French Hostages in Iraq - Captors demand end of Scarf Ban

ArmorPierce · Post by **ArmorPierce** » 2004-08-31 04:51am

Ah yeah, forgot that this is discussing k-12 students. Still, I see little praticality/reason in banning "gang colors". The only they would be able to ban colors in terms of praticallity would be to single out some while leaving out others. It might work in some suburban towns with a bunch wannabe kids walking around all in the same gang but somewhere where gang activity is a real problem it wouldn't affect it considering there are multiple gangs and gang colors. Even in said suburban town, they would probably all know each other so it accomplishes nothing.

As for the banning of religious wear on the basis that it encourages segregation along religious lines, I'm curious, are you also against people wearing clothes that depicts their country of origin's flag?

AniThyng · Post by **AniThyng** » 2004-08-31 05:11am

IUnknown wrote:
Wearing head scarves is an important thing in Islam. It is important to follow this rule. Besides head scarves have no bad effect, it is only an element of clothing.

last time i checked it was encouraged, but not compulsary, right?
mind you, the only reason i can take this position on the headscarve is because as i understand it it is not compulsary in islam and acceptable not to wear it.

as for the symbolism of the head scarf - i feel the analogy to a swastika or a t-shirt throwing dirt at the pope or a shirt with "nuke the infidels" is weak. it is not a symbol of the religion in the same way that the cresant moon is to islam or the crucifix is to christianity - or the swastika to nazism - i observe no one's going to go apeshit over the Iron Cross. there is a certain degree of latitude here and i think the scarf occupies a position on the spectrum quite far removed from the swastika or the symbols of al-queda or gang colours or whatnot. a headscarve is relatively benign - and i assume this is a scarf, not the whole freaking burka thype one. u can see the whole face with a headscarve.

and yes, yes, i despise islamofacists as much as the next person, but i *know* actual, normal, ordinary muslims and they are not cloven hooved monsters who want to slay all the infidels. i do not support these people who take hostages for this and i am actually thinking the french shouldn;t give in but i am addressing the whole point of banning headscarves in the first place.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-31 08:27am

Rogue 9 wrote:
Jade Falcon wrote:Though it wasn't just a 'scarf ban', it also affected other religious symbols, so the Islamics are not being singled out and victimised here. I find it interesting that the scarf is the case most often pointed out.
Well, it's an open secret that they Kipa and the cross were banned along with it only to maintain a semblance of fairness; the objective of the law was to integrate the Muslim population.

If they don't want to integrate they really have no bussiness of coming to europe IMHO.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2004-08-31 08:34am

ArmorPierce wrote:Well I think banning gang colors is retarded. So you're banned from wearing blue because that's crip, red because that's blood, and yellow because that's king? Besides it trampling over freedom of speech, I don't see what they are trying to stop from not being allowed to wear these "gang colors".

Not all countries have the same idea of freedom of speech and revere it on a level most US-Americans do...

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-31 08:37am

Even so I feel that europe on a whole is a more free society anyhow, but thats because US society is more religious, go figure.

Post by **Edi** » 2004-08-31 09:42am

His Divine Shadow wrote:Even so I feel that europe on a whole is a more free society anyhow, but thats because US society is more religious, go figure.

That's true. Besides, it's not like freedom of speech is being taken away from Europeans and suppressed. IIRC, the French ban on the Islamic head coverings, crosses and other religious symbols only applies topublic schools and workers in government offices. It is not forbidden for Muslim women to wear head scarves in public.

Edi

Lord Rog · Post by **Lord Rog** » 2004-08-31 11:07am

It isn't really going far enough IMHO. In my experience school uniforms help the place function immeasurably better and give the kids one less reason to bully each other.

If children will pick on each other because one of them isn't wearing the latest fashion then they are likely to do the same (or possibly worse) if one of them is wearing a religious outfit. Not that they should act in this manner but many children don't mature enough to realise this until after they leave school.

If aything the French should be praised for trying to mantain a secular environment in which to educate their children.

Jade Falcon · Post by **Jade Falcon** » 2004-08-31 11:21am

Look at the case in the UK recently with a school with a high Muslim attendance. The pupil who turned up dressed in full length gown, she was found to be violating school rules.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/3808073.stm

In this case the headscarf is allowed, and most of the Muslim girls are wearing a business style dress along with the head scarf.

This is what is important.

But the High Court judge said the school's uniform policy was aimed at the proper running of a multi-cultural, multi-faith secular school.

Emphasis mine.

I have a funny feeling that the French state schools are in a similiar position. I imagine, like in the UK there are 'faith schools' for Catholics and so on, where different rules and standards apply.

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2004-08-31 01:48pm

On one hand, I can't see how a stupid little law like that is worth the lives of two people.

On the other, while you can debate the Spanish withdrawal after the bombings, this would clearly be nothing but appeasement.

It's been about 48 hours, which way did they jump?

Falkenhayn · Post by **Falkenhayn** » 2004-08-31 02:48pm

Three hours later and still no news. Wouldn't be surprised if they are dead by now.

I just read an article on the BBC stating that the mayor of Paris and a high ranking official of the French government were now praying in the Grand Mosque in Paris.

Suppose the next hostage demand contains a clause that says x number of governmental officials in posts Y and Z must convert or hostage dies?

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-08-31 03:08pm

Darth Wong wrote:The objective of the ban was to keep students from segregating along religious lines, and overt religious clothing is one of the thing that aids in such undesirable behaviour. It's bad enough that people have all of these religious animosities, but to literally wear it on your sleeve all the time does not help the situation.

