its about the teachers being state (or rather canton) employees and the state and school is supposed to be free from religion. you wont see a cross on the wall either. thats the reasoning as far as I know
While i don’t agree with the hijab or other religious coverings because I see it as a way to oppress women, it’s equally dumb to forbid women to wear it.
A school should be non religious, but that doesn’t mean that you have to eradicate all signs of religion from school grounds, just that the teaching can’t be based on it.
This seems more xenophobic than well thought through.
Anatole France: ‘The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.’
I think we have very different interpretations of that quote.
When I try rephrasing it to something more concrete, it’s not really about the proportions of people it affects at all. It’s “the legal system has made it impossible to be poor”. As in there is an inherent flaw in our society where being poor and being law abiding are mutually exclusive, and that we should do something to ensure that people have a social net to not have to break the law, but also in the meantime be more understanding that these people have no other option.
That, to me, seems totally irrelevant to religion in schools. This isn’t a matter of life or death, of having to choose between breaking the law because you need somewhere to sleep. If we provided everyone with a place to sleep and means to live, then problem solved. Seems like a pretty clear cut answer.
What’s the solution for religion in schools? If we lived in a society where there were equal numbers of nuns and hijab-wearing women, would you be play with the law?
I personally think the answer is it doesn’t matter. Schools are about education. They have (or should have) ethical codes to not corrupt their students, just as doctors have ethical codes for treating patients. If we don’t hang crosses on the walls, and also shouldn’t hang them on school employees. Same goes for other religious stuff.
When you’re a practitioner of science, leave religion at home.
Are they worried elementary schoolers will convert religions due to their elementary school teacher’s religion?
its about the teachers being state (or rather canton) employees and the state and school is supposed to be free from religion. you wont see a cross on the wall either. thats the reasoning as far as I know
While i don’t agree with the hijab or other religious coverings because I see it as a way to oppress women, it’s equally dumb to forbid women to wear it. A school should be non religious, but that doesn’t mean that you have to eradicate all signs of religion from school grounds, just that the teaching can’t be based on it.
This seems more xenophobic than well thought through.
For it being xenophobic other similar clothes would have to be allowed. Are there Teachers dressed as Nuns, Monks or Cardinals?
Anatole France: ‘The law, in its majestic equality, forbids the rich as well as the poor to sleep under bridges, to beg in the streets, and to steal bread.’
How is that applicable in the context of religion?
It’s applicable because while the law might impact the occasional nun, I suspect that what they’re really out to do is target Muslim women.
I think we have very different interpretations of that quote.
When I try rephrasing it to something more concrete, it’s not really about the proportions of people it affects at all. It’s “the legal system has made it impossible to be poor”. As in there is an inherent flaw in our society where being poor and being law abiding are mutually exclusive, and that we should do something to ensure that people have a social net to not have to break the law, but also in the meantime be more understanding that these people have no other option.
That, to me, seems totally irrelevant to religion in schools. This isn’t a matter of life or death, of having to choose between breaking the law because you need somewhere to sleep. If we provided everyone with a place to sleep and means to live, then problem solved. Seems like a pretty clear cut answer.
What’s the solution for religion in schools? If we lived in a society where there were equal numbers of nuns and hijab-wearing women, would you be play with the law?
I personally think the answer is it doesn’t matter. Schools are about education. They have (or should have) ethical codes to not corrupt their students, just as doctors have ethical codes for treating patients. If we don’t hang crosses on the walls, and also shouldn’t hang them on school employees. Same goes for other religious stuff.
When you’re a practitioner of science, leave religion at home.
No, they are not. Wearing a cross isn’t allowed either. The ban is for all religious symbols, no matter the faith.
necklaces with a cross probably are banned too, the question is, if it gets enforced
I see, freedom FROM religion vs freedom of expression/practice. Interesting
This is like most things mainly about racism.