "I [heart] Odin" or "I [heart] Allah". As well, many Americans would not. But, as soon as it says "I [heart] Jesus" some increadible anti-religious fanaticism erupts here in the US. Why?"
I have no issue either. I applaud the expression of self. Everyone should be proud of who they are. I consider myself an aggressive non-believer, but I respect everyone freedom to worship Wal Mart if they want. However, I can understand WHY the "fanatics" as you call them, reacting the way they do. If you happen to be a non believer in this country.. an Atheist, you are treated like a derranged leper. I can speak from personal experience. People who I've known for years (and never spoke of religious beliefs etc) found out that I was not of their belief system... you could visibly see the recoil. Now I know what it would be like to announce you were gay! In addition, (not to waste your time... I'm sorry for the length) there is no chance in hell, that an announced Athiest in this country could get elected to office, which is not true of any other race, gender, religion or sexual orientation. Think about why they are ****ed?
"My wife is a teacher and has allowed some of her Muslim kids to pray in her room (between class). I have no issues with this at all. I actully think that it is awesome that she allows them to fulfill thier religious expectations to thier almighty in her classroom when it is available and not during a class."
I applaud her... but how far would she let that go? Some African religions require young boys to masturbate daily as they transition to manhood... I doubt she would respect their religious rights. Think about it.
Express your religion all that is desired, but do not expect or attempt to force me into believing or accepting that your philosophy is true. That goes for Christians and athiests as well.
gordontravels said:Then we are in agreement. Fear of even the teaching of religion is paranoia at its heights. My agreement stems from knowing how deeply seated religion is; not only in the vast numbers of our human counterparts but, in the governments and even businesses of the world. I can see the history being taught without the indoctrination.
Some of my best friends send their children to religious schools where that indoctrination along with dress codes and strict codes of conduct are in effect and enforced. Of all the people I know, it is the children that are enrolled in these religious schools or the children from the bible belt families that are the best behaved and do the best in school. I do not think this coincidence.
Although I don't think the simple teaching of Religious History would improve our MTV generation nor their peer morals I, at the very least, think it would show them the organization of religious thought and deed; the good graces of people as well as the use of religion as a weapon. My belief is that God is on humanity's side and at least understand religions and their origins and actions can't hurt the child or young adult :duel ~~~
Contrarian said:I agee that everyone should understand the history and genesis of religion since it is the single largest influence for societal behavior (both good and EVIL) in the history of mankind, but a truly objective academic presentation is impossible.
Naughty Nurse said:We did Religious Education when I was at scholl.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?