Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
Gov.Brown Signs Protection Muslim Attrie  
User currently offlinePSA53 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3069 posts, RR: 4
Posted (2 years 6 days 16 hours ago) and read 4068 times:

Governor Brown signed into law that Muslim women cannot be discriminated against by any California employer for wearing a hijab to work.I think it's a major defeat for woman's rights,which groups has been silent, that clearly suppresses them,IMHO is the worst of mankind religious treatment towards a woman.

This was all brought on by a lawsuit the woman and the ACLU,yes the ACLU of all groups, that it wants to protect "religious rights" against Disney ,which is a private company, which can have any dress code it wants.IMO,Brown is putting is nose where it shouldn't be and why employers are leaving the state.What's your opinion?




http://www.indianexpress.com/news/ca...o-law-prosikh-legislations/999767/


http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/...ight-to-wear-hijab/article4479874/

http://www.deadline.com/2012/08/disn...slim-employee-imane-boudlal-hijab/


Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
82 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offlineDocLightning From United States of America, joined Nov 2005, 19688 posts, RR: 58
Reply 1, posted (2 years 6 days 9 hours ago) and read 4043 times:

Quoting PSA53 (Thread starter):
Governor Brown signed into law that Muslim women cannot be discriminated against by any California employer for wearing a hijab to work.I think it's a major defeat for woman's rights,which groups has been silent, that clearly suppresses them,IMHO is the worst of mankind religious treatment towards a woman.

Has it occurred to you that not all Muslim women wearing the Hijab are being forced to do so?

I studied under a pediatric pulmonoligist named Dr. Samya Nasser. She wore traditional Muslim garb to work every day (and was very stylish about it, I might add). Whether it was jeans on a weekend or a business suit on a week day, she was always covered from the wrists and face. Her clothes were impressive, though. She might have covered up, but her hijabs matched her outfits and I daresay she was the best-dressed woman in the entire department.

She was also the chief of the Pediatric Pulmonology Division, a delight to work under, and she didn't take any BS from anyone. I challenge you to walk up to her and tell her to her face that she is "oppressed" because she is wearing a hijab.

She could take it off any time she likes. She chooses not to.

That said, I am of the opinion that religious PRACTICE should not enjoy any special protection. Religious BELIEF should be protected. If I don't want to hire someone who needs to wear fancy headgear to work, I shouldn't have to. But I would personally stick more to issues that actually affect the workplace.


User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 2, posted (2 years 6 days ago) and read 3965 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Has it occurred to you that not all Muslim women wearing the Hijab are being forced to do so?

This is the only issue for me - if it's the woman's free choice to wear a hijab, then she should be able to do so. The only acceptable exception would be if wearing a headscarf presented a safety issue in her job (e.g. operating machinery), in which case it shouldn't be allowed.

Unfortunately, in many Muslim communities, the wishes of the woman are subjugated by senior male members of the family (father or elder brother for example).



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinephotopilot From Canada, joined Jul 2002, 2737 posts, RR: 18
Reply 3, posted (2 years 5 days 23 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
I am of the opinion that religious PRACTICE should not enjoy any special protection. Religious BELIEF should be protected.

That's the correct answer in a nutshell, however it's too plain and Common Sense for most people to grasp.


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 4, posted (2 years 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 2):
Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
Has it occurred to you that not all Muslim women wearing the Hijab are being forced to do so?

This is the only issue for me - if it's the woman's free choice to wear a hijab, then she should be able to do so. The only acceptable exception would be if wearing a headscarf presented a safety issue in her job (e.g. operating machinery), in which case it shouldn't be allowed.

Why do employers like BA in the UK support Islamic, Jewish and Seik dress, but forbid Christian crosses to be worn?



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 5, posted (2 years 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3967 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 4):
Why do employers like BA in the UK support Islamic, Jewish and Seik dress, but forbid Christian crosses to be worn?

BA does not forbid the wearing of christian crosses.   

BA's current uniform dress code policy does not allow the overt display of any religious symbols. A Jewish member of staff may not display the cross of David on their uniform. Any member of BA's staff may wear a cross around their neck as long as it's hidden from view.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6649 posts, RR: 11
Reply 6, posted (2 years 5 days 22 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

What does that law mean in practice ? During the interview to hire her, the woman doesn't wear the scarf, you hire her, and next day she comes wearing it, and now you can't fire her ?

