French headscarf ban recommended

[CosmicCastaway 0]

I do not believe in Freedom of expression that directly promotes violence or racism.

What does wearing religious garn have to do with directly promoting violence or racism?

It's the freedom of expression, surely it's not possible to be for one type and against another? You have to be for freedom of expression or not. There isn't an inbetween. You can't say "I'm all for freedom of expression!! Except this sort, this sort and this sort."

Wearing religious garb is a form of self expression, just as wearing a t-shirt is.

Personally, if you're in a public institution like a school you abide by their rules and dress code, if you don't like the way it works you find another school.

[theavonlady 2]

But they also prooved that some point were fairly exact and correctly described  

Ask the Rabbi!

[theavonlady 2]

I do not believe in Freedom of expression that directly promotes violence or racism.

What does wearing religious garn have to do with directly promoting violence or racism?

It's the freedom of expression, surely it's not possible to be for one type and against another? You have to be for freedom of expression or not. There isn't an inbetween. You can't say "I'm all for freedom of expression!! Except this sort, this sort and this sort."

Wearing religious garb is a form of self expression, just as wearing a t-shirt is.

Personally, if you're in a public institution like a school you abide by their rules and dress code, if you don't like the way it works you find another school.

Again, you can look at my responses to these points earlier in the thread.

[SPQR 0]

But they also prooved that some point were fairly exact and correctly described  

Ask the Rabbi!

You have more opportunities than me to meet this man

Israël Finkelstein

[denoir 0]

How nauseating.

Can you be for one type of freedom of expression, and against another? You argue for the right to wear religious garb in public institutions, but are against someone expressing their alternative views (regardless of how onerous they may be) in a similar fashion?

I've already responded to this claim last night.

I do not believe in Freedom of expression that directly promotes violence or racism.

What does wearing religious garn have to do with directly promoting violence or racism?

Nah, that doesn't cut it. You can't have it both ways and claim that you are not imposing your beliefs while restricting specific forms of expression that doesn't agree with you.

Banning religious clothing is no different than banning Nazi symbols, public nudity etc When society imposes a restriction like that, it imposes the collective belief and opinion of the people (or politicians). Now your country may value unhindered religious expression more than unhindered political expression, but that makes no difference.

But, this is actually not the case here. We're not talking about people's constitutional right being reduced, but practical regulations in public schools. And these are not laws. You can violate them if you wish and you won't be legally punished for it. Schools have a lot of rules of behaviour that have little to do with any real laws.

Oh, and Avon, you know the ban on burkas in Sweden - it actually started as a law suit from the jewish community. They objected for the school giving special treatment to the kids with burkas and thus taking time and resources away from teaching the Jewish kids. And they are right. They obviously however didn't complain over Jewish kids getting kosher food (school lunches payed by the sate).

I suppose the general principle is that your religious needs will be accomodated as long as it doesn't interfere with the rights and the needs of others. If religious clothing is interfering or not is debatable - but the teachers seem to think so.

[Acecombat 0]

On the opposite, Religion maybe one of the first factors that help mankind to evolve from the basics needs of the animal reign

I agree. But after around the year 1500, when modern history starts according to the years work I recently finished, religion seemed to become more and more remote, and inhibited the growth of sciences, and cultures. But it depends on which end of the rope you were at.

Which religion is that may i know?

I get so fed up after listening to this useless crap of religion does this , religion does that FFS name the damn religion that does that ? Dont generalize all of us in one category.

ISLAM doesnt for one inihibits scientific reasoning and research , infact the Quran supports itself many of these newly found theory's by your 'modern' scienetists.

Now if some other religion or those who follow it make up their own rules and decide that scientific reseacrh should be banned them its their problem not ours mate.

As for those who peeps say religion didnt do any good then i would ask you to go through history again and erase all religion and do a simulation as to what the situation might have been today. If it werent for religion Arabia today would have been Viva Las Vegas of the East or something considering the corruption of the Pagans and polytheists living ehre who used to bury their new born daughters alive , sons used to inhrit there mothers from their fathers .... and gambling plus alcohol drinking and what other vice not.

