The French Law is justified!

Isnt' there middle ground, though? One in which you can express your religion without having secularism imposed upon you?

I don't think the display of one's personal religious beliefs is imposing. You can say "so long as it is not on state owned property", but you have to consider that prevents the Burqah in school and government workplaces.

Should Islamic people have to choose between the practice of their faith and school? I don't see why people should feel threatened by what someone wears on their head...

Dear Baker street ...

Why do you assume that Burqah is part of the religious belief for the Islamic people. It is not part of any religious beliefs for the Islamic people... I am afraid this is the drama of the Mullahs. and nothing else sadly.

My mother, wife , cousins have never observed Purdah, Burqah or Hijab... nor have any of my personal friends... yet no one has ever accused them of being bad muslims out here in Pakistan.

-Pakistani secularist

the intent is for french citizens to think of themselves--and see each other--first as being french? as opposed to adherents to a faith or formerly natives of this or that colony?

Kingbee Precisely

cool.

ive just been reading your other articles. very interesting to say the least.

Thankyou for your compliment.

So no segments of the Islamic faith believe that the Burqah is a religious necessity? I respect your choice to worship in the way you do, but don't others have the right to choose as well? Should someone who chooses to dress in the most fundamentalist fashion have to choose between school and those beliefs?

I am not Muslim, but I have worn either a Christian cross or a St. Christopher medal all my life. I would be outraged if I were told that in order to have a government job or go to a government school I had to take it off. If I lived in or vistied France, that choice would be forced upon me.

To me, forcing someone to do something contrary to their own personal faith is no different than forcing someone to practice a particular faith. The rights of the individual are denied either way.

My argument is meant with all respect. Forgive me for seeming antagonistic.

Baker street...

This means that anyone can assume anything and declare that to be part of their religious belief... Would you then be willing to allow polygamy because it is there in Islam ?

The fact of the matter is that these things are not integral to religious worship as such. If France feels that the Burqahs and Hijabs are counterproductive of national development and creates differences between citizens then I think they have all the right to ban it.

Good point about polygamy.

I disagree with their decision, but I suppose I have to agree with you that they have the right to do so.

I think it's also worth pointing out that the European court of human rights recently backed a Turkish university ban on muslim headscarfs.

To quote BBC news,

In its ruling, the court said that measures taken in universities "to prevent certain fundamentalist religious movements from pressuring students who do not practise the religion in question or those belonging to another religion" could be justified under the European Convention on Human Rights.
Bans issued in the name of the separation of church and state could therefore be considered "necessary in a democratic society", it added.

Very important for the French case as it effectively rules on an identical issue.

Paul.

Very good article, I enjoyed it. Religion has no place in schools as far as I'm concerned. That doesn't mean that all countries should ban religious dress in the classroom but, as you rightly point out, secularism is very important to the French and this must be respected.

One of the hallmarks of democracy is freedom of speech. One would think that government property would be the place where freedoms are most protected, not most restricted. Is the display of religious symbols really so harmful that it cannot be tolerated?

Polygamy is a good example of why it isn't approptriate to give everyone carte blanche to do anything in the name of religious practice, but wearing a headdress is certainly not the same as polygamy.

Singling out religious symbols for banning hardly seems like a secular (non-religious) law to me. Suppose the government decided that necklaces were harmful for students, and they banned all necklaces religious or otherwise. To me that would be a secular law. On the other hand, deciding that religious symbols are unacceptable for students to wear to school is an inherently religious (or anti-religious) decision.

After giving it some thought, I think the difference is more noticable between polygamy and religious dress. We don't have complete freedom to practice any religious belief in the US, either. If a religion, for instance, required human sacrifice, it would of course be illegal. The same with animal cruelty, child wedlock, or even polygamy.

The issue here, though, is freedom of expression, not religious practice. The only way the right to express one's self in the US is prohibited is if it is "obscene", defamatory, threatening, or treasonous (state secrets, etc.). In France, though, it seems to go a lot further.

They've had laws against the use of Nazi symbolism for years, so they already have anti-symbol laws in place. It was probably an easy step to move religious symbols there too. This isn't knee-jerk to me, I really give it thought, and I can't see any reason whatsoever that a religious symbol or mode of dress is harmful to anyone. If it isn't harmful, then I see no reason to withhold people's right to express their beliefs.

That said, it is France, not America, and I respect their right to pass whatever laws they want, however personally offensive they are to me.

Religion has no place in schools as far as I'm concerned.

I'm a mechanist (a form of athiest), but I have to disagree with this statement. Religion does have a place in school... in a religion or philosophy class. My beef comes when they try to teach it in a science class.