You have to wonder how strong is her belief if she can pull that trick.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 7, posted (2 years 5 days 18 hours ago) and read 3966 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 5):
Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 4):
Why do employers like BA in the UK support Islamic, Jewish and Seik dress, but forbid Christian crosses to be worn?

BA does not forbid the wearing of christian crosses.

BA's current uniform dress code policy does not allow the overt display of any religious symbols. A Jewish member of staff may not display the cross of David on their uniform. Any member of BA's staff may wear a cross around their neck as long as it's hidden from view.

A disingenuous answer, as you know that Jewish scull caps, Muslim Hijabs and Seik Turbans are all "religious symbols" or "symbols of religion" and are all allowed with the uniform. Hijabs and scull caps are not an article of their respective faiths, are not absolute requirements of either's religion, just as wearing a cross is not obligatory for Christians. Christian crosss are an item of clothing as much as a scull cap or Hijab (none are functionally necessary, are they?), but only the christian item is disallowed. Not credible.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offlinePSA53 From United States of America, joined Aug 2003, 3069 posts, RR: 4
Reply 8, posted (2 years 5 days 17 hours ago) and read 3965 times:

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):
That said, I am of the opinion that religious PRACTICE should not enjoy any special protection. Religious BELIEF should be protected. If I don't want to hire someone who needs to wear fancy headgear to work, I shouldn't have to. But I would personally stick more to issues that actually affect the workplace.

Very nicely said.In the example I have presented, do you believe Disney is correct? As you know,Disney is much more dress code sensitive.

Quoting DocLightning (Reply 1):

Has it occurred to you that not all Muslim women wearing the Hijab are being forced to do so?

I guess I'm guilty of stereotyping.But you say "not all." Are you speaking in terms of different levels of commitment of the religious practice?

But overall,businesses should have that final say so in dress code.Right now,Brown's seems want to force businesses to accept such special protection or face discrimination charges.



Tuesday's Off! Do not disturb.
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 9, posted (2 years 5 days 16 hours ago) and read 3964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

I really don't see how a women being protected from discrimination against her in the event that she chooses to wear hijab at work is somehow a bad thing. Really warped logic. As the Doc eloquently documented, it is far from the case that all women who wear hijab are somehow forced into it. I would suggest that those who believe that to be the case probably know nobody personally who chooses to cover up.


✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6649 posts, RR: 11
Reply 10, posted (2 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3964 times:

What about an employer's right to not want religion involved in his business ?


New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 11, posted (2 years 5 days 15 hours ago) and read 3964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 10):
What about an employer's right to not want religion involved in his business ?

How does a head covering interfere with almost any conceivable business?



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 12, posted (2 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3964 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 7):
A disingenuous answer

No, an accurate one.

Quoting OzGlobal (Reply 7):
Jewish scull caps, Muslim Hijabs and Seik Turbans are all "religious symbols" or "symbols of religion" and are all allowed with the uniform.

Turbans are compulsory for practicing Sikhs. Many Jewish scholars claim that the wearing of a kippa is compulsory. Likewise, the hijab is considered to be an absolute requirement by many Muslims. At the end of the day, the hijab is just a headscarf. My mother wore headscarves for many years.

If the wearing and public displaying of a cross were in any way a requirement of being Christian, BA would have to rethink its policy. But it isn't. It's also interesting that the British Government is of the view that Christians do not have the right to wear a cross at work.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/reli...ross-at-work-says-Government.html#

Quote:
Christians do not have a right to wear a cross or crucifix openly at work, the Government is to argue in a landmark court case.

As I said above, a cross can be worn, it just needs to be hidden beneath the uniform.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3636 posts, RR: 5
Reply 13, posted (2 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3963 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11):

There was a story in Canada a few years ago about some Sikhs that filed complaints against the new hard-hat requirements for their jobs. Not sure what ended up happening.


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 14, posted (2 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3965 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lewis (Reply 13):
There was a story in Canada a few years ago about some Sikhs that filed complaints against the new hard-hat requirements for their jobs. Not sure what ended up happening.

