France starts ban on full-face veil

[Audio]

govt officer require decent dressing,if there is a uniform that too, but that doesn't mean you can't wear a cross,scarf etc, that is an unnecessary encroachment to personal, religious freedom.

Does the concept of a secular country which is represented by people with excessive religious symbols sound ok to you?
If a certain person feels these requirements encroach on him or her he is welcome to find another job. That is his freedom as well.

And what about my freedom of not wanting to see symbols of backwardness when taking care of various bureaucratic processes which are stressful as is.

 

[Wright]

Its not like muslims flock to France anyway when the GCC is experiancing an economic boom.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

Does the concept of a secular country which is represented by people with excessive religious symbols sound ok to you?
If a certain person feels these requirements encroach on him or her he is welcome to find another job. That is his freedom as well.

And what about my freedom of not wanting to see symbols of backwardness when taking care of various bureaucratic processes which are stressful as is.

people doesn't need to sacrifice things like this for country to become secular, that's the matter of state, a minister wearing a cross, Jews cap can still propose secular laws for the state. what people wears is neither a concern of state nor dose it affect it's secular credentials, unless it is vulgar or it endanger security. somebody seeing someone else wearing his religious symbol on his sleeves is not hurting his sentiment or right, he can't ask other one to not wear anything's because he doesn't like the others religion or fashion. In my opinion as long as people wear their uniform and perform their duties, state has no business to stop them wearing simple things like a cross, scarf etc, it should be a non issue for state.

 

[KS]

Good move.

keep Europe as Europe and not Eurabia.

 

[Audio]

people doesn't need to sacrifice things like this for country to become secular, that's the matter of state, a minister wearing a cross, Jews cap can still propose secular laws for the state. what people wears is neither a concern of state nor dose it affect it's secular credentials, unless it is vulgar or it endanger security. somebody seeing someone else wearing his religious symbol on his sleeves is not hurting his sentiment or right, he can't ask other one to not wear anything's because he doesn't like the others religion or fashion. In my opinion as long as people wear their uniform and perform their duties, state has no business to stop them wearing simple things like a cross, scarf etc, it should be a non issue for state.

It conveys the wrong message at the minimum and it can go out of hand with religious groups demanding more and more consideration being taken care to accomodate them (their minority values) at the maximum.

Specifically on this:

In my opinion as long as people wear their uniform and perform their duties, state has no business to stop them wearing simple things like a cross, scarf etc, it should be a non issue for state.

State is their employer and if the state does not want to be represented by people wearing various religions "tokens" it is their right to demand it. Performing duties has nothing to do with it.

 

[KS]

@Audio - would this affect Sikhs as well ?

 

[Audio]

@Audio - would this affect Sikhs as well ?

If it wouldn't it would be discriminatory. Though that is only my opinion and i do not know French law, but if i would bet on it i would go for that yes, it applies to Sikhs as well.

 

[KS]

If it wouldn't it would be discriminatory. Though that is only my opinion and i do not know French law, but if i would bet on it i would go for that yes, it applies to Sikhs as well.

Well unfortunate if true...then Amrithdari Sikhs wont be able to work in public places.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

It conveys the wrong message at the minimum and it can go out of hand with religious groups demanding more and more consideration being taken care to accomodate them (their minority values) at the maximum.

Specifically on this:



State is their employer and if the state does not want to be represented by people wearing various religions "tokens" it is their right to demand it. Performing duties has nothing to do with it.

Any demands from minorities should be decided according to it's merit, nothing less nothing more.
if a govt employ keeps a photo, statue of any god in the govt office which is a public property then it is wrong, but unlike office his own body, mind is not a public property, he is hired for a job, he is a representative of govt but he has an existence, identity of his own at the same time, he has his personal, religious freedom with in the limits of that institutions rules, but the rules should be fair and it should not encroach one's fundamental rights.

 

[Audio]

Well unfortunate if true...then Amrithdari Sikhs wont be able to work in public places.

All they would in theory have to do is let go of the turban at the workplace and maybe trim the beard a little.

Any demands from minorities should be decided according to it's merit, nothing less nothing more.
if a govt employ keeps a photo, statue of any god in the govt office which is a public property then it is wrong, but unlike office his own body, mind is not a public property, he is hired for a job, he is a representative of govt but he has an existence, identity of his own at the same time, he has his personal, religious freedom with in the limits of that institutions rules, but the rules should be fair and it should not encroach one's fundamental rights.

Like i said before, if the said person feels the gov. encroaching on his freedoms he is free to go work elsewhere.
If you cannot understand that while you work, you give up a lot of you (i'd like a coffee break every hour but cant have one, despite the fact work would not suffer-see how that is encroaching on my personal freedom?-just a really obscure example of proving my point) for the sake of the paycheck i cannot help you and we are basically done here.

 

[Developereo]

Why does the "secular" State force non-Christians to adjust their work schedule according to Christian sensibilities?

France Official Holidays

• New Year's Day
• Good Friday
• Easter Monday
• Labor Day
• Ascension (l'Ascencion)
• WWII Victory Day
• Bastille Day (Fête nationale)
• Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Assomption)
• All Saints Day (La Toussaint)
• Armistice Day (Jour d'armistice)
• Christmas Day (Noël)
• 2nd Day of Christmas (in Alsace and Lorraine only)

 

[Dubious]

Good move.

keep Europe as Europe and not Eurabia.

@KS I am not sure if you know but head veil is common in elderly EUROPEAN ladies....

It is the NEW THOUGHT which is wanting this change....

Plus keep Europe as Europe = FREEDOM OF RELIGION!! Which they are not keeping hence, France is not even being Europe anymore...Just some scared state wanting attention!

 

[Developereo]

French law bars state employees from wearing prominent religious symbols such as Muslim headscarves, Jewish skullcaps or large Christian crosses in public schools, welfare offices or other government facilities.

What is the objective definition of "prominent"?

If I have good eyesight and can see a cross necklace, am I allowed to feel "offended" and complain?

If "secular" France wants to bar religious symbols, just say religious symbols. Why add weasel words like "prominent" or "conspicuous" to exempt traditional Christian symbols such as cross necklaces?

 

[Audio]

Why does the "secular" State force non-Christians to adjust their work schedule according to Christian sensibilities?

France Official Holidays

• New Year's Day
• Good Friday
• Easter Monday
• Labor Day
• Ascension (l'Ascencion)
• WWII Victory Day
• Bastille Day (Fête nationale)
• Assumption of the Blessed Virgin Mary (Assomption)
• All Saints Day (La Toussaint)
• Armistice Day (Jour d'armistice)
• Christmas Day (Noël)
• 2nd Day of Christmas (in Alsace and Lorraine only)

Probably the same reason Muslim are free of work on Eid.....it just isn't official. In exchange they get to work in businesses that need to be open on Christmas, New Year's day etc....

What is the objective definition of "prominent"?

If I have good eyesight and can see a cross necklace, am I allowed to feel "offended" and complain?

Yes, you are. And if and when you do, there wont be an angry mob coming after you.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

What is the objective definition of "prominent"?

If I have good eyesight and can see a cross necklace, am I allowed to feel "offended" and complain?

here the meaning I think is famous, widely known etc not about projection or visibility.

prom·i·nent (pr m -n nt)
adj.
1. Projecting outward or upward from
a line or surface; protuberant.
2. Immediately noticeable;
conspicuous. See Synonyms at
noticeable .
3. Widely known; eminent.