Bulletin Board of Bad Behavior

i know it sounds smug, this coming from me, and to be honest, it was not only the french who were right about iraq. it was pax acidus who was right, the germans, me, -- what the hell, the majority of people, world-wide, knew there was no trusting the bush regime on its war path.


http://www.thewe.cc/contents/more/archi ... ht.htm[url]

http://seeschloss.net/usa/[url]


right?[/url]

fucking mis-posted links. just copy and paste and remove all that [url] stuff, sorry

The French confuse me. First they act apalled at the US an Britain for our warmongering and seeming inability to let the Middle East alone, and now they introduce legislation in their own country that smacks of Fascism. They have outlawed all religious symbols in public schools and government areas. This is apparently targeted at Muslims especially, and the wearing of the traditional head scarfs by Muslim women.

I'm not a big fan of organized religion, but I certainly don't think governments ought to be legislating how people express their beliefs. What's up with France being so strict about theses ymbols. It seems to be stirring up more anger among the Muslims there(a large percentage of people, I think), and marring France's reputation as a "live and let live" type place.

Oppression, not just for the Bush Regime anymore.

the french have a strict policy of anti-clericalism. no symbols of religion allowed in state schools. no mixing of state and religion. it's in their constitution.

i think headscarves are a symbol of islam's oppression of women. there is nothing in the koran that says women need to wear them.

on balance, if i had to weigh the importance of various human rights, and various legal principles, i'd say freedom of religion is pretty important; anti-clericalism is even more important; and the right to wear a headscarf in school is pretty negligable.

I remember back in the early 90's the French banned the burka and veils in public schools and someone tried to wear one anyway and she got kicked out of school.

This is not a new policy.

The French feel that this type of dress is demeaning to women. Girls cannot wear garments that cover their face because it is a distraction and demeaning to women in genral. Just like girls cannot go topless because it is a distraction to other students and demeaning to women in general.

What is so hard to understand about that?

The French are right again.

Thank god we have the French to tell us what is right and what is wrong. Nothing like imposing western values on the world. VIVA LA FRANCE!!!

Call me a western capitalist pigsloth, but burkas suck. It has nothing to do with east or west. It has to do with oppression of femininity.

of course it does, I'm not in favor of anyhting that covers up women, or certainly not in favor of anything that oppresses them, or anyone else, but I also don't approve of over legislating morality of tradition.

It is not a governments place to tell it's citizens what are appropriate or inappropriate rituals or observations of their religious beliefs. As far as I know, Muslims' aren't evangelical...they aren't trying to convert the French, or anyone else to their way of thinking or worshiping. Sure, the extremists try to kill anyone who they consider infidels, but they aren't the ones we're talking about here. The French muslim women should have the ability to say no to wearing the burkas if they wish, but they should also be able to wear them if they believe in it.

In this case, the French are right...wing.

Well considering how flimsy the doctrine of separation of church and state is here, I find it interesting that there's this country that has gone to such great lengths to draw that line and be committed to non-biased secularism. I also think they have felt pressure to take a stand because they see a certain kind of muslim fundamentalism creeping up within their society. The extremists are testing them. My first reaction upon reading this was how ridiculous it would be for a muslim to come to France from a predominantly muslim country and then complain because they can't wear a head scarf in a public school or don't want to have teachers of the opposite sex. Don't like it? Go home. You can't have the benefits of western society and still expect everything to go according to the strict muslim code of behavior.

Perhaps you are right, Mark, but "the benefits of western society" aren't really very different from their homelands if the government tells them what they can and can not wear.

here's a new one: I just heard that he French government is attempting to ban Red Bull. Was this a joke? If it is serious, how can that be? And will Paxacidians abandon their Francophility? (is that a word?)

It sounds to me like they are getting regulation happy over there, legislating on religious traditions, and now soft drinks.

Lets not forget that although the religious symbols law is meant toward Muslim headscarves, it also encompasses yamicas and turbans, or crosses, or any other overt religious symbol.