Clear safety reasons are about the only justification I can think of.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3636 posts, RR: 5
Reply 15, posted (2 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3963 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 12):
If the wearing and public displaying of a cross were in any way a requirement of being Christian

It is not. Same thing for the examples you provided:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 12):
Many Jewish scholars claim that the wearing of a kippa is compulsory
Quoting scbriml (Reply 12):
the hijab is considered to be an absolute requirement by many Muslims

Emphasis added. I do not see how these are requirements of faith, yet not followed by all followers of that faith. From all the Jewish people I know, even the ones that fully practice, only one wears a kippa, so its not really a must, is it? Same thing with the hijab and same thing with the cross. You don't have to wear a kippa to be considered a Jewish male and you do not need a hijab to be considered a Muslim female.


User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3636 posts, RR: 5
Reply 16, posted (2 years 5 days 14 hours ago) and read 3966 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 14):

Clear safety reasons are about the only justification I can think of.

Yet political correctness trumps any safety reasons. Just look at the UK where Sikhs are exempt from wearing hard hats in a construction zone - they are also exempt from wearing crash helmets while operating a motorcycle. Who knows, maybe it is the same in Canada after the complaints were filed.

[Edited 2012-09-10 14:12:21]

User currently offlinescbriml From United Kingdom, joined Jul 2003, 12566 posts, RR: 46
Reply 17, posted (2 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3963 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting lewis (Reply 15):
I do not see how these are requirements of faith

You don't, but many Muslims and Jews do.



Time flies like an arrow, but fruit flies like a banana!
User currently offlinelewis From Greece, joined Jul 1999, 3636 posts, RR: 5
Reply 18, posted (2 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3956 times:

Quoting scbriml (Reply 17):

You don't, but many Muslims and Jews do.

Same can be said about Christians and the cross. Many does not constitute all, which means it is not as much of a necessity as some groups are trying to make it.

Listen, I am a person who is not really into religion and I am a person who likes personal freedom. In the end, I do not care if people want to wear togas to work, but if you want to enforce a rule, it should either be for all or for none. I do not see why a visible cross may be offensive but another religious garment is not. I dislike the kind of PC where all external cultural traits are to be tolerated and respected while the indigenous culture is toned down in order not to "offend".

In the end, is just a different branding method, the one is a hat, the other is a cross on a chain. Same thing with the example of turbans I mentioned above. You cannot make someone wear a hat based on safety regulations yet exempt a group because of the type of clothing they wish to wear.

Quoting scbriml (Reply 12):

As I said above, a cross can be worn, it just needs to be hidden beneath the uniform.

In the case of the Disney worker, would she be fine if they told her that she can wear her headscarf, but it has to be completely covered by a Mickey Mouse hat? I doubt it...


User currently offlineOzGlobal From France, joined Nov 2004, 2721 posts, RR: 4
Reply 19, posted (2 years 5 days 13 hours ago) and read 3956 times:

Quoting lewis (Reply 15):
I do not see how these are requirements of faith, yet not followed by all followers of that faith. From all the Jewish people I know, even the ones that fully practice, only one wears a kippa, so its not really a must, is it? Same thing with the hijab and same thing with the cross. You don't have to wear a kippa to be considered a Jewish male and you do not need a hijab to be considered a Muslim female.

     

Exactly. Just asking for one standard for all, please.

The arguments used to support BA / UK rules convince no-one.



When all's said and done, there'll be more said than done.
User currently offline777way From Pakistan, joined Dec 2005, 5716 posts, RR: 4
Reply 20, posted (2 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3916 times:

^ Women are required to cover their heads according to Islam, if they choose not to its their perogative but it is going againt a religious requirement or even order, Muslim men do not have to cover their heads at all, they only wear caps because the prophet, peace be upon him used to at times, so its considered a Sunnah or tradition, but some take it to extreme of considering traditions as obligatory.

User currently offlineB777LRF From Luxembourg, joined Nov 2008, 1359 posts, RR: 3
Reply 21, posted (2 years 5 days 11 hours ago) and read 3910 times:

There is no answer to the BA/UK rules that will satisfy either logic or fairness. But as anybody discussing anything to do with the UK should know, that place has been savaged by a political correctness race to the bottom. That means, among other things, that any minority will have it's rights protected whilst those of the majority will have it's ignored or, worst case, vilified.

