France to ban female students from wearing abayas in state schools

[Social Media]

 

Students will be banned from wearing abaya, a loose-fitting full-length robe worn by some Muslim women, in France's state-run schools, the education minister has said.

The rule will be applied as soon as the new school year starts on 4 September.

France has a strict ban on religious signs in state schools and government buildings, arguing that they violate secular laws.

Wearing a headscarf has been banned since 2004 in state-run schools.

"When you walk into a classroom, you shouldn't be able to identify the pupils' religion just by looking at them," Education Minister Gabriel Attal told France's TF1 TV, adding: "I have decided that the abaya could no longer be worn in schools."

The move comes after months of debate over the wearing of abayas in French schools.

 

The garment has being increasingly worn in schools, leading to a political divide over them, with right-wing parties pushing for a ban while those on the left have voiced concerns for the rights of Muslim women and girls.

"Secularism means the freedom to emancipate oneself through school," Mr Attal told TF1, arguing the abaya is "a religious gesture, aimed at testing the resistance of the republic toward the secular sanctuary that school must constitute."

He said that he would give clear rules at the national level before schools open after the summer break.

 

FULL STORY

 

[thaibeachlovers]

Well done France. I wish the rest of the non Muslim world would follow suit.

[KhunLA]

Can you get any more racist than that.  Are the other religions restricted from wearing such clothing;

Jews & kippah/ tznuit

Sikh & dastar

Amish & organdy head bonnet

Uni religion or Atheist from a scarf

Edited August 28, 2023 by KhunLA

[mikeymike100]

Excellent news, now I hope other 'Western Countries' take a similar course, but I seriously doubt it? 

[VocalNeal]

2 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Can you get any more racist than that. 

Seems to be a dress code based on equality, not race????

[KhunLA]

13 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Seems to be a dress code based on equality, not race????

Only if ALL head coverings are banned.

Edited August 28, 2023 by KhunLA

[transam]

3 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Only if ALL head coverings are banned.

Ban on wigs.....????

[richard_smith237]

Secular idealism....   what ever happened to simple inclusiveness ?

 

Does it matter if students know what religion another is by looking at them ?

Within a day or two of the first day of school all students will know what religion the others are anyway.

 

This is creating tension where none is necessary.

 

 

[Bkk Brian]

15 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Can you get any more racist than that.  Are the other religions restricted from wearing such clothing;

Jews & kippah/ tznuit

Sikh & dastar

Amish & organdy head bonnet

Uni religion or Atheist from a scarf

The law has been in place for many years (2004). This includes Kippahs and even large cross pendants. Sikh are also not allowed head dress in schools

[Foxx]

21 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Can you get any more racist than that.  Are the other religions restricted from wearing such clothing;

Not racist.  The French law on secularity and conspicuous religious symbols in schools bans wearing all conspicuous religious symbols in government schools.  It does not specifically target Islam.

 

And not racist because "Islam" is not a race.

[KhunLA]

Is 'rainbow' clothing allowed ?

[Bkk Brian]

Just now, KhunLA said:

Is 'rainbow' clothing allowed ?

What religion would that belong to?

[KhunLA]

4 minutes ago, Foxx said:

And not racist because "Islam" is not a race.

Knew that, but couldn't think of word that expresses anti-religion.

 

Reading the link, do see they ban any religious identify apparel/accessory (large cross - small ?)

 

All for complete separation of state & church.  

Edited August 28, 2023 by KhunLA

[prakhonchai nick]

School uniforms for one and all. If not liked....................bugger off!

[VocalNeal]

10 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Only if ALL head coverings are banned.

Did you wear a head covering at school???? Anyway France banned head coverings in about 2004.

[KannikaP]

12 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Secular idealism....   what ever happened to simple inclusiveness ?

 

Does it matter if students know what religion another is by looking at them ?

Within a day or two of the first day of school all students will know what religion the others are anyway.

 

This is creating tension where none is necessary.

 

 

Totally agree.

[wombat]

The more we empower minorities the more they want untill the minority dictate to the majority

[KhunLA]

6 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Did you wear a head covering at school???? Anyway France banned head coverings in about 2004.

Not really a hat person, unless needed.  Though don't think they were banned in school.   Was raised not to wear a hat indoors/under cover.

[KannikaP]

16 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Did you wear a head covering at school???? Anyway France banned head coverings in about 2004.

At Ashton-under-Lyne Grammar, ALL boys had to wear the school cap, or get a whack from the Headmaster.

[VocalNeal]

6 minutes ago, KannikaP said:

At Ashton-under-Lyne Grammar, ALL boys had to wear the school cap, or get a whack from the Headmaster.

In class????

