Elections in various countries

[MacAnDàil]

I hold the somewhat radical view that in more than 99% of cases it's a matter of individual freedom. People are big enough to choose for themselves.

Do you mean that it should be amatter of individual freedom or that is already?

(I have a very low opinion of Aymeric Caron, the member of parliament who suggested the ban, besides.)

What do you dislike about him?

[Ares Land]

I hold the somewhat radical view that in more than 99% of cases it's a matter of individual freedom. People are big enough to choose for themselves.

Do you mean that it should be amatter of individual freedom or that is already?

It should be. I feel that (in France at least) letting people decide for themselves can still be a little difficult: see the perennial debate about the veil.

(I have a very low opinion of Aymeric Caron, the member of parliament who suggested the ban, besides.)

What do you dislike about him?

He seems to be, mostly, a narcissistic media personality.

[Travis B.]

I hold the somewhat radical view that in more than 99% of cases it's a matter of individual freedom. People are big enough to choose for themselves.

Do you mean that it should be amatter of individual freedom or that is already?

It should be. I feel that (in France at least) letting people decide for themselves can still be a little difficult: see the perennial debate about the veil.

My view of the matter is that I am opposed to both American-style "separation of church and state" and French-style "laïcité" for opposite reasons; on one hand I view that the former gives religious groups far too many privileges and allows people to use "freedom of religion" as an excuse to oppress others (and yes, refusing to get vaccinated or get one's children vaccinated for non-medical reasons is oppressing others), but on the other hand I view that the latter is oppressive in and of itself, and that people should be permitted to openly express their religious beliefs as they see fit as long as they do not oppress others in the process (e.g. people should be permitted to wear the veil of their own accord if they so wish, but conversely no one should be permitted to force or pressure someone else to wear the veil).

(I have a very low opinion of Aymeric Caron, the member of parliament who suggested the ban, besides.)

What do you dislike about him?

He seems to be, mostly, a narcissistic media personality.

I kind of get that impression from reading about him.

[MacAnDàil]

Note that laïcité as understood by those who put in the original 1905 law is much closer 'separation of church and state' than the interpretation of the current anti-headscarf debacle. The worst is that the Celtic scholar Claude Sterckx says that headscarves were normal in Gaul/France for centuries until the mid-20th century.

[Raphael]

German farmers' wives used to routinely wear headscarves, too.

[WeepingElf]

German farmers' wives used to routinely wear headscarves, too.

They did! I grew up in a small German village, and I clearly remember my mother and other farmers' wives wearing headscarves at least until about 1980.

[Linguoboy]

German farmers' wives used to routinely wear headscarves, too.

They used to quite common here in the USA as well. Until 1983, the Roman Catholic Church required all women to cover their heads during church services. Most older women I knew kept doing so long after they were required. Headscarves were the most popular way to do this, and many woman wore them all day.

[Travis B.]

German farmers' wives used to routinely wear headscarves, too.

They used to quite common here in the USA as well. Until 1983, the Roman Catholic Church required all women to cover their heads during church services. Most older women I knew kept doing so long after they were required. Headscarves were the most popular way to do this, and many woman wore them all day.

When I was young, it was very common to see older women wearing headscarves, which certainly isn't the case these days.

[Rounin Ryuuji]

My (definitely Christian) grandmother wore them sometimes, especially when it was cold or rainy.

[bradrn]

Many (if not all) observant Jewish women wear headscarves. At the Jewish day school I went to they were a common sight.

[Raphael]

Now I wonder how bad things will get in Brazil.

[bradrn]

Now I wonder how bad things will get in Brazil.

Talking to a Brazilian person in another forum, it would seem that in many ways it’s a lot less bad than it was in the US: the media is uniformly condemning them as ‘terrorists’, and furthermore the Congress building was completely empty when they stormed it, which makes it all thoroughly pointless and futile.

[Richard W]

Many (if not all) observant Jewish women wear headscarves. At the Jewish day school I went to they were a common sight.

The previous head of the Church of England frequently wore a headscarf.

[Travis B.]

Now I wonder how bad things will get in Brazil.

Talking to a Brazilian person in another forum, it would seem that in many ways it’s a lot less bad than it was in the US: the media is uniformly condemning them as ‘terrorists’, and furthermore the Congress building was completely empty when they stormed it, which makes it all thoroughly pointless and futile.

"History repeats itself, first as tragedy, second as farce."
-Karl Marx

[Ares Land]

My (definitely Christian) grandmother wore them sometimes, especially when it was cold or rainy.

I can confirm that my very Catholic grandmother also used to wear a headscarf.

My (definitely Christian) grandmother wore them sometimes, especially when it was cold or rainy.

"Laïcité" / Secularism as advocated by way too many people in France is also anti-semitic -- I think people just don't realize all of the implications, but even a kippa would be unacceptable by their rules.

(A coworker at a former job strongly objected to Chabad people driving around trucks with menorahs on Hanukkah. He thought it was proselytism, which I think perfectly summarizes how damaging ignorance is.)

