[Norway] Star of David banned in school, but hijab OK

Its important not to get caught up in victimization but at the same time there are structural inequalities in society that uniquely target minorities. We can't get caught up with one side or the other.

 

Offtopic: Voltaire never said that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voltaire under "misattribution"

EDIT: Huh - learn something new everyday; from the same site:

"If there were only one religion in England there would be danger of despotism; if there were two they would cut each other’s throats. But there are thirty, and they live in peace and happiness."

--A real Voltaire quote that is rather poignant for this thread.

 

They'll get over it. Banning polygomy didn't make the Mormons go poof. Whatever radicalization happened has been marginalized at best. Occasionally you see some nutjob in the arizona or idaho wilderness get busted for having to many wives but mainstream Mormons adapted and moved on. No reason Islam and Judaism can't do the same. Further, pandering to a particular sect because they are religious only encourages less integration, not more. Ultimately that is more dividing and breeds not only resentment but conflict.

Since there are thousands of regulations of religion I think the ol' slippery slope argument is kinda silly. Mormons can't have multiple wives, indians can't ingest peyote, rastas can't smoke pot, jim jones can't serve poison Kool-aid, satanic cults can't have human sacrifice and cannibals have to eat chicken...yet we don't live in a police state. The government should not decide what religion we practice - but regulating it is exactly what it ought to do.

 

The side of acting like a pompous jerk?

 

Polygamy and Incest got banned because it negatively impacts people. Women were coerced into marriages at young ages against their will and generally most of those werent consensual relationships. Banning it almost became necessary because of the abuse that happened. Polygamy theoretically could be justified if everyone involved truly consented to the relationship but that cant ever be verified or proven so the only thing to do is ban it.

However, banning muslim women from wearing a scarf seems ridiculous to justify. It does nothing to harm you or anyone else and is a personal peaceful decision. If you can prove some truly negative effect on other people then maybe you can justify a ban.

 

I'm secular (non-religious) but it would be an error to say i am an athiest - that's a poor assumption. I just try to keep my spiritual beliefs to myself and don't expose other people to them. No symbol or word or image is needed for me, and I don't think one's beliefs have anything to do with wearing a star or wearing donning something on your head or a cross or whatever.

Yes, I think religion is stupid - that's my honest opinion. It's oppressive and divisive. Do i think it should be banned? No, I just think other people shouldn't have to be distracted with someone else's religion. I shouldn't have to be accosted by freakin Hari Krishnas, or deal with some Bible Beater, or whatever. Practice in your home, your temples, or whatever, but don't bring it into schools and the work place - places of integration, not seperation.

 

Right and there's a difference between wearing a religious garb and trying to convert you. One is peaceful and a personal act and the other is an act attempting to affect another. The first is within every person's right just as in its your right to wear any other shirt while the latter while legal can be pretty annoying.

The point is that there's no reason to ban a person from wearing a religious garb. Unlike a member of jehovah's witnesses they're not trying to convert you but rather they are doing a personal act that only affects them. Just like you choose to wear a certain piece of clothing that you feel is within your rights so do they.

 

The subjegation of the female in at least many Muslim communities (won't say all or most) is ridiculous. As a symbol of such it certainly has a negative effect - namely to continue to reenforce said subjegation.

 

I'd rather be pompous and right than humble and wrong.

 

Are you seriously and consciously equating wearing a headscarf to polygamy, ingesting peyote, smoking the old reefer (which is totally cool by the way), poisonous Kool-Aid, human sacrifice, and cannibalism?

Surely you would agree that the government stopping me from eating you is a little different from the government banning a headscarf.

 

I don't think people should wear religious symbols in the work place or in school. It isn't conducisive to intergration. I think the work place has "uniforms" - suits or business casual...and schools should have uniforms as well - thus eliminating the whole debate. Wear what you want on your own time, but school and workplace aren't for practicing your beliefs - it's for doing work or learning. If there's a holiday where one needs to wear something, take a day off and practice your religion with your family and friends. Is that so hard?

 

talk about communism.

 

Wouldn't it be easier if you and others who hold such views were actually more 'tolerant' of the majority of the world who ARE religious?

 

Fascism is more like it...

 

No you got it wrong. There is only tyranny of majority, not minority.

 

Tell Iraqi Shi'as that...

 

The context of the discussion (NewYorker's) is in a democratic country.

 

If you have to stretch, communism sounds more like it. Fascism doesn't exclude religion from state.

 

but the masses can be presuaded by passion.

hence the necessity of a deliberative process. and a republic only with a constitution which gurantees freedom of religion. and yes there are limits. but that doesn't mean freedom to practice religion ends when i leave my house.