[candide]

37 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Can you get any more racist than that.  Are the other religions restricted from wearing such clothing;

Jews & kippah/ tznuit

Sikh & dastar

Amish & organdy head bonnet

Uni religion or Atheist from a scarf

 

16 minutes ago, Bkk Brian said:

The law has been in place for many years (2004). This includes Kippahs and even large cross pendants. Sikh are also not allowed head dress in schools

And the spirit of the law is much older, from a time there were practically no Muslim in France.

Actually, the origin of laicism was to protect Protestants and Jews from the dominance of the Catholic Chruch.

American people cannot understand French laicism because their concept has a different origin. 

The U.S. has been founded by people fleeing religious oppression by European States (usually linked to Catholicism). Hence the U.S. concept: to protect religion from the influence of the State.

France has been one of these countries in which the State was phagocyted by the Catholic religion, and oppressed or did not give equal rights to other religion. Hence the French concept: to protect the State from the influence of religion.

 

It is also broader than just religion. It is also forbidden to mention the race of people in any official document. Actually, It's even forbidden to make any file mentioning race. For example a business selling cosmetics is not allowed to have race mentioned in commercial files.

[placnx]

49 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Seems to be a dress code based on equality, not race????

It's called Islamophobia.

[leeedwards]

It's antitheist. 

[Bkk Brian]

35 minutes ago, KhunLA said:

Knew that, but couldn't think of word that expresses anti-religion.

 

Reading the link, do see they ban any religious identify apparel/accessory (large cross - small ?)

 

All for complete separation of state & church.  

"large cross pendants"

 

The 2004 Law

[placnx]

9 minutes ago, candide said:

 

And the spirit of the law is much older, from a time there were practically no Muslim in France.

Actually, the origin of laicism was to protect Protestants and Jews from the dominance of the Catholic Chruch.

American people cannot understand French laicism because their concept has a different origin. 

The U.S. has been founded by people fleeing religious oppression by European States (usually linked to Catholicism). Hence the U.S. concept: to protect religion from the influence of the State.

France has been one of these countries in which the State was phagocyted by the Catholic religion, and oppressed or did not give equal rights to other religion. Hence the French concept: to protect the State from the influence of religion.

 

It is also broader than just religion. It is also forbidden to mention the race of people in any official document. Actually, It's even forbidden to make any file mentioning race. For example a business selling cosmetics is not allowed to have race mentioned in commercial files.

In the case of employment, the problem in France is that through the name of an applicant employers systematically discriminate against citizens of North African origin, but because of legal blindness this discrimination cannot be addressed. This blindness finds its origin in the laïcité concept.

Edited August 28, 2023 by placnx

[VocalNeal]

9 minutes ago, candide said:

The U.S. has been founded by people fleeing religious oppression by European States

The original pilgrims went to the new world so they could persecute, not to escape it. They were religious extremists unwanted at home. mostly religious malcontents and political subversives.

[KhunLA]

11 minutes ago, candide said:

 

And the spirit of the law is much older, from a time there were practically no Muslim in France.

Actually, the origin of laicism was to protect Protestants and Jews from the dominance of the Catholic Chruch.

American people cannot understand French laicism because their concept has a different origin. 

The U.S. has been founded by people fleeing religious oppression by European States (usually linked to Catholicism). Hence the U.S. concept: to protect religion from the influence of the State.

France has been one of these countries in which the State was phagocyted by the Catholic religion, and oppressed or did not give equal rights to other religion. Hence the French concept: to protect the State from the influence of religion.

 

It is also broader than just religion. It is also forbidden to mention the race of people in any official document. Actually, It's even forbidden to make any file mentioning race. For example a business selling cosmetics is not allowed to have race mentioned in commercial files.

I can definitely agree with the removal of all identifying 'labels', as the root of most issues. 

 

We're human, not nationalities, race, religion, gender or colors.

[Sigmund]

41 minutes ago, wombat said:

The more we empower minorities the more they want untill the minority dictate to the majority

And what would you say if in Thailand the Thai's think the same about us farangs ? Such ideas you advocate work both ways.

[candide]

8 minutes ago, placnx said:

In the case of employment, the problem in France is that through the name of an applicant employers systematically discriminate against citizens of North African origin, but because of legal blindness this discrimination cannot be addressed. This blindness finds its origin in the laïcité concept.

I don't claim it's perfect.

Having said that, considering the number of people from Northern Africa I see working in banks, education and various businesses, I am not sure it is very acute.

Actually, discrimination may be based on an even more subtle criteria: the address. It seems that living in a "bad" neighborhood is an impediment for getting some jobs.

[transam]

1 minute ago, Sigmund said:

And what would you say if in Thailand the Thai's think the same about us farangs ? Such ideas you advocate work both ways.

Think "what" about us farangs....?  ????