- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
- europe@feddit.de
- cross-posted to:
- news@kbin.social
- europe@feddit.de
Pupils will be banned from wearing abayas, loose-fitting full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in France’s state-run schools, the education minister has said.
The rule will be applied as soon as the new school year starts on 4 September.
France has a strict ban on religious signs in state schools and government buildings, arguing that they violate secular laws.
Wearing a headscarf has been banned since 2004 in state-run schools.
Can’t just let women wear what they want. Clearly lacking a penis makes them incapable of deciding what clothes to wear.
It s not only female its everyone . No one can were religion cloth. That just normal you are in a public place .
Except this kind of outfit is not religious at all. Abaya is basically just a dress which can be worn by anyone regardless their religion, unlike burqa and hijab. It’s like banning sari because Hindus women wear them, even though it’s not a religious cloth.
The goal here is to ban religious symbol, right? Not outright banning anything related to middle-eastern culture? Surely there is a reasonable middle ground between banning religious symbols and banning the entire ethnic culture.
That’s not how it’s actually enforced. This is making new laws and regulations picking on a minority.
Banning clothes in public space is fascism.
I guess then we will force them to wear a special star and send them in special “protective” camps?
Let me guess, you’re either an american or an anglo?
I’m French. But I know what fascism or racism are so I understand it can be a bit unsettling.
Et si tu me crois pas à cause de l’anglais on peut faire le débat en français, mais j’avoue que parler avec des fascistes ignorants m’emmerde pas mal.
They literally ban ALL forms of religious depictions in France. Women just get forced, by a religion, to wear specific clothes to adhere to arbitrary standards set by some old dead dude(s). This is super par for the course and makes a lot of sense for them. The only thing oppressive here is the religion that forces women to wear shit to fit some ideals/standards, especially children who don’t know any better and are forced into it/don’t have a concept of doing anything else.
To stop women from being forced to do something by the dead we force them to do something by the living. Makes perfect sense.
I once pulled a gun on someone and ordered them to be free.
It seems like any religious emblems or clothing aren’t allowed in public schools, not so much that they can’t wear what they want.
I think it’s fair enough, it’s pretty obvious that religion and education are incompatible in the modern age. Anyone who disagrees with that is a “religious” person who’s never read a holy book.
I am a militant atheist and disagree with this decision completely. Freedom means nothing if it doesn’t include the freedom to make bad decisions.
Oh just to be clear: Jesus was talking to Satan not the Holy Ghost and Allah doesn’t exist.
There, the two unforgivable sins of the two major ones. I don’t much care for people claiming to be atheists without backing it up.
What? I honestly don’t understand what you’re trying to get across here
Just because I am an atheist does not mean I am against people having religion by law. I would prefer that no one has religion by choice. Just like I would prefer everyone to have healthy lifestyles. Just like I would prefer if we all stopped listening to rap-rock.
There is a difference between what I wish and what I think should be lawful.
But you probably couldn’t loudly play rap-rock in a public school, either. Doing something in private or in public are quite different.
I’m quite alright with the banning of religious symbols, but I do agree, banning what is essentially a robe, is a bit much. Then again, enforcing clothing standards is actually fairly common. People should be allowed to wear what they want, but within limits. I don’t think most people would find it appropriate if a stundent showed up to school in a bikini.
You are muddling distracting from learning with freedom of expression. They do not have to be in conflict. There is a difference between listening to vile music on your earbuds and blasting it. There is a difference between wearing a cross and standing on your desk to give the good news during math class.
There is also a difference between wearing a small cross around your neck and a t-shirt saying “sinners repent or burn in hell”.
The question is, where, between all these differences, do we draw the line. And for context, I’m not really with France on this one.
Well not like anyone asked me but I would use criteria.
I would also begin with the presumption of freedom of expression. We should assume kids can wear what they want and make rules to lower it, instead of what we do is begin with the assumption that they have zero agency and give it.