I am thankful to be following a religion its helps me keep a STABLE perspective on life , i believe in a life after death i believe in ressurection , i believe i will have to answer one day infront of a being more powerful then me for my actions here on earth and on the basis of those i will either enter true eternal life in heaven or hell. My life on earth is of a wayfarer i believe in GOD which helps rein m in and my evil thinking with in me. It makes me think of what the consequences of my actions would be for me in my afterlife.

Heres a little analogy:

A believer and a unbeliever in GOD. There are 2 persons ones called Ahmed and ones called Harry.

Ahmed believes in GOD while HArry doesnt.

An incident occurs in their lives they both need large amounts of cash in order to stop their businesses from filing Chap 11 , thy are both desperate they know a guy whos got loads of money he lives alone but he wouldnt give them money.

So what do they initially think. Thy both think initially since they wont be able to get the money out of him so lets steal th money from him or kill him , the thought comes to both.

But what do they feel about it after theyve given more thought to it.

Ahmed believes if he did that he can help make his life worth living again with his business saved and all , but he knows committing a theft wont get him any rewards in the afterlife he also knows that GODs watching his eevery action all the time he knows he cant away with it afterwards maybe for the time being but not permanently.

Harry believes hes got to have that money no matter what it takes even though hes honest chap but hes in a desperate situation so he decides oh wtf who will notice if i quietly steal his money no one will plus my life will be made once more and thats all that usually matters to him the most his temporary life on earth , for which he will strive no matter what measures he has to take.

Sorry for tarrying to long here but i feel i should make this clear for those people/kids who keep on arguing on the fact that religion dos nothing and only instigates fighting and such , well religion is one thing that makes you think about the consequences of your action in a much more BROADER perspective , and before you say we got laws and jails for such people well think again , thse people while considering such acts hardly giv thought to what happens to them earth for most of them lifes a one time chance as they dont believe in afterlife , jails maybe an effective means of containing such people but not in eradicting such thinking from ones MIND.

So dont even bother to think about saying the next time that reigion ahsnt done anything , for you maybe not but as a staunch believe for many it has changed their lives.

Besides on this whole secularistic thing i feel this is slowly developing in to a cultish/religion itself a belief which preaches not to believe in a GOD or afterlife just believe in life on earth and life like theirs no tomorrow ..

People who dont believe will obviously usually not care much about what they do on earth since its of no bother to them , they dont believe they will b questioned afterwards for it.

THIS IMHO is the keydifference between Secualarist and religious thinking.

As for the scarf ban all i will say is that how is it hurting students or even secualrists ? Dont tell me that they all literally drop in paranoai OMG my teachers wearing a scarf .... *Drops to the floor*

The only reason i can see behind it is that some people are not allowing some pople of other beliefs to practise it freely , its just plain stupid , i mean if a girl wears a hijab to work i would say finethats DUMB remove it but a scarf isnt hurting anyone.

And anyone who wanna attach the scarf to islam , then beware i am attaching secularism to a T-shirt or a Jeans or whatever article secularists wear the most and ban it here so next time you come here come wearing a Arab Robe or we'll swipe off your pants and shirts:p ... sounds stupid doesnt IT ?

Welll guess what IT IS

P.S: No offense to any secularists/atheists here , you got your own free wish to believe in whatever you want toi respect that , plus i know not many people who dont follow religion are like that Harry character i portrayed it was just to give a little comparison on this issue.

[denoir 0]

Let me ask you this Acecombat: Do you believe that separation of mosque and state is a good concept?

Or do you think that the state should enforce religious rules and vice-versa?

[DracoPaladore 0]

Question: Whats gods view on people who beleive in god, but just not sure which of the religions is right?

[Acecombat 0]

Let me ask you this Acecombat: Do you believe that separation of mosque and state is a good concept?

Or do you think that the state should enforce religious rules and vice-versa?

Yes and NO both denoir you cant have the situation in any of these extremties if you are to follow your religion perfectly. The state has huge role to play in a countries enforcing of Islamic laws and regualations.

I would strike for a fair balance between the 2 there are times and issues on WHICH the mosque should shut up and let the people equipped with handling the job more tactfully like leaders/scientists politicians etc etc.

Besides there will b no need for mosque to interefere when you enforce SHARIA laws perfectly for all with EQUALITY and honesty and complete partiality then the Mosque hasnt got any role to play in this at all.

[SPQR 0]

Acecombat, I was speaking about the religious concept in human intelligence development.

