Marianne has a naked breast because it’s an allegory, you cretin

[rah]

So how do you distinguish between the two when a muslim woman can be killed for not wearing one - in a western country to boot!

More douchery.
In our office many women wear appropriate garb for their faith. Not one of them is saying that they they are forced by their husbands or they fear death if they don't. They do it by choice because it's their religious belief. Religious freedom and all that. Something you just can't seem to understand.

If a husband does kill his wife for exposing skin, you prosecute them, just like you would if it was a catholic man.
I'm sure killing your wife is still illegal in France.

Douche.

[Dry]

The French Government aren't the fashion police. The women wish to cover their bodies while swimming. So what's the problem.

1. It was not the french government who decided to ban the burkini, it was one local mayor. Valls was only supporting this mayor, he was not trying to pass any government law.
2. The mayor has responsability of keeping peace in his city. If he thinks that a behavior, a meeting, an event, a flag, a poster bill can cause public unrest (Trouble à l'ordre publique), he has the right to cancel/forbid a concert, decide for a curfew, forbid access to an area. In the name of public order. It is not the first time some mayor take some controversial local decree.
3. Other mayors (mainly far-right) have now also tried to ban the burkini and various local tribunals have invalidated those decrees.

So, the problem is not fashion or freedom, it is more a problem of individual freedom vs public unrest.
And the question behind is: are those women in burkini really genuine, or is it more a provocation with the intension of offending people?
Now, it is true that a lot of far-right mayors take the 'public unrest' as an excuse. And are willing to immediately call it provocation. But it seems the french justice disagree with them.

The same would apply to municipalities deciding to allow/forbid topless beaches.
And although there is no record of any decrees in any french town, forbidding women to wear a top at any topless beach, I wouldn't be surprise that you might be seen as a troublemaker if you are not nude at a nudist beach...

[Ming]

1. It was not the french government who decided to ban the burkini, it was one local mayor. Valls was only supporting this mayor, he was not trying to pass any government law.
2. The mayor has responsability of keeping peace in his city. If he thinks that a behavior, a meeting, an event, a flag, a poster bill can cause public unrest (Trouble à l'ordre publique), he has the right to cancel/forbid a concert, decide for a curfew, forbid access to an area. In the name of public order. It is not the first time some mayor take some controversial local decree.
3. Other mayors (mainly far-right) have now also tried to ban the burkini and various local tribunals have invalidated those decrees.

Good point on it being local and not Fed.
But still, MANY local mayors have continued to ban them or will be lifting it AFTER the prime swimming season

So, the problem is not fashion or freedom, it is more a problem of individual freedom vs public unrest.
And the question behind is: are those women in burkini really genuine, or is it more a provocation with the intension of offending people?
Now, it is true that a lot of far-right mayors take the 'public unrest' as an excuse. And are willing to immediately call it provocation. But it seems the french justice disagree with them.

I don't buy into them doing it to offend people... and I'd bet they at least 99% are genuine (yeah, simply an opinion)
They just want to swim, and stay within the mandate of their religion. All power to them.
And yes, the fed shut one down, but many have kept the ban in place.

The same would apply to municipalities deciding to allow/forbid topless beaches.
And although there is no record of any decrees in any french town, forbidding women to wear a top at any topless beach, I wouldn't be surprise that you might be seen as a troublemaker if you are not nude at a nudist beach...

Thumbs up for topless beaches

[Bespin]

I call BS... it's all just a lame excuse to practice discrimination.
We aren't talking about wearing "religious symbols"... just cloths to cover their body. If people want to associate Muslims with covered bodies, that's their problem.
They are NOT practicing their religion... THEY ARE SWIMMING!
The French Government aren't the fashion police. The women wish to cover their bodies while swimming. So what's the problem.

Sometimes things aren't as simple as you might want to think it is. Cultural values has a great impact on any of our thinking.

In this case, the burkinis are a religious symbol because it is closely tied to islam (if you want a greater understanding I recommend to read up on symbolism and semiotics/hereustics), ergo something that is frowned upon in the public space.

I know it is easy to sit here on a forum and call racism, or discrimination, but try to understand and see the cultural norms and values before doing so.

