[helene_t]

Winstonm, on Jun 6 2009, 04:41 PM, said:

Quote

This is not about religious symbols. It is about being able to socially interact with other kids. It is about kids who do not necessarily choose to wear such clothing but are being often forced to do so by their family.

I don't know but suggest that if you questioned the families they would say it is very much about religious observations.

Sure, but that's irrelevant. We have laws against child abuse. "My religion commands me to abuse my children" is no better excuse for crime than "my card game commands me to rob banks".

I would go further than the French laws. Parents who prevent their children from socializing with other kids, who prevent them from receiving education or health care, or who have their genitals mutilized, should be put in prison and should not be allowed to raise children.

And whether they use superstition, tribal peer pressure, ancient traditions or something else as an excuse for their criminal behavior ought to be irrelevant.

[awm]

You are mis-stating the French ban on religious apparel, which in fact bans all such items including head scarves, yarmulkes, crosses, etc. It's relatively easy to find this out from a web search.

There are not a lot of people wearing burqas in France, and those who are there probably don't send their kids to public (coed!) schools regardless.

[helene_t]

tx Adam. That's a different discussion, then.

[blackshoe]

"The ban is designed to maintain France's tradition of strictly separating state and religion." From an article I googled.

As the article suggests the ban applies to wearing these things in schools (as opposed to say, in France), perhaps this is an argument against state run schools.

IAC, there's a difference between schools actively supporting a particular religion, and allowing personal self-expression by students.

Note: I am not suggesting that I support the custom of clothing women in burkas, or the coercion by parental or peer pressure of young women who don't want to wear them. Quite the opposite, in fact. But if a person wants to wear the damn thing, I don't think the state (any state, matter of a general principle) has a right to tell her she can't, just as I believe no state (or for that matter, religion) has a right to tell her she must.

[Winstonm]

helene_t, on Jun 6 2009, 02:14 PM, said:

Winstonm, on Jun 6 2009, 04:41 PM, said:

Quote

This is not about religious symbols. It is about being able to socially interact with other kids. It is about kids who do not necessarily choose to wear such clothing but are being often forced to do so by their family.

I don't know but suggest that if you questioned the families they would say it is very much about religious observations.

Sure, but that's irrelevant. We have laws against child abuse. "My religion commands me to abuse my children" is no better excuse for crime than "my card game commands me to rob banks".

I would go further than the French laws. Parents who prevent their children from socializing with other kids, who prevent them from receiving education or health care, or who have their genitals mutilized, should be put in prison and should not be allowed to raise children.

And whether they use superstition, tribal peer pressure, ancient traditions or something else as an excuse for their criminal behavior ought to be irrelevant.

Perhaps you misunderstand my position - I am only strongly against this concept if it singles out a particular group and a particular custom.

Forcing fundamental religious beliefs onto progeny is a form of abuse in its own right.

[helene_t]

Winstonm, on Jun 7 2009, 03:37 AM, said:

Perhaps you misunderstand my position - I am only strongly against this concept if it singles out a particular group and a particular custom.

Forcing fundamental religious beliefs onto progeny is a form of abuse in its own right.

Thanks.

My comment turned out not to be relevant to the French situation, as that is a law against religious display, not a law against child abuse. My bad.

In the Netherlands there has been a discussion about whether the laws against wearing masks to avoid identification should also apply to burkas, and whether women who insist on wearing burkas on job interviews should lose their right to unemployment benefits. Here it is a question of discrimination in favor of religion rather than discrimination against religion. FWIW I am strongly against both kinds of discrimination. Covering one's head may or may not under specific circumstances be illegal or lead to loss of certain rights, but whether one does it for religious reasons, just for fun, or whatever (I would be OK with an exception for valid medical reasons) ought to be irrelevant.