Pupils will be banned from wearing abayas, loose-fitting full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in France’s state-run schools, the education minister has said.

The rule will be applied as soon as the new school year starts on 4 September.

France has a strict ban on religious signs in state schools and government buildings, arguing that they violate secular laws.

Wearing a headscarf has been banned since 2004 in state-run schools.

  • mycroft@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    3 years ago

    For a 200 year old law, it’s pretty straight forward. And for all it’s flaws, the Nth revolution didn’t like the Catholic church for … reasons, so they wanted to make a law to get them out of politics and make them liable for their shenanigans. Thankfully they didn’t discriminate when they wrote the law.

    https://www.gouvernement.fr/sites/default/files/contenu/piece-jointe/2017/02/libertes_et_interdits_eng.pdf

    1. PROHIBITIONS AND LIMITS TO INDIVIDUAL FREEDOMS IN THE FRAMEWORK OF “LAÏCITÉ”

     The principle of secularism means that the State and religious organisations are separate. There is therefore no state-run public worship. The State neither recognises, nor subsidises, nor salaries any form of worship. Exceptions and adjustments to the ban on funding are defined in the legislation and case-law; they concern in particular chaplaincies, which are paid for by the State1

     No religion can impose its prescriptions on the Republic. No religious principle can be invoked for disobeying the law.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 years ago

      Except banning anything at school is the opposite of what’s written here: the Republic forbid wearing some dress because it’s wrongly associated with religion.

      The government is turning atheism into an oppressive religion.

      • nullptr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        3 years ago

        Lol sorry but could only laugh on “turning atheism into oppressive religion”…

        • x4740N@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 years ago

          Says the guy with the randomly generated username from random.org

          People woth randomised usernames are usually trolls or bad faith accounts because they want to make it harder for their accounts to be found by using randomised usernames

    • nullptr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 years ago

      No it’s not. making something mandatory for a group of people makes that group of people well separated from the rest. here is exactly opposite : they are trying to make them look like anyone else.

      • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 years ago

        this ban is as dumb as banning heavy metal, dungeons and dragons, skateboards, backwards baseball caps, etc etc

        it’s all just trying to look tough enough to court right wing racists on targets too vulnerable to fight back.

        if you want to protect vulnerable young girls, you don’t start by ostracising them from the community.

          • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            3 years ago

            how is saying someone from a group of people can’t dress in attitudes that identifies them as a member of the group not ostracising? it’s the very definition.

            • nullptr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              Because “ostracizing” means “to exclude” someone. While imposing a common dress standard is to include everyone. so petty much the opposite of “ostracizing”

              • generalpotato@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 years ago

                A common dress standard would be called a uniform. This law isn’t mandating uniforms, so you’re incorrect. It’s excluding religious groups, so yes, ostracizing.

                • nullptr@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  Ostracising means to exclude. The law forces the blending. The mental gymnastics you need to find “exclusion” in that is buffing. Again it’s not excluding anyone, it tries to male them blend with the rest. Blend. Mix. Nobody is excluded. I never mentioned uniforms, neither the law, i don’t know why you bring that up. Yes, uniforms obviously make everyone uniform but we aren’t talking about it. Dressing regularly also make everyone look “regular” or “secular”, we don’t need uniforms.

                  If anything, the groups of people are literally excluding themselves by wearing stuff nobody else does.

                  Looks like at some point people are just repeating the same argument for everything and opposite of it.

      • SCB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 years ago

        You know what makes everyone look alike? A niqab.

        Someone call the Taliban and let them know they’re defenders of freedom.

        • nullptr@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 years ago

          lol your argument is dumb sorry You know what else make everyone alike? Plastic surgery. Someone call surgeons

          • SCB@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            Plastic surgery does not make everyone look alike. That’s a silly thing to say lol

            Also you’re missing the highly relevant point that plastic surgery is not compulsory

            • nullptr@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              3 years ago

              Well i made a silly argument to show you how I feel about yours lol.

              Nobody is imposing a cloth on anyone, and even less a religious one. So you can’t use niqqab in your argument against me because that’s literally what i am against!

              You could say for example that’s a cultural thing, and forbidding it would somehow restrict the minority. But then, it’s only public schools, the law doesn’t care (me neither) about adults wearing it outside. (I don’t know why I am arguing with myself on your behalf 🤔)

              What it does care about, is to prevent community bubbles forming within groups of children. Which i totally support.

              • SCB@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                English
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                3 years ago

                we’re just controlling what communities people are allowed to form. Nothing oppressive

                Ok lol

                • nullptr@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  3 years ago

                  We are controlling what communities ARE NOT allowed to form. Stop negating my points lol

  • nullptr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    3 years ago

    I am mildly in favor of that. Kids can’t decide what to wear it’s their parents who do.

    This will simply reduce the artificial divide between those wear that type of stuff and who doesn’t.

    I also don’t believe it’s a freedom endangering, because they’re aren’t spontaneously people wearing abayas or burka or whatever just for the pleasure of it, I interpret the fact of wearing it as religious propaganda and artificial separation.

    • bouh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      3 years ago

      If there was a uniform at school it would be different. Here it’s fashion police. Specifically targeted at Arab culture.

      It’s an atheist theocracy. Also called fascism.

      • nullptr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        3 years ago

        It’s obviously targeted, but at religion not a specific ethnic group. Moreover, that law will make those pupils look like anyone else, so if anything, this will reduce the stigma

        • bouh@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          3 years ago

          It’s not targeted at religion because it’s not a religious dress. Ergo it’s a culture that’s targeted and it’s blatant racism.

          Stigmatising people for their culture or religion never integrate them.

          We should teach fascists how to read what’s written on our townhall though.

          • nullptr@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            3 years ago

            It’s clearly associated with religion, so technical details do not matter. This law is literally erasing the difference between all, stop repeating the same argument guys, it’s not stigmatizing anyone because they all damn look the same