Myself I am not condoning these actions in any way or shape, I strongly believe in the individuals right to freedom of right, speach and fredom of press. However, I also try to understand the social structures in where something like this happens in order to get a more nuanced picture of it all. I don't come from France, as such I do not share their values and norms, but I try to understand them. Life isn't black or white, it's more of a greyscale.

[Bereta_Eder]

Drawing a distinction between "practicing your religion" and "everyday life" in the first place is intrinsically problematic.

It's not that hard...
for example according to ben's religion gay people shouldn't be served chocolate tarts. That's ben's religion his own.
Does that infidge on gay's peoples' rights to enjoy chocolate tarts?

It does.

Ben is illegal.

Now assume I want to go to the beach dressed as a saracene cursair (which I think might agree with me, stylistically).
Do I hurt anyone, assuming I don't carry a two meter curved sword with me?


Nope.

Allowed


This law* is strange. Is it a right to decensy? Indecensy?
And what public unrest. One has to qualify it, he can't just say it.


*oops, it's not even a law. just a far right's mayor decision that has been overturned, as pointed out

[Bereta_Eder]

And the question behind is: are those women in burkini really genuine, or is it more a provocation with the intension of offending people?

I would argue that even if in some cases it is done out of a desire to accentuate the invidindual and collective liberty of expression, and not out of a religious adherence, it's still valid.

[Elok]

BE, you're misunderstanding the terms of the argument here. Our whole conception of religion-as-private-vice is rooted in the Enlightenment's radical Protestant notions of what religion ought to be. The Enlightenment is sometimes talked up as a victory for democracy over coercion, which is misleading; many of its dominant figures were ambivalent about democracy at best, and its strongest promoters tended to be despots like Frederick and (early) Catherine. Really it was the culmination of centuries of struggle between Church and State.

The State won, and pushed us into a little box for so long that we have come to view it as the norm. They employed a great many "religion causes ignorance and violence" arguments that sounded great in 1700 but, after the past few centuries of purely secular imperialism and brutality, must strike any actually disinterested listener (if any exist) as rather trite and silly, like continuing to be terrified of Spain or Poland. There is no reason why this state of affairs should necessarily continue, nor why the religious should see any rational cause to passively accept it, as it consigns them to a permanent second-class status.

[Elok]

Which is not to say that I favor theocracy. But a church that has been shoved entirely to the margins cannot serve as a counterbalance to state ambitions, or serve any of its vital functions of community adhesion.

[giblets]

Poland is terrifying

[Bereta_Eder]

I don't know if it matters where it came from, and I doubt protestants had anything to do with it (did they exist back then? were they even relevent?) but about indivindual freedom, the right to live your life as you choose.
Nations are indeed made from majorities and that includes religious majorities but not always. Germany, holland are divided countries (I won't talk about ireland).
Yeah sure. There is a unifying thread that usually runs through a nation and religion has a lot to do with it, even if it is on a not so apparent scale.

However if you really have to find a source for indivinduality, it's not some weird cult but on the foundations of ancient Greece itself (unless it is considered a weird cult, but I don't think so).

So it's not about which branch of christianity gave march to a much older practice but wether this is good and just.

[giblets]

I don't think Protestants were super important for the French enlightenment

[Elok]

Poland is terrifying

Poland was ridiculous even for the brief century when it was powerful. Why are you putting big wings on your backs, you imbeciles? They're just going to flop around back there, throwing off your balance, adding drag, and catching speartips.

[Bereta_Eder]

If you tie the enlightment with the renaiscance (and you should) the kickstart kick in the butt came rather from exciled byzantines to venice and florence.
They were not protestants

[Elok]

I don't think Protestants were super important for the French enlightenment

Protestants themselves? No. The Protestant Reformation, however, was an absolute prerequisite for the whole thing, as it introduced the concept of religion as a question of individual rather than communal identity. The Enlightenment carried the same idea much farther.

[BeBMan]

Poland was ridiculous even for the brief century when it was powerful. Why are you putting big wings on your backs, you imbeciles? They're just going to flop around back there, throwing off your balance, adding drag, and catching speartips.

Don't get me started on the Japanese

That being said, I don't want to threadjack what could be an interesting discussion - I just don't have the time right now for a more meaningful post.... /hides