19-12-2003 22:56									#61
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

The teacher rule would be Constitutional, IMO (US Constitution probably, Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms possibly not). Would be wrong unless the mode of expression was too blatant/evident (i.e. a yarmulke or a scarf is okay, full burkha or huge cross on a tshirt probably not).

	19-12-2003 23:01									#62
	Full PM-box? Change here!

quote: Originally posted by KrazyHorse Although if I had my way I'd allow public nudity, with minor exceptions (I don't want to sit on a seat after somebody else has had their bare ass on it, for example).

Towels should be the only mandatory cloth in any human society

	19-12-2003 23:08									#63
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

It is easy to look the other way when problems result from the integrism, but they exist anyway : for security reasons, headscarfed girls cannot access laboratories; parents refuse their participation to sport activities, and their attending certain course such as biology. As a consequence, they will not been allowed to pass certain exams. The public school is not a superstore where you buy what you want, it is a standarsized teaching factory whith national programs and exams.

Within the public school all children are equal and uniform; outside they are free to be as different as they like.

And adult women are free to wear the headscarf all day long, but not on their identity card. And at the hospital they have no right to demand a female doctor if no one is available. All these behaviours exist too.

	19-12-2003 23:13									#64
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by DanS DAVOUT: That's not a good comparison. As LOTM says, McCarthy was repudiated a whole long time ago and the laws that enabled his work were judged unconstitutional.

The fact that a law has been reversed did not prevent Prosecutor Yang to condemn the Crédit Lyonnais.

40 years ago you were much more authoritarian that we could be today.

	19-12-2003 23:53									#65
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: When they are displayed that clearly, they are beyond personal.

No... they are still personal, even if displayed clearly. Doesn't matter one iota.

quote: For us, that rule would be no problem, since the teacher is an agent of the state.

Under the Constitution, yes. Under Title VII, however, the teacher could easily argue religious discrimination (individual disparate treatment), unless the employer could show not wearing the headscarf was a bona fide occupational qualification.

	20-12-2003 00:37									#66
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by DAVOUT Not at all, I was just illustrating your statement : Mac Carthy slightly impinged of the communist party affairs, and on the life of hundreds of American citizens for political reasons. I assume that this was made under the cover of the US law, and I conclude that as far as authoritarianism is concerned, we are at par.

Under cover of the Smith act, which banned organizations dedicated to the violent overthrow of the government. NOT to organizations that, for example, would have their members violate the law as acts of civil disobedience. And even so that law is, IIUC, repealed and the actions taken pursuant to it condemned by all "right thinking" tolerant people.


So no, not on par, you're just 50 years behind us - at least.

	20-12-2003 00:44									#67
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor Because schools are the State's thing, and that the State does the regulation of what expression and clothing is allowed, and what is not? If I tell you nudists cannot come naked at school, will you whine so much?

At least in the US attendance at school is MANDATORY - is it not in France? So if parents cant afford private schools, and dont have the resources to homeschool (does that even exist in France) they have no choice but to send their children to public school, or face the truancy laws. Therefore the state MUST accomodate religious diversity in school, or else it is effectively suppressing the practice of religion/

As for nudism, I would suggest that the state would have to demonstate that nudism presented a direct threat to order - not a difficult thing to demonstrate, I suspect - NOT merely that it was proselytization for a religion or political group.

	20-12-2003 00:46									#68
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor When they are displayed that clearly, they are beyond personal. That's precisely the beef, and that's what falls under the law.

Personal beliefs doesnt mean hidden and secret. And again, havent crosses worn by students been acceptable in France since 1905? (despite wearing of such clearly NOT being religiously mandatory for Catholics)?

	20-12-2003 00:52									#69
	Remove this text

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor The problem is that it is often unclear whether the Scarf is 1) a free choice, 2) a 'free' choice dictated by the circumstances such as by the girls who can only do this not be considered sluts, or 3) something forced upon the girls by their relatives or religious leaders.

Ditto for long sleeves. I can assure you there are jewish communities where girls who wear short sleeves, even in the summer, are considered sluts. And I am quite sure feminists of all stripes would (rightly) consider that oppression as well. Are long sleeves in warm weather to be banned as well? This has no end -to be consistent you must ban ALL fulfillments of religious based laws of modesty that go beyond the consensus of "the Republic".

BTW, how do you know that children who attend Catholic schools do so out of choice, rather than pressure from their relatives? Are you to ban Catholic schools as well?

If you are to take an unpopular practice, and ban it (everywhere or somewhere) on the justification that in SOME CASES it might not have been a choice, you might as well drop all pretense of liberalism. If you truely think these girls are being abused, you should do something about it, whether they wear scarves to school or not. IF not, you have no basis for denying them choice.

	20-12-2003 00:57									#70
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by DAVOUT The public school is not a superstore where you buy what you want, it is a STANDARDIZED teaching FACTORY whith national programs and exams. Within the public school all children are equal and UNIFORM; outside they are free to be as different as they like.