I think the same should be done with openly displaying one's sexuality. People should not be allowed to proclaim, display, or state their sexual preferences to prevent certain sexual movements from pressuring students who do not hold to a certain sexuality. After all, nobody can deny that homosexuals are often harassed because of their sexuality.
Besides, shouldn't they see each other as being French first?

That doesn't mean that all countries should ban religious dress in the classroom but, as you rightly point out, secularism is very important to the French and this must be respected.

Isn't it possible for a secular society to allow people to express their religious beliefs though? Secularism and religious expression don't have to be mutually exclusive.

Besides, shouldn't they see each other as being French first?

I don't think there is any inherant reason to think that being Muslim and French are exclusive, or come in any order. The only people I see in this situation that are trying to make them separate are the French. Hard to make the point that they are protecting anything when they are the ones on the offensive.

I think the ruling by the European court on human rights was quite clear on why such a ban is acceptable.

In a democracy, the individual's right to express their religion is moderated by the secularly state's right to protect ALL those within the state from feeling threatened or pressurised.

Both Turkey and France have determined that the state secularism is best protected by banning overt religious symbolism in state run schools, the human right courts agree. The individuals right to express their religion in their homes, places of religious worship or in public places is protected.

Paul.

So you would consider my St. Christopher medal as an threat or pressure? I feel it difficult to understand that, especially in nations where it is legal to walk up to someone and start talking to them about God.

The next step seems to be a system like China's, where you can believe what you want, but any attempt to spread your beliefs is a criminal act.

CS Guy,

What's a mechanist? I'm an atheist myself so I'm curious.

I wrote a blog about this a long time ago which I'm going to link to in a blatant act of self-promotion:
Link

Point is that Wahkonta's response made me realise that banning religious symbols in American schools wouldn't be on because in the US, personal freedom comes first. In France secularism comes first.

So, I'm against any religious teaching in schools but, when it comes to religious symbols, different countries will find differemt answers and that's fine.

It seems to me that a lot of people who want to wear religious symbols always fall back on "respect my tradition". But in the French case, secularism in schools is the tradition. What about respecting that?

Bakerstreet,
you are obviously not aware of the details of the French law. Only overt religious symbolism or attire is banned. The wearing of small personal medals or crosses is not banned. Therefore you can happily wear your St. Christopher medal in a French school.

Paul.

In a democracy, the individual's right to express their religion is moderated by the secularly state's right to protect ALL those within the state from feeling threatened or pressurised.

It is certainly true that threats are not protected under the guise of free speech. However, I wouldn't agree that all religious symbols are threatening. Do you?

Is religious pressure the only kind of pressure that is unacceptable?

What is it about schools that makes religious symbols more harmful in school than other places?

The situations in France and Turkey are similar, but there are some key differences. Turkey's ban is on headscarfs, not every religious symbol, and Turkey's ban is on all government buildings, not just schools.

Is religious pressure the only kind of pressure that is unacceptable?

Exactly. As I mentioned, many people are threatened or pressured because of their sexualities, so people should not be allowed to express their sexuality in public. Same with political beliefs, so people should not be allowed to wear any clothing or say anything that might suggest that one political belief is better than other (i.e. shirts such as those making fun of Bush should be banned). The fact that these things won't be banned even though they pressure others leads me to belief this isn't about protecting students from pressure and threats.

It seems to me that a lot of people who want to wear religious symbols always fall back on "respect my tradition". But in the French case, secularism in schools is the tradition. What about respecting that?

How does somebody wearing religious attire prevent the school from being secular? Just because most of the people happened to be of one religion in a school does not mean that the school can't do its own thing.

"Only overt religious symbolism or attire is banned."

So depending on the size of the bling-bling, I may or may not be allowed to wear it. Seems way too subjective.

Silly law, imposing neutrality at the cost of self-expression, but it is their nation to impose their ideals in. I don't have to visit it. They are just becoming more and more caricature-ish and self-centered. Between banning english words, and protecting their culture from Western influences and now discouraging the expression of religious belief... I dunno.

Maybe they should just build a big wall and get it over with. (*image of the French castle from MOnty Python and the Holy Grail...*).

Madine / Joseph,
it's not the pressure they are protecting from, but the secural state they are protecting. The French constitution protects this secular statehood and so the state is legally entitled to enforce the ban.

As to whether the state could impose similar bans against other forms of presure, that would all depend on the constitution, and the ability of the French government to prove that a ban was required to protect the constitution. Unlikely.

It's worth realsing where this whole issue stems from. French schools have a level of acceptable attire which children must conform to. This attire or uniform is designed to make all student equal, but does take different religions into account with a bandanna option being allowed for thoise who wish to cover their heads. Much research has shown that school uniforms do indeed reduce tensions and pressure between pupils. French schools were having to ban muslim girls who refused to remove their headscarfs for religious reasons. Hence the new law. Paul.