As I have said, I am not a big fan of organized religion in general, but I also don't like Big Brother type bureaucracies that tell people what to wear or drink. It soesn't sound like the type of thing most people here would support either, so I'm surprised that it seems some of you seem to. If these things were happening in America (and similar things have, recently), you would all be crying out for human rights and freedoms.

this is turning into a thoroughly sterile discussion. the matter of clothing in schools is a legal matter and not a political or philosophical one.

the french constitution is very strict about the separaration of church and state. thus, there is little real discussion on whether religious symbols should be allowed in public school -- there is simply no way to allow then without going against the constitution. muslim fundamentalists are free to send their children to private schools. (i am 100% with marky on this one, as usual, in asking: why live in france if you want to live as a muslim fundamentalist?)

the US constitution is not anticlerical. as a matter of fact, it is with justification that some people say there is no real separation of church and state. so there is no easy way to forbid demonstrations of religious belief in US schools.

while i am boring you, i might as well add that the german constitution is evel less anti-clerical than the US and french ones, so discussion here is merely about whether to allow *teachers* to wear headscarves. it would be a mistake to follow that germany is thus more liberal than the US or france.

Well I confess I haven't quite the brain power at the moment to fully digest all of Martino's post, but it sounds good so far.

I had been thinking that I wanted to say that I do think you have a point, Mav. For the American Freedom side of things.
Absolutely, philosophically, you have a point. But from a purely evolutionary standpoint, I find it admirable that a group of people in the form of a nation have stuck like glue to secularism. That is my own personal view, that religion causes wars and should be avoided. So I concede that. But if you were perhaps French, just out of pure coincidence, and you had a constitution borne out of your country's unique history and experiences that absolutely forbid a mixing of church and state, then you might feel differently.

Those Muslim women are welcome to wear whatever they want in public, on the street. And I don't see any problem with that. But not in government institutions.

I read an article recently about how many Europeans think we are crazy that our presidential candidates don't hesitate to mention their faith as a selling point to be elected. Perhaps they have a point? Who knows.

It should also be noted that Britain whipped the United States' arse today in the newspaper. The British standards now according to global warming are even more stringent than the Kyoto Protocol. FRICTION WITH THE BUSH ADMINISTRATION!! OH YEAH!

Kick their f'n arse.

I got all my homework done by 3 pm today!!!!! WOW!!!!
It's a real bona fide weekend!

Can I still wear my Catholic cross necklace to school in France?

I believe so, actually. I think they said small crosses or emblems were okay.

On this topic, I read an interesting article in the paper today about a pilot of an American Airlines plane who started talking about his Christian beliefs to the flyers on board. He asked people to raise their hands if they were Christian, among other things. He had apparently used the word "crazy" at some point, though it was disputed whether he meant non-Christians or the Christians who raised their hands. Anyway, he certainly got flak for it, it really made some people uncomfortable and the airline has launched an investigation. Now, it might be argued that an airplane is not necessarily a public space, since the airline is a private company despite much subsidizing of airlines by the government. But even so, isn't it just a little inappropriate for a pilot to be discussing his religious beliefs with the flyers, especially calling on them to reveal their own?

Most of the time I don't think my views are all that controversial when I post here, but this time out, I've taken some risks and just spoke my mind, kindof like Sloth does sometimes. I'm sure there are those out there who would completely disagree with me and I don't mind if they want to post their thoughts at all. I guess if no one does, I'll just end by saying you brought up a good point, Mav - it's not just Muslims that are affected by this sort of thing, it's other religions, too, and that my friend, is the point. There's no particular anti-Muslim bias in this. It's just that they are the ones I read had complained the loudest.

I would be interested to know whether you think the public school system also has a responsibility to provide these muslims with teachers of the same sex, since that was also one of the complaints I read?

Perhaps I've overdone this thread, but I think this is a really interesting issue and I'm glad people have posted their opinions.