Ban on religious symbols

[SidBh]

Would Communists support the French ban on conspicuous religious symbols?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_law_on_secularity_and_conspicuous_religious _symbols_in_schools

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/French_ban_on_face_covering

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_scarf_controversy_in_France

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

Given that I use to live in France and am very familiar with said policies I will say I think they're complete and total bullshit, I think it's designed to in part repress the public visibility of Muslims/Arabs and that I would never support such policies.

[ВАЛТЕР]

I wouldn't support banning anything that is religious, so long as it does not cause harm to anybody else. Let people believe what they want and follow their traditions and cultures as they pleases. We want social equality, and you cannot have that if you are oppressing certain groups because of their customs.

[SidBh]

Okay. But in a future Communist state would you support Atheism being taught in schools as a mandatory course and Atheism as the State's official stance on religion just like in the Soviet Union?

[Leftsolidarity]

Okay. But in a future Communist state would you support Atheism being taught in schools as a mandatory course and Atheism as the State's official stance on religion just like in the Soviet Union?

First, there is no "communist state". Communism is a classless and stateless society.
Second, how could their be an "Atheism course"? That's ridiculous.

Is not teaching creationism teaching atheism? I really don't get this at all. Who gives a fuck what religion someone follows? It's wrong for the state to teach any religion in school but does that mean it is teaching atheism? No, it is just leaving the subject alone. Religion has no place in schools unless it is just teaching the history of different religions.

[Drowzy_Shooter]

First, there is no "communist state". Communism is a classless and stateless society.
Second, how could their be an "Atheism course"? That's ridiculous.

Is not teaching creationism teaching atheism? I really don't get this at all. Who gives a fuck what religion someone follows? It's wrong for the state to teach any religion in school but does that mean it is teaching atheism? No, it is just leaving the subject alone. Religion has no place in schools unless it is just teaching the history of different religions.

I believe he's implying that teaching evolution would be incompatible with Christianity or Islam

[xub3rn00dlex]

First, there is no "communist state". Communism is a classless and stateless society.
Second, how could their be an "Atheism course"? That's ridiculous.

Is not teaching creationism teaching atheism? I really don't get this at all. Who gives a fuck what religion someone follows? It's wrong for the state to teach any religion in school but does that mean it is teaching atheism? No, it is just leaving the subject alone. Religion has no place in schools unless it is just teaching the history of different religions.

To go further with your statement, there are optional classes about the history of religion and all about their teachings in college. So if some one is serious about "learning" religion then they're free to choose to do so. If not, then they don't have to.

[SidBh]

First, there is no "communist state". Communism is a classless and stateless society.
Second, how could their be an "Atheism course"? That's ridiculous.

Is not teaching creationism teaching atheism? I really don't get this at all. Who gives a fuck what religion someone follows? It's wrong for the state to teach any religion in school but does that mean it is teaching atheism? No, it is just leaving the subject alone. Religion has no place in schools unless it is just teaching the history of different religions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
Read the part under The Soviet Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union
Read the intro and the rest of it. Quoting from the intro:

"To that end, the communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools"

[Leftsolidarity]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
Read the part under The Soviet Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union
Read the intro and the rest of it. Quoting from the intro:

"To that end, the communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools"

Well seeing as that the USSR wasn't communist (the whole it being a state thing), it completely negates your point.

I'll address it though by saying, so what? How does that make any sort of a point? It makes even less of a point because I don't support everything the the state in the Soviet Union did. "Propagated atheism" is EXTREMELY vague though. Just sounds like a pissed off religious fellow.

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

Okay. But in a future Communist state would you support Atheism being taught in schools as a mandatory course and Atheism as the State's official stance on religion just like in the Soviet Union?

The state, particularly a Socialist should remain completely silent on the matters of religion, niether Theistic nor Atheistic, just neutral; basically if X Socialist state was being described in points and it got to religion it should be filled out as N/A. No, Atheism should not be "taught," in schools and I don't see how one would do such a thing. Leave Atheism, religion, etc. to the philosophy classes and other college courses which students can elect to take.

[Ocean Seal]

Given that I use to live in France and am very familiar with said policies I will say I think they're complete and total bullshit, I think it's designed to in part repress the public visibility of Muslims/Arabs and that I would never support such policies.
Yep, this policy is essentially nationalist drivel designed to keep France "French".

[Ocean Seal]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/State_atheism
Read the part under The Soviet Union
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Religion_in_the_Soviet_Union
Read the intro and the rest of it. Quoting from the intro:

"To that end, the communist regime confiscated religious property, ridiculed religion, harassed believers, and propagated atheism in schools"
Why does your tendency read libertarian socialist?

[SidBh]

Why does your tendency read libertarian socialist?

There might be subtle differences between Anarcho-Communism and Libertarian Socialism, but my inspiration for it is Noam Chomsky who is a Libertarian Socialist.

[SidBh]

Yep, this policy is essentially nationalist drivel designed to keep France "French".

So the French Ban is actually a right wing thing? I thought it was a far left policy. Mea Culpa.

[Dzerzhinsky's Ghost]

So the French Ban is actually a right wing thing? I thought it was a far left policy. Mea Culpa.

It's some bullshit pseudo-'progressive' nonsense or as RedBrother aptly described it's nationalist drivel designed to target Muslims/Arabs. Christians can wear whatever and get away with it just fine, it's primarily geared toward Islamic religious garb and expression aka to repress non-white French citizens and immigrants.

[hatzel]

Let's put it this way: if I were, say, 15 and French I wouldn't go to school. Or, I wouldn't go to a 'normal' or 'mainstream' school, but like many French Muslims (and others), I might be (un)lucky enough to be forced into 'special' education, where I can enjoy(?) a childhood totally separated from the rest of society. Or, more importantly, the rest of society can enjoy(?) a childhood totally separated from my strange foreign influences. As I'm not 15, however...well, I believe I'm right in saying that similar laws actually mean that various jobs in the public sector in certain countries are unavailable to me and many others on purely religious grounds. Needless to say any system of governance - be it capitalist, socialist, feudalist, whatever - which allows such policies will be met with sheer indignation from this corner...

But maybe I'm just biased. Apologies for the terribly early application of Godwin's law, but for some strange reason I associate the banning (or mere eradication) of religious symbols with such shining beacons of democracy as Tsarist Russia, Nazi Germany and scenes like this:

http://germanhistorydocs.ghi-dc.org/images/30010007%20beard.jpg

In fact, the school I went to mandated that all boys be clean shaven. Not through any kind of opposition to religious symbols, I assume, but when the symbols of one's religion include - as they do for many Jews, Muslims, Sikhs etc. - elements of one's person, styles of grooming and the like, you have to wonder how long it will be until "you can't wear that" turns into "sorry man, but you're gonna have to cut your hair." (Or, in fact, if it already has; I don't know the complete application of these types of law.) Such blatantly discriminatory policies - intended only to humiliate, threaten and marginalise minorities by separating out their practices and giving them the stamp of official disapproval, so that they may thenceforth be considered 'wrong' (for why else would they be prohibited?), with those who wish to perform such practices (namely, minorities) therefore looked upon as akin to criminals - have been enacted before, the difference being that, this time round, they're wrapped in the much more tasteful guise of secularity. And it seems the masses are lapping it up like sweet sweet nectar.