126
submitted 1 year ago by Tazmanian@lemmy.world to c/world@lemmy.world

The French government's decision to ban children from wearing the abaya, the loose-fitting, full-length robes worn by some Muslim women, in state-run schools drew applause on Monday from the right, but also criticism.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] bobman@unilem.org 3 points 1 year ago

The other commenter was saying 'crosses are allowed if they're not too big.'

Which is it?

[-] Dremor@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago

Usually if it isn't visible. Like a necklace worn under clothes. The idea being that you should not make your religious apparent.

[-] bobman@unilem.org 1 points 1 year ago

He was saying that they would wear them around their necks and in their ears and nobody would bother them about it.

[-] Dremor@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

It is mainly up to the head of the school to define what is acceptable or not.

In my case it wouldn't bother me me if a Jewish, Muslim, or any other religion student wore a penny sized necklace under his clothes, but not if it is a ostensible one.

That's the problem with clothes, it shows ostensibly from which religion, caste or culture you are from.

[-] bobman@unilem.org 1 points 1 year ago

Yeah, he didn't make any mention of obscuring it with clothing or it being up to the 'head of the school.'

[-] Dremor@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

The law is intentionally broad while leaving some space for interpretation in order to encompasse case that may not yet exist.

Law is like an onion. Each layer encompasses the previous one with more precise definition, while not contradicting it. In this case, the constitution protect the freedom of religion, but also separate religion from the state. Thus you are free to have one, but not to ostensibly display it in public (by that I mean in state owned) spaces.

From this point you have 2 way to say what is considered as ostensible according to said law. Application decrees, which is taken by the executive branch, and which is what was used in this case. And jurisprudence, which are the result of the judiciary branch.

this post was submitted on 29 Aug 2023
126 points (97.7% liked)

World News

38972 readers
2937 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS