US Criticises French Headscarf Ban

[DanS]

will I be accepted as clearly as someone showing that he understood and respected US constitution and its laws

Probably will.

[DanS]

Well seriously, here is the oath of citizenship for the US:

The Oath of
Citizenship
I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and
entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and
fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or
sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore
been a subject or citizen; that I will support and
defend the Constitution and laws of the United
States of America against all enemies, foreign and
domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance
to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the
United States when required by law; that I will
perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces
of the United States when required by the law; that
I will perform work of national importance under
civilian direction when required by the law; and
that I take this obligation freely without any mental
reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.
In acknowledgement whereof I have hereunto
affixed my signature.

[Ned]

US society is based on tolerance and, more, affirmative action.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by Mazarin
yavoon,

Sure, but I don't want children to be deprived of the chances to succeed because of the family they were born into. That's why we have a madantory and free school system; that's why we help students from poor families during their university studies. Don't tell me that blacks in the US are overrepresented in prisons due to all the freedoms they've had.

Ned,

So, what is the US society based upon? What values is the US trying to spread all over the world? If I go to the US, apply for citizenship later and claim, I think it should be governed by a Saddam-type dictator and the sharia
is the only law I'm willing to follow, will I be accepted as clearly as someone showing that he understood and respected US constitution and its laws?

freedom isnt acceptance.

and opportunity and coercion are different things.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Ned
Mazarin, I think you truly misunderstand America. We do not require everyone to agree on certain core principles in order to enjoy full status as citizens. The type of uniform thinking and behavior that France insists upon is truly alien to the United States.

Polygamous Mormons might disagree, Ned. Besides which, it isn't as if the United States reached this supposed state of perfection without having had anti-Catholic laws, and apartheid. Gosh, what was the Civil Rights movement about? Astonishing that it took nearly a hundred years to reach the conclusion that perhaps their citizens of African origin might not be getting the same deal as caucasian ones, despite having fought a civil war over it.

And please- don't give me a boring lecture on Australia's history, because I'm not Australian and I'm perfectly aware of it.

Everybody can crow about how wonderful their own country is, but when our houses are made even partially out of glass, then we shouldn't throw stones.

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

I don't understand how americans can pretend they promote freedom of religion when they say 'God bless America' in official statements.

Um... that's part of freedom of religion. Why should I tell the President he can't express his religious beliefs? It's his speech, he has the freedom to say his belief. Freedom of religion.

On the back of all US banknotes, even the new ones, is written :*In God we trust*. This is not said by an individual expressing his personnal beliefs, it is the state forcing the belief in a god in the throat of all American atheists.

That is the way the believers respect the freedom of religion of the non believers.

By the way, I must add that if I were a believer I would be offended too that the name of my god be mentionned on a banknote. I would not be surprised to see that mentionned as well on the DU shells or on the fragmentation bombs.

[Ned]

Originally posted by molly bloom


Polygamous Mormons might disagree, Ned. Besides which, it isn't as if the United States reached this supposed state of perfection without having had anti-Catholic laws, and apartheid. Gosh, what was the Civil Rights movement about? Astonishing that it took nearly a hundred years to reach the conclusion that perhaps their citizens of African origin might not be getting the same deal as caucasian ones, despite having fought a civil war over it.

And please- don't give me a boring lecture on Australia's history, because I'm not Australian and I'm perfectly aware of it.

Everybody can crow about how wonderful their own country is, but when our houses are made even partially out of glass, then we shouldn't throw stones.

Molly, I have no disagreement with this post. We progressed and still much to do on relations with minorities of all kinds. But our ideals today are to integrate, not to segregate.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

The wearing of scarves is viewed as a provocation and intimidation

Only in France.

I don't understand how americans can pretend they promote freedom of religion when they say 'God bless America' in official statements.

Um... that's part of freedom of religion. Why should I tell the President he can't express his religious beliefs? It's his speech, he has the freedom to say his belief. Freedom of religion.

No, that's official endorsement of religion (when he's speaking as the President).

And it's wrong.

[yavoon]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


No, that's official endorsement of religion (when he's speaking as the President).

And it's wrong.

it is not an official endorsement of rleigion. its an official endorsing religion.

[DanS]

anti-Catholic laws

Anti-Catholic laws? To what are you referring?

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned
Spiffor, thanks for your thoughtful reply (Krazy Horse can learn something from you.)

Too much tolerance for idiocy is not a virtue.

It's interesting that many of the right-wing USers here give me respect, yet they seem to laugh at you.

Hmmm...

[DAVOUT]

Originally posted by Ned


But our ideals today are to integrate

According to Yavoon :

"promoting integration" just sounds wrong and dirty.

I have to (reluctantly) recongnize that Ned is closer to the French policy than Yavoon.

[DanS]

It's interesting that many of the right-wing USers here give me respect, yet they seem to laugh at you.

Don't misinterpret the silence.

[Mazarin]

Originally posted by Ned
...But our ideals today are to integrate, ...

great:top:...though it sounds wrong and dirty

must be that damn european individualism

edit: crosspost
and DanS, thanks for the US Oath of Citizenship, I really started to think your Constitution was irrelevant.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by yavoon

it is not an official endorsement of rleigion. its an official endorsing religion.

Which, when the official is working in his official position, is an official endorsement of religion. Duh.

You might not have any way to stop it (I wouldn't consider making it illegal for a pol to invoke deities in his favour), but it's wrong, and I'm very happy that most Canadian politicians avoid it.