European and Middle Eastern points of view about tolerance can't be anything but absolutely differents. It is a matter of Religions, Histories, Invasions, exchanges. Neither civilizations can compare the others using his own socio-cultural references.

Some feel that a society should work on the free expression of all differences. It's obvious when their religion is the core of their culture. It's their own society development choice

It's your conception of tolerance

Others want to create a strong evolution-capable community which put the stress not on the differences but on the same particularities in the PUBLIC LIFE. Religions are a factor of differences for us, for exemple. That's WHY it's come to be part of PRIVATE LIFE.

It's the European conception of Tolerance

Neither I nor you possess the Sacred Wisdom of the Secrets of the Universe

I'll let you the earth, I'll take care of the rest of the Universe

[Acecombat 0]

In other words your implying that people who follow religion are incapable of fullying developing a scientifically orientated community ?

[SPQR 0]

In other words your implying that people who follow religion are incapable of fullying developing a scientifically orientated community ?  

No I was speaking about Tolerance perception differences, why.

Either for a saudi or a french,  during any scientific-driven research, any study, the difficulty is to choose the best reference point of view (it's a it hard to explain with my pooor english )

You want to calculate the speed of a moving object.

If you stand near the mouvement, unmoving, you'll find 200 m/s (for ex.)

If you decide that it's better to run nearby, you'll get 196 m/s

The results will be different with different research protocols.

More complicated, Eisenberg's uncertainty factor

Or A. Einstein, that every perception is relative, just dependant from where you are to observe the studied phenomena

[EiZei 0]

In other words your implying that people who follow religion are incapable of fullying developing a scientifically orientated community ?

Well, most fanatically religious countries usually tend to be less technologically advanced than secular ones.

[denoir 0]

In other words your implying that people who follow religion are incapable of fullying developing a scientifically orientated community ?  

People that are following different religions in a way that interfere with the public behaviour, yes.

A multicultural society is only possible if

1) The society focues on the things the different cultures have in common and redirect the rest to the private domain

2) One culture is dominant and forces the other cultures to adapt to their standards

To take a trivial example: Islam doesn't allow the use of alchohol while Catholicism requires you to drink wine when you take the communion. A country that has its laws based in Islam would prohibit all import of alcohol - since it's usage is a violation of the scripture. Which wouldn't make the Catholics too happy.

In the European system, if you would want an alcohol ban (won't ever happen, but for the sake of the discussion) you would have to give a secular reason that applies to all citizens, regardless of religion. Like for instance that it's bad for your health.

Don't you think it's a double standard that you advocate the sharia as a basis for the legal system in a country while at the same time loudly complaining when we enforce elements of our culture in our countries?

Edit: On the science thing - yes it's a hindering factor. Remember, we used to burn our scientists here in Europe becuase they used to say silly things like "the earth is round". That period was called the "dark ages" for a good reason - after the fall of the roman empire, there was virtually no serious development in Europe for several centuries.

Incidnetally, Islam is about as old now as Christianity was during the dark ages. (A point brought up by a good muslim friend of mine).

[SPQR 0]

Another religion war preparing  

I like to write things that no one seems to understand  

[denoir 0]

More complicated, Eisenberg's uncertainty factor

Heisenberg.

Just because you Frenchies can't handle "H"'s doesn't mean the rest of us don't.

[SPQR 0]

Heisenberg.

Thanks for correcting me

I really like to feel much smarter than the previous day

(P.S. it's a happy joke, I'm not pulling your leg.... Hey my leg, give it to me now )

[denoir 0]

I really like to feel much smarter than the previous day  

I usually have that effect on people

[SPQR 0]

I really like to feel much smarter than the previous day  

I usually have that effect on people  

You are just a bit pro-european  

We (and I of course) ALL get use to run alongside the moving object  

[python3 0]

In other words your implying that people who follow religion are incapable of fullying developing a scientifically orientated community ?  

Well, most fanatically religious countries usually tend to be less technologically advanced than secular ones.

yes, well thats cuz the morons in charge like to make themselves wealthy and dont give a rats a$$ about it's citizens. They use islam as a basis to shut up all opponents and to maintain power. In due time, they shall see what is in store for them .

