Chirac: ban on religious icons in public schools

  • News
  • Thread starter Monique
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Schools
In summary: The ACLU has successfully stopped Santa from visiting public schools in Baldwin, Kan., because his presence constitutes illegal proselytizing by the school, reports the Baldwin City Signal. After receiving a letter of complaint from the American Civil Liberties Union (search), the school board there voted to put a stop to the nefarious activities and said it will re-examine how it treats all religious holidays in the schools.
  • #1
Monique
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
Gold Member
4,219
67
Rediculous, the French president Chirac wants to ban the muslim hair covers, the jewish caps and large crosses at public schools.. since these religious symbols are opposing the distinction between church and state.

I mean, can it get more crazier than that? Why ban religious icons, rather teach people how to deal with them.. I don't understand the whole hoopla about the muslim hair covers anyway.. it is a big issue here in the Netherlands: they have to integrate and thus not wair those things. Who cares??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
It seems nonsensical to me. By interfering with religious duties - keeping the head covered- the state is blurring the distinction between church and state, not enforcing it.

From what I understand, this is a shot at muslims and jews. The head coverings are actually religious necessaties for the more orthodox of them. Wearing crosses is just a matter of preference for Catholics.

Njorl
 
  • #3
I agree, these things should be respected.. what is the harm anyway?
 
  • #4
The state should not inflict religious stuff on students. Ie. the schools should not have any religious stuff.

However, they should not restrict the kiddies from wearing their "Winnie the Pooh is God" hats, or whatever religious stuff they are into.
 
  • #5
http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsPackageArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=424354&section=news"
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #6
To extend Chirac the benefit of the doubt, in the US about 18-20 years ago, some high schools had to ban the colors blue and red. These were the colors of "Crips" and "Bloods".

Locally, in DC, high schools had to ban the wearing of "Washington Bullets" (the local basketball team) items. A local gang had decided that the team logo would be their "sig", and they shot other people for wearing it. The team has since changed their name.

It may be that Chirac wants to prevent religious violence before it starts. I don't believe it, but maybe that is his explanation.

Njorl
 
  • #7
I just came across something on the web that makes this even more disturbing. Evidently, the French made a big deal about getting rid of veils in Algeria as part of their colonization efforts.

http://hiphi.ubbcluj.ro/JSRI/html%20version/index/no_3/maria_boariu-articol.htm

Njorl
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #8
Couple of points, keeping in mind that I think the issue is multi-faceted in regards to the government and the peoples views and also that I'm speaking ONLY in regards to the issue in certain areas of france ONLY.
1. It apparently would not be an issue for the Jews to not wear their cap as recently, within the last month or so France's chief Rabbi requested young jews "to replace the yarmulke with the baseball cap." for their own safety.
2.In the ghetto conditions of the "cites" in France, a culture of Islamic male sexism has been allowed to fester unchecked. Some of the products of this culture are enforced wearing of the veil and raping/ beating and (I believe..but am looking for source) murder by teen age boys of girls who do not.
3. Beside being there to make up for male sexual insecurities, the veil carries some political messages of protest against secularity, modernity and also a "screw you" in the general direction of the French authorities. That this message is deserved is not the point. The point is that women/girls are constrained to carry it and bear its burden in more than one way.
 
Last edited:
  • #9
It does get quite complicated.

"I support your religious freedom to coerce your unwilling members to do things they don't want to do."

Njorl
 
  • #10
I don't think governemnts should get involved in the religious lives of individuals.
 
  • #11
More on banning religion:

Fla. Women File Suit To Display Nativity Scene

POSTED: 7:40 AM EST December 16, 2003

PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Two women are seeking a federal court order to overrule a town's refusal to allow a Nativity scene to be displayed alongside a Christmas tree and menorah in a central town park.

Maureen Donnell and Fern deNarvaez filed a lawsuit filed in U.S. District Court in West Palm Beach, arguing the town's policy violates free speech, equal protection and the establishment of religion amendments to the Constitution.

Complete text at http://www.local6.com/news/2707669/detail.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #12
More on religious banning, whether just or unjust, it's up to you to decide:

Monday, December 15, 2003
By Scott Norvell
The ACLU has successfully stopped Santa from visiting public schools in Baldwin, Kan., because his presence constitutes illegal proselytizing by the school, reports the Baldwin City Signal.



After receiving a letter of complaint from the American Civil Liberties Union (search), the school board there voted to put a stop to the nefarious activities and said it will re-examine how it treats all religious holidays in the schools.

The ACLU complained that in a visit to an elementary school last year, Santa gave out candy canes and asked the kids why Christmas is celebrated. The kids had the nerve to pop up and answer Jesus’ birthday.


Complete text at http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,105744,00.html
 
Last edited by a moderator:

1. What is the "Chirac ban" on religious icons in public schools?

The "Chirac ban" refers to a law passed in France in 2004 by President Jacques Chirac that prohibits the wearing of conspicuous religious symbols in public schools. This includes headscarves, crosses, and other religious attire or symbols.

2. Why was the ban put into place?

The ban was put into place in an effort to promote secularism and maintain religious neutrality in public schools. It was also seen as a way to prevent religious discrimination and conflicts among students.

3. What are the exceptions to the ban?

The ban does not apply to discreet religious symbols, such as small crosses or Stars of David, that are not considered "conspicuous." It also does not apply to private schools, where students are free to wear religious symbols.

4. Has the ban been controversial?

Yes, the ban has been highly controversial, both in France and internationally. Supporters argue that it upholds the principle of secularism and protects the rights of all students, while opponents argue that it restricts religious freedom and unfairly targets Muslim students.

5. Have there been any changes to the ban since it was implemented?

In 2013, the French government clarified that the ban also applies to teachers and staff in public schools, not just students. Additionally, there have been debates and proposals to lift the ban or make amendments to it, but it remains in place as of now.

Similar threads

News Separation of Church and State May God Bless the rest of us?
    • General Discussion
3
Replies
99
Views
11K
Top politically correct phrases of 2005
    • General Discussion
Replies
5
Views
9K
From the sublime to the pirate
    • General Discussion
Replies
7
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top