Can't we just agree that religions that teach women are subservient to men should be opposed? A concept of religious freedom that gives parents/fathers the right to compel observance on their children under threat of beatings or death is a fucked up sense of freedom. I don't blame France for trying to protect their secular society by banning religiously-derived garb in public schools - removing the power of parents to dictate such garb gives kids a chance early on to make up their own mind - do they like the freedom from family-mandated othering they experience at school, or do they like displaying that they are subserviant to men when compelled by their family?
this post was submitted on 07 Sep 2023
231 points (96.4% liked)
News
23296 readers
3564 users here now
Welcome to the News community!
Rules:
1. Be civil
Attack the argument, not the person. No racism/sexism/bigotry. Good faith argumentation only. This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban. Do not respond to rule-breaking content; report it and move on.
2. All posts should contain a source (url) that is as reliable and unbiased as possible and must only contain one link.
Obvious right or left wing sources will be removed at the mods discretion. We have an actively updated blocklist, which you can see here: https://lemmy.world/post/2246130 if you feel like any website is missing, contact the mods. Supporting links can be added in comments or posted seperately but not to the post body.
3. No bots, spam or self-promotion.
Only approved bots, which follow the guidelines for bots set by the instance, are allowed.
4. Post titles should be the same as the article used as source.
Posts which titles don’t match the source won’t be removed, but the autoMod will notify you, and if your title misrepresents the original article, the post will be deleted. If the site changed their headline, the bot might still contact you, just ignore it, we won’t delete your post.
5. Only recent news is allowed.
Posts must be news from the most recent 30 days.
6. All posts must be news articles.
No opinion pieces, Listicles, editorials or celebrity gossip is allowed. All posts will be judged on a case-by-case basis.
7. No duplicate posts.
If a source you used was already posted by someone else, the autoMod will leave a message. Please remove your post if the autoMod is correct. If the post that matches your post is very old, we refer you to rule 5.
8. Misinformation is prohibited.
Misinformation / propaganda is strictly prohibited. Any comment or post containing or linking to misinformation will be removed. If you feel that your post has been removed in error, credible sources must be provided.
9. No link shorteners.
The auto mod will contact you if a link shortener is detected, please delete your post if they are right.
10. Don't copy entire article in your post body
For copyright reasons, you are not allowed to copy an entire article into your post body. This is an instance wide rule, that is strictly enforced in this community.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
That’s like every religion. The world would be MUCH better off if religion overall wasn’t a thing.
People keep saying this edgy take but that's impossible. As long as strong beliefs are held true by many individuals, there will always be a religion. Pastafarianism is a great example of an "anti-religion" that promotes the positive morals without the need for a deity (or the flying spaghetti monster as a joke), but in doing so, it ironically became a religion in itself.
Your take is edgy and divisive, despite intent. Even religions accept deity independent good depending on interpretation (God commands good because he or she observes it is good, the good isn't arbitrarily good because he or she commands it). But I agree, folks don't like to acknowledge the good religion has historically done in equal measure with the bad. Nuance matters. History is not black and white. So let's not be black and white on religion generally being good or bad.
Yea, I'm an atheist myself, but I only choose to be this way after learning about the world and other religions. I'm not about to shatter my grandma's reality that there's no God. It's all about respect at the end of the day.
Exactly. At the end of the day do we care why someone agrees to do something or that something should be permissible, or just that they agree to do something or that something is permissible. I don't care whether or not someone thinks rape or murder is wrong because God commands it or because they have a different moral basis. It's important that we agree that behavior is wrong.
Because non religious governments like China don't commit genocide and exercise authoritarian control?
Do they do it BECAUSE they lack religion? Or is that an irrelevant detail you're cherrypicking because it suits your argument?
People commit terrible acts because of their belief in sky fairies. Do people commit terrible acts because they don't believe in sky fairies? (Hint: no)
That's pretty much every religion I've seen when the interpretation comes from the conservative folk.
Yes ..agreed.. fuck religion. Brainwashing power house.
Id be great if all religions had age limits
A concept of religious freedom that gives parents/fathers the right to compel observance on their children under threat of beatings or death is a fucked up sense of freedom. I don't blame France for trying to protect their secular society by banning religiously-derived garb in public schools
Parents telling their daughters what to wear is wrong, so the state must intervene and tell the daughters to wear something that I personally find more agreeable.
How about we all just stop telling women what they can and can't wear?
Because school children are not adults, religious parents that believe females are subservient to men will continue to compel their children to comply. Then, suddenly, instead of the Catholic Church impinging on all aspects of society, you have islamic groups impinging on all aspects of society - same game, different religion. France is a secular society and fought hard to get that way.
So what about the grown adult women that want to wear a hijab? You take away their agency with laws 'to protect the children' (where have I heard that excuse to control people before?)
I actually went to school with girls that wore the hijab. I asked them why they wore it, some said because their dad made them and others said it kept grown adult men from trying to hit on them on the bus.
If you want to help the girls who's fathers or husbands are forcing them to wear a hijab, then you should create a society where women don't have to be dependent on financial support from family members and they can make the decision themselves, rather then forcing them to dress like you personally want.
Grown adult women aren't allowed to wear a hijab in public school either. Girls and women are perfectly free to wear whatever they want/are forced to wear by the men in their lives, outside of public schools.
Oppose behaviors and actions. Religion is messy. There are so many different interpretations with differences of denomination and sect. Don't oppose religion. Oppose the concrete human actions and the people that support and promote those actions. If those people are religious leaders, so be it.
Don't oppose superstitions that breed bad behavior? Why not?
Because you are shooting yourself in the foot if you want to establish a pluralist and tolerant society.
If we're talking ideals, I'd love to live in a society that isn't pluralistic when it comes to religion. It's all based in nonsense.
Ideally the populace is educated enough to not be religious. Because, as I'm sure you know, religiosity decreases as education increases.
We should definitely dump money in education, for many reasons.
Religion can be a weapon used by those in power to suppress the people or parts thereof (like women).
Her dad strangled her in her sleep. It wasn't a heat of the moment decision
I also have to assume the actual law used was not the two examples cited by the article, as 41 applies to disciplining children (and murder is not discipline but punishment) and 409 is about adultery. Those examples still highlight the problem, but all this it leaves me wondering whether the law even mattered here.