STANDARDIZED - FACTORY - UNIFORM

Dear Freedom-minded Brits, Norwegians, Finns, Swiss, Poles, etc - be VERY careful what you're commiting yourselves to.

	20-12-2003 01:01									#71
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

Chirac could accomplish his objective in a religion-neutral manner by requiring all kids in public schools to wear uniforms with no permissible deviations. Just such a requirement was held to be enforceable by the SCOTUS in connection with the military where a captain wanted to wear his Jewish skullcap indoors. If France went this direction, I am sure STATE would have no problem with what it is trying to do here.

But, since this is a direct attack on freedom of religion, it IS offensive to basic US constitutional law and IS contrary to American foreign policy that advocates freedom of religion. Simply saying that the Muslim headscarf is offensive to some and therefor must be banned is offensive to most Americans regardless of France's long struggle with the Catholic Church. It was exactly this kind of intollerance that caused many to flee Europe (and elsewhere) to settle this new land centuries ago and establish the principle here of freedom of religion.

I must say that I am increasingly viewing France as a not quite a modern civilized society. There seems to be a lot of religious intollerance openly displayed even by its president. This is the same problem we had with Milosovic and his ethnic cleansing was it not?

	20-12-2003 01:05									#72
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ned Chirac could accomplish his objective in a religion-neutral manner by requiring all kids in public schools to wear uniforms with no permissible deviations. Just such a requirement was held to be enforceable by the SCOTUS in connection with the military where a captain wanted to wear his Jewish skullcap indoors. If France went this direction, I am sure STATE would have no problem with what it is trying to do here. But, since this is a direct attack on freedom of religion, it IS offensive to basic US constitutional law and IS contrary to American foreign policy that advocates freedom of religion. Simply saying that the Muslim headscarf is offensive to some and therefor must be banned is offensive to most Americans regardless of France's long struggle with the Catholic Church. It was exactly this kind of intollerance that caused many to flee Europe (and elsewhere) to settle this new land centuries ago and establish the principle here of freedom of religion. I must say that I am increasingly viewing France as a not quite a modern civilized society. There seems to be a lot of religious intollerance openly displayed even by its president. This is the same problem we had with Milosovic and his ethnic cleansing was it not?

just to clarify - i see a great difference between the headscarf law and ethnic cleansing - and a society can be completely civilized, and even completely democratic, even if somewhat illiberal.

Also I DONT think its the general business our state Dept to meddle in the internal affairs of other democracies - though given the current struggle for the hearts and minds of muslims around the world I can see this as one area to make an exception.

	20-12-2003 01:18									#73
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: i see a great difference between the headscarf law and ethnic cleansing

So do the rest of us... Ned is a bit... off his rocker, would be proper words.

	20-12-2003 01:24									#74
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Lord of the Mark, I think there is little doubt that the French are motivated by a reaction to the Muslim community and want to keep Muslim practices if not the Muslim themselves away from everyone else. At least in part, if not in major part, this is why Milosevic wanted to forcibly remove Muslims in both Bosnia and Kosovo and replace them with Orthodox Serbs. I remember a statement early on in the conflict that what was going on in Bosnia (and Kosovo) was merely an extension of the Serb's ancient war against the Muslim Turks. Now the French are justifying their actions against the Muslims on a basis of their own ancient struggle with the Catholic Church.

But the underlying facts remain the same. There is a significant intolerance in France, as there was in probably still is in Serbia, to Muslims.

	20-12-2003 01:26									#75
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui quote: i see a great difference between the headscarf law and ethnic cleansing So do the rest of us... Ned is a bit... off his rocker, would be proper words.

The only difference between the two is degree.

	20-12-2003 01:40									#76
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

quote: Originally posted by Ned Lord of the Mark, I think there is little doubt that the French are motivated by a reaction to the Muslim community and want to keep Muslim practices if not the Muslim themselves away from everyone else.

(sorry, I'm drunk and in a rush)
The French polical community is divided about that. To say things are uniformed is an uninformed thought.

1) "Keeping Muslims and other people separate" has strongly to do with local politics, as the cities are responsible for the geographic allocation of people. For a long time, cities tried to concentrate Arab populations in specific quarters, and middle-class (generally white) populations in others. Things are changing slowly, but right-wing mayors are very reluctant in mixing populations, given than many a right-wing voter would hate feeling surrounded by Arabs (quite a few middle-class Left-wingers would as well, but they're not vocal about it)

2) There is a dispute at the top of the State between Chirac and his popular rival, police minister Nicolas Sarkozy. Chirac wants to keep the 3rd Republic model of integration/assimilation of the migrant populations, that worked so well for our Italians and our Poles.
Sarkozy, OTOH, would favor an American-inspired model that figure affirmative action, NO new law about the Scarf, and a clear representation (rather than a melting) of communities.

The fact that Davout and I agree on Chirac's position doesn't mean there is a consensus in the French opinion.