[python3 0]

Quote[/b] ]To take a trivial example: Islam doesn't allow the use of alchohol while Catholicism requires you to drink wine when you take the communion. A country that has its laws based in Islam would prohibit all import of alcohol - since it's usage is a violation of the scripture. Which wouldn't make the Catholics too happy.

not totally true, take egypt for example. It has its laws based on Islam, yet it strikes a balance between religion and state. For example, Tourists from Europe like beer, wine, and gambling etc., Thus in egypt we have a few casino's in cairo with bars for them. In most hotels, there are bars for them. Yet most muslims dont go and visit these areas. As i have stated before, the coptics in our country are allowed to practice their religion freely. They get to eat pork and drink wine as well.

[python3 0]

Quote[/b] ]Edit: On the science thing - yes it's a hindering factor. Remember, we used to burn our scientists here in Europe becuase they used to say silly things like "the earth is round". That period was called the "dark ages" for a good reason - after the fall of the roman empire, there was virtually no serious development in Europe for several centuries.

as i have posted before, The Prophet said "The pen is mightier than the sword" under his rule and the rule of the caliphs afterwards, science under Islam flourished. Islam has no quarrels with knowing more about the world around us. Maybe on issues like stem cells and evolution. But those are touchy issues.

[denoir 0]

Quote[/b] ]Edit: On the science thing - yes it's a hindering factor. Remember, we used to burn our scientists here in Europe becuase they used to say silly things like "the earth is round". That period was called the "dark ages" for a good reason - after the fall of the roman empire, there was virtually no serious development in Europe for several centuries.

as i have posted before, The Prophet said "The pen is mightier than the sword" under his rule and the rule of the caliphs afterwards, science under Islam flourished. Islam has no quarrels with knowing more about the world around us. Maybe on issues like stem cells and evolution. But those are touchy issues.

The problem is that religion very often crosses into the domain of the secular. Now, I don't know specifically about Islam, but Christianity makes through the Bible a number of claims that can be scientifically thwarted. Plus you get the problem of interpretations and not to say different religions.

Evolution is a good example. You say that it's a "toucy issue", but it's only touchy becuase religious people try to impose their beliefs on science. It's the prefect example of why letting religion have any say in the secular world is intrinsically bad, let alone letting it decide what is "acceptable science" and what is not.

[python3 0]

Quote[/b] ]Edit: On the science thing - yes it's a hindering factor. Remember, we used to burn our scientists here in Europe becuase they used to say silly things like "the earth is round". That period was called the "dark ages" for a good reason - after the fall of the roman empire, there was virtually no serious development in Europe for several centuries.

as i have posted before, The Prophet said "The pen is mightier than the sword" under his rule and the rule of the caliphs afterwards, science under Islam flourished. Islam has no quarrels with knowing more about the world around us. Maybe on issues like stem cells and evolution. But those are touchy issues.

The problem is that religion very often crosses into the domain of the secular. Now, I don't know specifically about Islam, but Christianity makes through the Bible a number of claims that can be scientifically thwarted. Plus you get the problem of interpretations and not to say different religions.

Evolution is a good example. You say that it's a "toucy issue", but it's only touchy becuase religious people try to impose their beliefs on science. It's the prefect example of why letting religion have any say in the secular world is intrinsically bad, let alone letting it decide what is "acceptable science" and what is not.

But to say, religion has no say in the secular world. Come on, maybe in the secular world yes. But not everyone wants the secular life. Some countries try to strike a balance. Stem Cell research is still a hot topic among many secular countries. One would have thought they would have just went for it. Because of evolution, those non secular countries will not fall far behind the secular ones. There are a few minute topics which the values of Islam would probably go against. Most of them are theories yet to be proved. This does not mean that religion has hindered science, except in the cases were people have taken religion out of context, ex. taliban.

yes, well im no expert on islam and evolution. Im sure there have been countless arguments about that so, i will not argue on anyones behalf. I will try to find a paper my friends recently wrote about the topic. It was a presentation given to biologists about how evolution is wrong. Remember it is still a theory and subject to change.

Naturally, i feel differently about religion than you do. (hehe, no surprises there ) I mean, i will not post fairy tales and fantasies here about Islam and modern science, as i have no clue about it. So, i do disagree, but i have not yet to formulate a position from which i can argue. I will return to the subject once i inquire though I wont forget .

[m21man 0]

Quote[/b] ]It was a presentation given to biologists about how evolution is wrong.

Evolution is wrong?