When I went to school, if I wore a shirt saying (for example) something like "the Pope is a worthless piece of scum", I probably would have been asked to not wear it because it's inflammatory. This is no different; they are telling students not to walk around wearing religious "gang colours".

Mike there is a difference between gang colors and religious symbols. Gang colors in say, france, will cause violence. Religous symbols dont do that.

People will make or break freindships based on religion, only if they are morons to begin with.. The conversation will eventually turn to religion, and they will segregate themselves regardless.

Not allowing them to wear religious symbols, will only slow down that process, it wont stop it.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-31 03:36pm

Lots of people will segregate into groups, esp. if they're indoctrinated with religious dogma, and you really sure those religious symbols don't cause violence now and then and most certainly resentment?

And yeah this'll only slow them down, they should take it further and require school uniforms as well.

Aeolus · Post by **Aeolus** » 2004-08-31 03:36pm

Dahak wrote:
ArmorPierce wrote:Well I think banning gang colors is retarded. So you're banned from wearing blue because that's crip, red because that's blood, and yellow because that's king? Besides it trampling over freedom of speech, I don't see what they are trying to stop from not being allowed to wear these "gang colors".
Not all countries have the same idea of freedom of speech and revere it on a level most US-Americans do...

Now Now there is no need to point out the short commings of others now is there

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2004-08-31 03:39pm

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Mike there is a difference between gang colors and religious symbols. Gang colors in say, france, will cause violence. Religous symbols dont do that.

So any problem in the student body short of gang violence is not worthy of a corrective policy? You figure they should just wait until it escalates to that level before doing anything about it?

People will make or break freindships based on religion, only if they are morons to begin with.. The conversation will eventually turn to religion, and they will segregate themselves regardless.

Not allowing them to wear religious symbols, will only slow down that process, it wont stop it.

Nonsense; overt visible segregation is far more pervasive than the kind that requires actual conversation. Given visible differences, people are more likely to segregate even if they aren't inclined that way, because you take one look around you and see that everyone else is doing it.

Post by **Alyrium Denryle** » 2004-08-31 03:52pm

So any problem in the student body short of gang violence is not worthy of a corrective policy? You figure they should just wait until it escalates to that level before doing anything about it?

No, but has such self segregation harmed anyone(assuming it is as widespread as is implied, for the sake of argument)? No. Therefore, does a government need to step in, and BAN people from saying visibly what their religion is? Separation of church and state is a 2 sided coin mike. Governments are not supposed to intervein one way OR the other.

If they want to wear a cross, or a headscarf, that is their business. Are they harming someone? No. DO they always segregate themselves based on religion? No. In fact, when I was in high school, I had a wide range of friends and good-terms aquantances of all religions, and some were rather overt about it. In fct, I have never seen that type of religious segreggation in a high school environment save for the most insane of extremists.

Nonsense; overt visible segregation is far more pervasive than the kind that requires actual conversation. Given visible differences, people are more likely to segregate even if they aren't inclined that way, because you take one look around you and see that everyone else is doing it.

Hw often does that happen mike? I have never seen it. No group in my old high school was religiously homogamous. At least as much as probability and demographis permit. And people DID wear their religion on their sleeve. There was one girl(we didnt have many muslims) who was Islamic, wore decorative headscars, not a fundy, but did it because she liked the look. She was one of the most popular girls in the school, among white, christians. And I am in Mormon/catholicville in conservative arizona

Only the most nutbaggy individuals will segregate themselves based on religion(American south not withstanding) diversity doesnt need to be enforced in an open country like france.

His Divine Shadow · Post by **His Divine Shadow** » 2004-08-31 03:53pm

Aeolus wrote:
Dahak wrote:
ArmorPierce wrote:Well I think banning gang colors is retarded. So you're banned from wearing blue because that's crip, red because that's blood, and yellow because that's king? Besides it trampling over freedom of speech, I don't see what they are trying to stop from not being allowed to wear these "gang colors".
Not all countries have the same idea of freedom of speech and revere it on a level most US-Americans do...
Now Now there is no need to point out the short commings of others now is there

Not a shortcoming.

Dahak · Post by **Dahak** » 2004-09-01 04:50am

Alyrium Denryle wrote:Separation of church and state is a 2 sided coin mike. Governments are not supposed to intervein one way OR the other.

When the religion in question slowly sneaks into the schools, the French have every right to step in and correct that.

Solauren · Post by **Solauren** » 2004-09-01 07:08am

I have to agree with Mike on his explaination of this.

Unfortunately, the French ban wasn't through enough. If they had said 'any religious items regardless of size', then it would have been more obvious they were not trying to aim for a specific religion. They should have also gone with school uniforms too

Anyway, for those of you wondering what gang colors are:

Think identifying marks found on a soldier.

For example, in Star Trek, all command officers were Red.

With gangs, it's usually the case where they wear a certain color on them at all times, or a certain logo/symbol.
i.e "Hells Angels"

Anyone wearing that symbol that's not a gang member, gets there ass kicked.

Anyone wearing an enemy symbol gets there asked kicked.

As an example
5 members of 'gang red' are at a pool hall playing pool, wearing there gang color in whatever means they are required to.
In walk 3 members of 'gang blue', wearing there symbols.

Depending on the violence level of the gangs, a fight will break out.

In essence
Gangs often use symbols/colors because they are rather symbol, and cheap.
This is why you hear of people getting beat up in some parts of the US (and occasionally Canada) for what they wear (without being robbed).