	20-12-2003 01:47									#77
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: as long as they are doing so without provocation and intimidation of others in the society

The wearing of scarves is viewed as a provocation and intimidation, and that's the whole point. The reasoning is the following: Allowing scarves to be worn at school means that girls who don't wear it will be discriminated against, seen as sluts, and hassled. Wearing a headscarf can be done in because of intimidation. This may be exaggerated, or maybe not. The point is that there's a difference between scarves. An aunt of my wife is muslim and wears headscarves which are not ostentatious. She respects her religion and noone would complain if a girl wore something like this at school. When a girl refuses to go to the swimming pool and learn to swim because of her religion, she is actually acting against the law. This behaviour is also a reason why these scarves are banned.

As a side matter, I don't understand how americans can pretend they promote freedom of religion when they say 'God bless America' in official statements. As an atheist, this would hurt me a lot if I was American, as I couldn't utter a statement like that. It'd be against my religous beliefs.

	20-12-2003 01:47									#78
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Ned The only difference between the two is degree.

	20-12-2003 01:48									#79
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: The only difference between the two is degree.

Yeah and the only difference between killing someone because they slept with your spouse and being Stalin is a matter of degree .

	20-12-2003 01:49									#80
	Tired of ads?

Proper usage: the only difference between Fez and Ned is one of degree

Improper usage: the only difference between Hitler and GWB is one of degree

	20-12-2003 01:52									#81
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: The wearing of scarves is viewed as a provocation and intimidation

Only in France.

quote: I don't understand how americans can pretend they promote freedom of religion when they say 'God bless America' in official statements.

Um... that's part of freedom of religion. Why should I tell the President he can't express his religious beliefs? It's his speech, he has the freedom to say his belief. Freedom of religion.

	20-12-2003 01:55									#82
	Got spare money?

quote: Originally posted by LDiCesare As a side matter, I don't understand how americans can pretend they promote freedom of religion when they say 'God bless America' in official statements. As an atheist, this would hurt me a lot if I was American, as I couldn't utter a statement like that. It'd be against my religous beliefs.

Not every statement by an official is an official statement. Official documents dont state that. Individual pols can say that, just as they can proclaim their atheism if they so choose.

	20-12-2003 01:57									#83
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

Hey, we ban Muslim women from wearing a headscarf while getting a drivers license, who are we to judge:P?

by the way, no school girls vs France jokes in the entire thread?

	20-12-2003 01:58									#84
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

What happens in the US?
Do muslim girls come with whatever they want?

I don't have a fixed opinion on the subject, but I think, not a conviction or anything, that freedom is the best. Anyone comes as he/she wants in school.

	20-12-2003 01:59									#85
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by Spiffor (2) There is a dispute at the top of the State between Chirac and his popular rival, police minister Nicolas Sarkozy. Chirac wants to keep the 3rd Republic model of integration/assimilation of the migrant populations, that worked so well for our Italians and our Poles. Sarkozy, OTOH, would favor an American-inspired model that figure affirmative action, NO new law about the Scarf, and a clear representation (rather than a melting) of communities. .

First of all i dont see affirmative action and seperate representation as necessarily ideal - we tend to distinguish here between ethnic assimilation and religious assimilation. Which would lead to distinguishing between assimilating Italians, Poles and even North africans, and muslims per se.

BTW, why do you suppose so many more Italians went to the US than to France, despite proximity of France, closer language, and relatively high French wages (lower than US, but still high by european standards throughout 19th and early 20th c)

	20-12-2003 02:00									#86
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

I can't really see this as justified unless as part of a school uniform. School uniforms are a good idea, though.

I don't know why some of the American posters seem to believe that the death penalty is something Europeans 'whine' about. Most Europeans are probably in favour of it. And a good portion of American states don't use it.

	20-12-2003 02:07									#87
	Support Apolyton

quote: Do muslim girls come with whatever they want?

For public schools, I think so. However, I guess there's an appropriateness dress code for physical education class, for instance.

	20-12-2003 02:15									#88
	Increase the size of your Attachments

It's interesting that the US isn't "afraid" of being completely free and on the one hand allowing religious freedom and on the other not feeling "threatened" by it.

personal freedoms at its max. The best way IMHO, if possible.

	20-12-2003 02:21									#89
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: we ban Muslim women from wearing a headscarf while getting a drivers license, who are we to judge

No we don't. We only ban a total facial covering. Women can wear the headscarf in driver's license pictures, as it shows their entire face.

	20-12-2003 02:31									#90
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

Spiffor, thanks for your thoughtful reply (Krazy Horse can learn something from you.) It does appear there is a significant amount of (right-wing?) resistance to Muslims in France and this issue with the scarves flows directly from it.

Chirac is not trying to get the French to accept the Muslims, he is trying to get the Muslims to become French - and until they do - they can stay in their ghettos.

Well, we all know where that led to in Yugoslavia and in Germany before that.