Thus, in the specific case it could be argued that while no mainstream branch of Christianity require the display of a cross, other religions does require its faithful to wear certain garbs in certain ways. BA and the UK can therefore successfully say they are neither discriminating nor offering affirmative action, but at the same time their actions does defy logic and fairness.

The answer to all this is, of course, to have the CoE, Cat C and every other branch of organised mainstream Christianity make it mandatory for their followers to wear a cross of no less than 3 feet by 2 feet, tied across the back, for 8 x 1 minute every day. Or what about a thorn crown, made from slightly less scratchy material than the original, to be worn during daylight hours? Now that'd put a spur up the rear quarter of the PC brigade, and by jolly would it serve them well!



From receips and radials over straight pipes to big fans - been there, done that, got the hearing defects to prove
User currently offlineAesma From France, joined Nov 2009, 6649 posts, RR: 11
Reply 22, posted (2 years 4 days 21 hours ago) and read 3828 times:

Quoting RussianJet (Reply 11):
How does a head covering interfere with almost any conceivable business?

I don't know. Can you imagine a woman with an attire saying "I'm Muslim" cleaning up a christian church or selling christian books at the library of the church ?

Each country has its culture of course, in some it will pose little problems (but then, why the need for a law ?), in others it wouldn't fly. In France any job where you have to interact in person with a customer would frown upon any kind of display of faith, unless it's a job related to religion (and you wear the attire corresponding to it). Even a McDonald's where you might expect a lot of Muslim customers and a lot of Muslim employees won't allow it. And even in an office job it would often be seen as detrimental to the work atmosphere. All religions are treated equally, and indeed that culture stems from an opposition to the main religion of the country, catholicism.

The funny part is that hardliners/islamists wouldn't allow women to work or even go out, anyway.

Quoting lewis (Reply 18):
In the case of the Disney worker, would she be fine if they told her that she can wear her headscarf, but it has to be completely covered by a Mickey Mouse hat? I doubt it...

Some Muslim women try this kind of stuff. For example my mother is a high school/community college professor, where public display of religion is illegal. Some girls put a scarf and then a wig on top of it. Usually after a week they either quit or remove the scarf, only wearing them in the street.



New Technology is the name we give to stuff that doesn't work yet. Douglas Adams
User currently offlineAirontario From Canada, joined Aug 2001, 551 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (2 years 4 days 20 hours ago) and read 3816 times:

Quoting lewis (Reply 16):
Yet political correctness trumps any safety reasons. Just look at the UK where Sikhs are exempt from wearing hard hats in a construction zone - they are also exempt from wearing crash helmets while operating a motorcycle. Who knows, maybe it is the same in Canada after the complaints were filed.

In Canada hard hats must be worn by everyone in constructions zones. The people who brought the challenges lost on the basis that if you choose to work in the construction industry you must follow the standards of that industry. Sikhs are allowed to wear their turban in other workplaces where helmets are not mandatory (In Toronto the police department even has a turban with the badge on it).


User currently offlineRussianJet From Belgium, joined Jul 2007, 7703 posts, RR: 21
Reply 24, posted (2 years 4 days 16 hours ago) and read 3772 times:
Support Airliners.net - become a First Class Member!

Quoting Aesma (Reply 22):
even in an office job it would often be seen as detrimental to the work atmosphere

That just seems such a bizarre claim. Unless you're going out of your way to be offended I just cannot understand how wearing a headscarf is detrimental to anyone. Any hint of religious proseletysing in the workplace should rightly not be tolerated, but wearing such an item of clothing as a headscarf just isn't offensive. What would be offensive is if someone who gets on well with their job, does not force their views on anyone but wears a headscarf, was treated badly or victimised by an anti-religious zealot on a mission to 'get offended'. It is pure prejudice and victimisation.



