Finally something to agree with Chirac about

[Sims2789]

thats wrong. you should organize a petition against the government. if they made me pray, i'd walk out of school.

 

[Oruc]

well it was in junior school, and i cant remember if i had to pray in Secondary school now, wasnt paying much attention

 

[Yago]

That is so dam weird. I wanted to check the spelling of "laicism" and typed it (in the version as I write it now) into the net-English dictionary I use.

Nothing. Nada. Rien.

Next try.

Same. A void where "laicism" should be.

Tool my school dictionary of contempary English.

Nothing. Nada. Rien.

While I've found some sides in English using the word "laicism", the concept didn't even made it into the usual English dicitonary.

Astonishing. Secularism seems to be a complete alien subjet in the land under the she-defender of the faith.

 

[Oruc]

what you talking about Yago?

 

[Yago]

Secularism, in its characteristic Western form, is tantamount to the idea that religion and state are different and separable entities.(8) It is based on the recognition that "religion is a subject about which human beings hold strong yet divergent opinions." "It simply asserts that people can differ on this subject while remaining citizens of the same state, and that they can do so more easily if the state as such professes no opinion on the matter." (9) However, secularism is more than just a political concept. "It is also a philosophy of life, and its ideal is progress in human life in the present world, irrespective of man's religion, sect, caste, color, etc."(10)

Iv'e found something. I'm still surprised, that it wasn't easy.

I'm completly behind laicism. Religion has nothing lost in public schools, except of course when the different religions are presented as object of studies. Religious symbols shouldn't be found in place, made mandatory by the state to visit.

http://faculty.maxwell.syr.edu/mborouje/IslamSecularized.html

 

[Benderino]

Originally posted by Hitro

You don't live in Western Europe, right?

And I certainly wouldn't want an involvement of religion with the state as it is in the U.S. (though we have our share of that, too, unfortunately).

How do you mean, Hitro?

Can you give examples of de-secularization in Germany (or elsewhere, if possible)?

 

[cgannon64]

Originally posted by Akka
What if my religion ask me to be naked ? Should school allow me to go into class naked ? Hey, I'm not violating anyone's right with it !

They are two different things. There has always been a law against nakedness, but now they are specifically making a law with the intent of changing the behavior of a religious person. It would be as if nakedness was socially acceptable and done by all people of a religion, and then they made the law to make those people like everyone else.

Religion has nothing to do in school. Religion is personnal, and should be kept personnal. Religion is a PERSONNAL link between a man and his God. Or a PERSONNAL opinion that god is a concept and he doesn't exist.
If they are required to wear symbols, they can. They are just required to not being overly obvious, not being claiming "I'm from this religion !". No publicity for controversial and personnal subjects (politics and religion) displayed in school. I think it's normal and I even think it's great.

But shouldn't you be allowed freedom of expression?

Remember they're even going to ban yamicas. How is that overly obvious?

BTW I think they should go ask the kids if they mind girls wearing veils in the school. Are they really offended?

The damn breaurocrats should stop imposing their opinions on the students and assuming they're offended by girls wearing the veil, or that they purposely isolate the girls who wear the veil. (Which is a greater problem of prejudice which won't be solved this easily.)

 

[Andrewz]

They are two different things. There has always been a law against nakedness, but now they are specifically making a law with the intent of changing the behavior of a religious person. It would be as if nakedness was socially acceptable and done by all people of a religion, and then they made the law to make those people like everyone else.

That's actually what you didn't catch. It has always worked this way in France. You've never seen any girls allowed to wear the veil except in very few schools or in private schools. As Marla Singer, Akka, and Kinniken explained to us about a million times, the law is the same than in 1905. The only thing changing is the responsibility of the decision which was before the one of the principal and which is now guaranteed by a law and not a blurred text who weren't accurate about what symbols were banned. Thus, this argument isn't a good one.

But shouldn't you be allowed freedom of expression?

Remember they're even going to ban yamicas. How is that overly obvious?

According to what Marla Singer told me. Jewish authorities agree with the law... and she also told me on pm she was jewish... (hope she won't be pissed off if I'm saying so in public... but I wondered why she would... )

 

[Andrewz]

Actually I wasn't that far from reality when I said it was a good reason for Bush to declare war to France ! I've just heard on the radio that Bush's Administration is officialy severly condemning the new French law.

 

[Marla_Singer]

According to what Marla Singer told me. Jewish authorities agree with the law... and she also told me on pm she was jewish... (hope she won't be pissed off if I'm saying so in public... but I wondered why she would... )

How can you denounce me like that I feel betrayed !!

No, seriously, I just consider my own beliefs shouldn't be an argument to advance.

 

[Hitro]

Originally posted by Benderino
How do you mean, Hitro?

Can you give examples of de-secularization in Germany (or elsewhere, if possible)?

Well, very obvious interferences of religion with the state are the numerous religious (specifically Christian) holidays in the country.
Except for Unification Day (the national holiday) and the 1st of May (Labour Day of the Worker's movement) all holidays are Christian (Easter, Christmas, Pentecost, etc.), while there are no official holidays of other religions, nor do people of other or no faiths have the choice of working at those days and taken a holiday when they need or want it.
Then the two main churches (the Catholic church and the Evangelical/Lutheran church) can collect taxes via the state, which is a serious infringement in my view. Furthermore other religious groups can't do that.
There are also some comparably minor advantages in terms of taxes and the general status compared with secular organizations, but especially the tax collecting is a major thing.

 

[Marla_Singer]

Just tell me Hitro, when do you sleep ?

If you ask me the same question, I'll just answer you : never.

 

[Hitro]

Well, you already answered your question.

I don't let my life be dictated by something like a steady biorhythm.

 

[Benderino]

Wow, the Church collects a proportion of the taxes accumulated? That's ridiculous. I now see what you mean. The holiday thing kind of occurs here too, since we get Good Friday off--or they just call it a "non-attendence day" but not a "no school" day. Taxes, geez. That's a big deal, if you ask me.

 

[Mr. Cackle]

Note how the article says

".... skullcaps and LARGE crosses will also fall under this ban" First this, next stop Hitler.