• BURN@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    43
    arrow-down
    32
    ·
    1 year ago

    This is BS

    Let people wear what they want. If they want to wear religious clothing, let them. It’s not hurting anyone. This law, while technically applying equally to all religions is very clearly targeted at a single group that has been persecuted for this before

    • RazorsLedge@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      40
      arrow-down
      20
      ·
      1 year ago

      Giving religion safe spaces in society normalizes it. Normalizing religion does hurt people. It hurts the mind’s ability to think rationally, not to mention all the intolerance that seems to come from it.

      • BURN@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        34
        arrow-down
        20
        ·
        1 year ago

        I disagree. I’m an atheist, and we shouldn’t restrict anyone’s ability to practice their religion unless it actually harms others. This isn’t a safe space, it’s simply persecuting a single religion because the population dislikes Muslims.

        Religion is not an exclusively bad thing. It has done harm, but it also does have good effects.

        • RazorsLedge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          arrow-down
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          Agree to disagree I guess. I think we’re better off without sky fairies, regardless of whether they’re named Zeus, Jesus, Allah, whatever. The society that I’d want to live in would discourage public practices of religion.

          Another point I should have made above. As Dawkins says, normalizing religion gives the especially nutty and violent ones room to breathe. They don’t stick out so badly when their neighbor believes and practices 90% of what they do.

        • Anduin1357@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Well, you are wrong that religion is a good thing when people do good in spite of religion rather than because of it. If someone’s belief system is aligned with a particular religion, they can just adopt the practices of that religion without professing faith in it.

          Whatever makes them less susceptible to manipulation from religious leaders is a win in my book.

        • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m not sure where I come down on this issue, but teaching women to be ashamed of their bodies is harmful to the young women.

          • • milan •@feddit.nl
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            8
            arrow-down
            3
            ·
            1 year ago

            Absolutely. And that behaviour should be condemned. But punishing people for their choices of clothing is not the way to go. Target the harmful ideas, not people’s personal expression.

            • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              3
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              Ok but how does a school do that? You have young women being raised in a harmful faith where they are taught harmful things. The school can’t stop that. They can prohibit wearing harmful clothing in school.

              I support encouraging kids to express themselves, but schools can set limits to what is appropriate and what is prohibited expression. And the abaya is the opposite of freedom to express themselves. It represents shame, conformity, and the subjucation of women, backed by a faith that tells them they are less than men.

              • • milan •@feddit.nl
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                First off, the abaya is not a burka. It’s a fairly standard clothing item. The idea that an abaya in itself is harmful is absurd.

                The harm comes from limiting the freedom of self expression. And that’s what France is doing now. Most Muslim girls in the west are fairly progressive, they don’t feel that they’re being forced to wear what they wear. So what happens then when the government actually infringes on their self expression? It’s not gonna make them look kindly on the institutions that will teach them western values, they will gravitate more to the institutions that will teach them Muslim values.

                If you want rid people of their conservative ideals, you do that through education. If you try to force people to conform, you’ll get blowback and people only get more radical.

                • themeatbridge@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  An abaya is a long outer gown or robe, covering the legs to the ankles, the arms to the wrists, to be worn over clothing. It can be worn by men or women, but women are required to dress modestly and cover their skin. It’s not commonly worn in France except by muslim women conforming to the modest dress code.

                  Kids aren’t allowed to wear any religious adornments in French schools. No caps, crosses, or satanic tee shirts. That ban has been in place for almost 20 years, along witb burquas, niqab, and other ostentatious displays of religious expression.

      • gmtom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        13
        ·
        1 year ago

        I’m really glad all the smug atheists came over from reddit too

        • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It sucks, I beleave this was the wrong move because its a government acting as a parent to school kids, trying to hevy handedly disrupt that child’s religion. Wanna get these kids “free from their opressive religion”? Talk to them as a peer. Social movements are there to do that, even ones that work mainly in the school system.

          Couldn’t they’ve picked a less extreme way of handling this situation than “we are your parents, we think you shouldnt have to dress like that so now you wont”.

    • cley_faye@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is very efficient at having people talk about it, and temporarily forget all the places missing teachers, the sad state of a lot of school buildings, the lack of recognition (and decent salary) that’s been the norm for decades at this point, and actual issues regarding kids.

      • gnygnygny@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        13
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        The law is there to remind that no religious sign or clothe are accepted into the public system. People who disagree with it can go to the private school.

        • cley_faye@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          5
          ·
          1 year ago

          Except it’s been extended beyond religious clothing. An abaya is not specifically a religious clothing or something mandated by a religion, it is something worn in some places where people happens to be of that religion. No religious texts calls for it, where other things like burka and headscarfs where more directly linked to islam. Here, it’s a dress, that people in arabic countries wear. It’s literally fashion police.

            • SCB@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              6
              arrow-down
              3
              ·
              1 year ago

              It’s not self-important or pretentious, so no, we have to concede that it isn’t part of traditional French culture.

              It is, however, part of the culture of these French people.

              • gnygnygny@lemm.ee
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                5
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                Above all, it is an attack on secularism.

                France is the country of human rights, it protects by the right of asylum any person who is the victim of persecution in his country. The School of the Republic allows any dress, as long as it is not proselytising.

                This prohibition is not compatible with private life, freedom of religion, the right to education and the principle of non-discrimination. This dress is part of a logic of religious affirmation. It is compulsory for women in Qatar. There is no evidence that a student in France is forced or not to wear the abaya.

                This story of the abaya illustrates a question that runs through the whole of society: the question of boundaries. It seems increasingly difficult to impose rules, to apply them, without running the risk of being accused of authoritarianism.

                • SCB@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  If someone wearing religious garb is an attack on secularism, your institutions suck and that’s where your focus should be.

      • TheFrirish@jlai.lu
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        This is exactly my problem with this. Regardless of your position on the issue it’s just a diversion to get us all riled up.