[Torco]

Now I wonder how bad things will get in Brazil.

Talking to a Brazilian person in another forum, it would seem that in many ways it’s a lot less bad than it was in the US: the media is uniformly condemning them as ‘terrorists’, and furthermore the Congress building was completely empty when they stormed it, which makes it all thoroughly pointless and futile.

Not only that, most of the military really stepped up, and Lula is being quite clear about "we're gonna find the people who participated, and who collaborated, supported and funded this, and we're gonna punish them". Hopefully it doesn't fizzle out, lest such copycat plots spread.

____

I don't know much about french politics or the specifics of laicite, but in here I almost never see religious clothing and I think it's a better country for it. not that we have laws against it, of course, I've seen a couple of nuns walking around in their hábitos, and I've seen sikhs wearing daggers and turbans and stuff... I heard those bans were against religious clothing in schools, or are they like you *can't be in the sidewalk* wearing anything that's religious?

[Travis B.]

I don't know much about french politics or the specifics of laicite, but in here I almost never see religious clothing and I think it's a better country for it. not that we have laws against it, of course, I've seen a couple of nuns walking around in their hábitos, and I've seen sikhs wearing daggers and turbans and stuff... I heard those bans were against religious clothing in schools, or are they like you *can't be in the sidewalk* wearing anything that's religious?

I don't see much religious clothing in public; what I have seen are occasional Jewish men with kippahs, Sikh men with turbans, and Hindu women with dots on their foreheads, and while I was in college I saw a good few (presumably) Muslim women with headscarves. The only real religious expression I've seen in elementary through high school was kids who came in with ash crosses on their foreheads on Ash Wednesday. To me I think that people should be permitted to express their religion as they wish so long as it does not infringe on others' rights and freedoms, and things such as these are clearly not oppressing anyone (unless they themselves are forced upon the people in question, where then it is they who are being oppressed).

[Ares Land]

I don't know much about french politics or the specifics of laicite, but in here I almost never see religious clothing and I think it's a better country for it. not that we have laws against it, of course, I've seen a couple of nuns walking around in their hábitos, and I've seen sikhs wearing daggers and turbans and stuff... I heard those bans were against religious clothing in schools, or are they like you *can't be in the sidewalk* wearing anything that's religious?

Basically religious clothings are symbol are forbidden in school, and also for civil servants. I think it's misguided and unnecessary, but not that bad. On the streets, the burqa is illegal (more specifically, you can't hide your face.)

There's a continuous debate on what you're allowed to wear at the beach and in swimming pools -- in practical terms the burkini is forbidden at swimming pools.

Of course there's continuous debate and outrage on where to draw the line. (Can moms that help along school trips wear a veil?)

You do see a fair amount of headscarves in France. Even burqas once in a while back when that was allowed. That's mostly true of big cities, of course. In my neighborhood in particular you'll see kippas too and of course Orthodox Jewish women who will dress as prescribed (the modesty rules are perhaps less noticeable but more stringent).

And of course, plenty of people will advocate, for instance, banning headscarves anywhere.

I'd prefer a more liberal view myself.

[Torco]

The liberal approach sounds good, but I think it's not controversial to say that we wouldn't take that approach towards, say, genital mutilation, right? cause social pressure, familiar coercion and so on are certainly things that happen... but, ultimately, wearing a cloth over one's hair isn't so serious as to merit that kind of illiberality. full body and face covers, however, seem more worrying.

Do they, in practice, extend the ban on religious symbols in school to christian stuff? I don't know, jesus tshirts or crucifix necklaces? or is it just for *other* religions?

[Ares Land]

The liberal approach sounds good, but I think it's not controversial to say that we wouldn't take that approach towards, say, genital mutilation, right? cause social pressure, familiar coercion and so on are certainly things that happen... but, ultimately, wearing a cloth over one's hair isn't so serious as to merit that kind of illiberality. full body and face covers, however, seem more worrying.

Do they, in practice, extend the ban on religious symbols in school to christian stuff? I don't know, jesus tshirts or crucifix necklaces? or is it just for *other* religions?

Yeah, I entirely agree that the liberal approach has its limits too, especially on -say- religious mutilation.

The ban extends to all religions. Cross necklaces are tolerated as long as they're discreet but you certainly could be asked to hide it under your clothes. Of course huge pectoral crosses or Jesus T-Shirts are out of the question.
The ban itself was quite openly aimed at Muslims -- France being mostly a country of agnostic, as it happens if you're French and religious it's very probable you're a Muslim -- but in general teachers and public sector employers are going to be fair about it.

There's quite a bit of prejudice against Muslims involved, of course, but there are other historical reasons for the ban. In France, the Catholic Church (and a very dysfunctional Church at that) used to basically run the show and getting rid of it was a major pain. So there's also a sense of 'we're certainly not going through that shit all over again', if you see what I mean.