✈ Every strike of the hammer is a blow against the enemy. ✈
25 starbuk7 : But I just do not see it in the workplace. If you go to a shopping mall or to a restarant I do not care what you wear but I expect the employees of th
26 StarAC17 : It is optional and there are many Muslim women who choose not to wear it. How far does this go and there has to be some protections for the worker to
27 CrimsonNL : I don't agree with the protection of religious practice, but tell me how a headscarf or a hijab is any different from a Christian woman wearing a ski
28 Post contains images lewis : Whether it is a cross, a headscarf or a small hat, it is not detrimental really, it is just that some people try hard to be "offended" while they sho
29 Aesma : It is not : a company will certainly not allow too short a skirt or too big a cross, for similar reasons.
30 Aesma : I think you got your answer in that sentence, here not much is needed to think proselytizing is happening. The fact that only women have to wear some
31 RussianJet : Not sure what you mean. Wearing a headscarf is not equal to proseletysing. That is a real stretch if this is really what you mean. Doesn't help what?
32 DeltaMD90 : Didn't we have a thread a while back about tattoos and the consensus was it is "individual freedom and expression" but now all of the sudden because i
33 DocLightning : Can you back that up? At any rate, someone needs to decide that their "religion" mandates that they come to work naked. And file a lawsuit. That will
34 DeltaMD90 : Yes, there are limits, as there should be. I agree with you though, I don't think female Muslim attire is bad or automatically oppressive. But again,
35 LTBEWR : I live in an area of New Jersey that has mosic of many ethnic and religious groups. I can go into a local grocery store and see a Muslim woman with th
36 Post contains links lewis : Sure! This is for protective hats in construction sites - effective exemption only when a Sikh is wearing a turban. http://www.hse.gov.uk/foi/interna
37 DocLightning : There needs to be a test: does an employer have a valid reason why the employee's religious PRACTICE would affect that employee's job performance? A
38 lewis : I thought about taking up dodekatheism, I can launch toga Fridays at the office.
39 Pyrex : Not sure what the big news here is. There is a very clear and well-established priority of values for liberals Non-Christian/Mormon religions > Ath
40 Aesma : Can you look at that woman without being reminded of her religion ? I'm an atheist but I don't wear anything to advertise it. It doesn't help because
41 DeltaMD90 : Really, does it matter? Are you offended by seeing someone wear a cross or something? Just wondering, you seem so up in arms about religion...
42 RussianJet : Yes, particularly in the case of people I work with regularly and can value their skills, knowledge and character far more than whether they are wear
43 StarAC17 : I have a problem with this because these exemptions on the basis of religion trump very strict health and safety rules. Also if a Sikh gets in an acc
44 Aesma : I'm not offended either way, but I don't feel totally comfortable either. A small cross (or david star or whatever) is no problem but I would feel th
45 DeltaMD90 : Why? I don't see how's it's any different than wearing a "I ♥ NY" shirt, a shirt with a picture of their favorite band, a picture with a big flag o
46 starbuk7 : Because that is standard "American" attire and is expected when you are walking on the street, just as seeing someone wearing their standard "religio
47 DeltaMD90 : I think we're arguing 2 different things, though I did kind of drift away from the workplace argument.
48 DocLightning : I defy you to list one instance in which Christians have been persecuted in this country.
49 Pyrex : Nice attempt at deflecting the conversation away from your tolerance for intolerance.
50 DeltaMD90 : What are you talking about??
51 Asturias : If I understand correctly, the freedom for expression is very important in the USA. In France the freedom from religion is equally important. It is p
52 aa757first : This is really just a political move -- existing federal laws already cover employees in this situation. As an example, take a look at this hypotheti
53 DeltaMD90 : These is indeed a gray area, but I'm wondering what insensitive people would care if a receptionist has a hijab. I've seen many here that say that it
54 lewis : Exactly. I can see what something extreme like a burqa may not be appropriate for work, especially for a receptionist as this example shows, but a hi
55 Aesma : Are we still talking about the work place ? Yeah, it has very historical roots but has become cultural : religion is for the home or the religious bu
