

0·
3 years agoA 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.


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.
Yes, we’ve established what ostracizing means. If anybody seems to be jumping through hoops to prove that this law, that target religious minorities isn’t targeted at religious minorities, is you. You shouldn’t have to force (or make them) “blend”. If there’s force or a mandate involved, then it’s already not the best path to freedom of expression and identity.
There’s no such thing as a “secular dress” because people in a truly secular society, can come from different (incl non western) backgrounds and can choose to wear whatever they want. Therefore, you either don’t claim freedom of expression or identity or you accept that this is a targeted law aimed at a minority group in the name of “secularism” and is no different than the Taliban mandating face-covering like somebody else stated in these discussions. This just happens to be on the other end of the spectrum.