56 DeltaMD90 : No I kinda drifted a bit (I misunderstood something). But back to the workplace, I realize there are times were safety and image is concerned. But a
57 aa757first : Probably the same people who are worried that their waitress is wearing a hijab as she sets down their Diet Coke.
58 Aaron747 : What's missing from your total equation here is that freedom of expression protects everything - including poor taste. Which is basically how I defin
59 777way : Why would any Muslim work such a job when its against their religion teachings? unless they want to convert people they would never take up such jobs
60 DeltaMD90 : LOL the horror. I think it stems from anti-religion... looking at some of the pictures overseas right now (the riots) I can kinda see why many non-re
61 Aesma : I don't know. The few jobs that hijab wearing women do get are cleaning jobs, so it could happen, since those jobs are almost always handled by contr
62 777way : No it would not happen, you are just trying to dmean hijab waering women with the manner you have commented on the type of jobs they get, why would a
63 DeltaMD90 : I don't know, I (and the churches I've attended) welcome people of all faiths in. In fact I know my church does do some work with employees of differ
64 JAGflyer : As far as I know, there is no "requirement" for a Sikh to wear a turban. It seems though that the turban is the most convenient (for lack of a better
65 scbriml : The wearing of turbans is an absolute requirement for practicing Sikhs.
66 Aesma : I'm not trying to demean anybody. The fact is to get a good job you often need an education, and for that to happen you first need a high school dipl
67 Asturias : That was implied with my remark on the national fabric, which indicated severe cultural roots.
68 N1120A : Seeing discussions like this on an airplane website is pretty funny for me, given what I do for a living and where I do it. Governor Brown signed into
69 PSA53 : Please include businesses in that conversation as private companies have civil rights,too.
70 N1120A : Yeah - not to be discriminated against if they are a member of a protected category.
71 Aesma : Meanwhile, Marine Le Pen, 18% of the votes in last presidential election, is proposing a ban of all religious signs everywhere.
72 DeltaMD90 : Is a draconian law like that even legal (in France?)
73 Aesma : Constitutional experts are saying no. I'm guessing it would go against EU law too (in fact the current laws are already being attacked at the EU level
74 Post contains links DeltaMD90 : Oh ok. I think that would be along the lines of banning football team merchandise... rooting for your favorite team, except it's your religion Edit:
75 Aesma : Well, we (the French) mostly disagree. But as I said above it's cultural, the Catholic Church once had so much power that now religion outside private
76 DeltaMD90 : I understand, and I know people aren't as religious in France, but isn't there a middle option between letting the Catholic Church run things/Sharia
77 777way : Yes they are: "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except
78 Post contains links aa757first : All of my understanding of anti-discrimination laws come from an undergraduate employment law course (taught in California), so while I understood yo
79 PSA53 : Employer is not banning you from practicing you're religion.When an employee is serving the public,employers will have a universal dress code applied
80 Aesma : I talked about the influence of the catholic church but I would like to add that France also had several religious wars (catholics vs protestants) th
81 MD11Engineer : Actually up to the late middle ages women in Europe would cover themselves very much like Muslim women in hijab today. Look at a typical Catholic nun
82 stealthz : And this is where my Indian freinds "rights' impinge on mine.. "This does not apply to a follower of the Sikh religion while wearing a turban." Scena
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
New Hawaii Gov. To Combat "Birthers" posted Tue Dec 28 2010 15:48:46 by Aaron747
Obama's Granny Prayed For Him To Be Muslim posted Fri Nov 26 2010 17:54:36 by kevin
Happy Eid To All Muslim Members! posted Mon Nov 15 2010 22:01:07 by BrusselsSouth
Lou Dobbs Signs With Fox posted Wed Nov 10 2010 19:50:33 by WarRI1
Screen / Case Protection For MacBook Pro posted Thu Nov 4 2010 12:34:53 by ALTF4
The Muslim Calendar posted Sun Oct 17 2010 21:04:06 by DocLightning
Funny Signs & Text From Around The World (Photos) posted Sun Oct 17 2010 12:43:34 by MadameConcorde
CA Race: Brown, Whitman & "W" Word posted Mon Oct 11 2010 11:39:15 by Aaron747
The Tea Party Isn't About Anti-Muslim Sentiment. posted Sat Oct 9 2010 11:36:10 by DocLightning
Abominable US Gov Action In Guatemala In 1940s posted Fri Oct 1 2010 19:30:24 by Derico