• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    -2
    edit-2
    7 months ago

    People that feel uncomfortable because they fear for their safety around openly Muslim people are islamophobes and their comfort does not matter more than the Muslim persons right to practice their religion.

    Edit: in general enforcing a cultural nonreligious hegemony by banning any religious displays at work and in public goes against the freedom of religion. People feeling uncomfortable because their faced with something they don’t like is not a greater ill than people being free to practice their religion.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        I was raised christian in a majority Muslim country. I know exactly what these laws do, because I felt it myself. Hence me speaking up. The shoe being on the other foot does not suddenly make it right.

        edit: also the laws of a country do not reflect the values of every person on earth that shares the same religion as the one which is predominant in that country. Or even of the religion itself. Thats an islamophobic red herring.

      • Flax
        link
        fedilink
        English
        47 months ago

        Many people fear for their safety around men. Should we ban men?

      • @abraxas
        link
        English
        17 months ago

        I’m a non-Christian who has feared for my safety around atheists before.

        But I shouldn’t have a right to demand atheists act differently so I stop being scared.

        I don’t have the right not to be offended. Nor do I have the right to have irrational phobias honored. Neither does anyone else.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -3
        edit-2
        7 months ago

        Right, the comfort of people that feel uncomfortable around others simply because of their religion is of no importance, regardless of the religion they feel uncomfortable around because there is no actual threat. It “just happens” to be more prevalent around muslim people which is why I chose that example. My edit meant to clarify that.

    • Kalash
      link
      fedilink
      English
      47 months ago

      in general enforcing a cultural nonreligious hegemony by banning any religious displays at work and in public goes against the freedom of religion.

      Freedom of religion is stupid anyway. Freedom of speak and expression already allows people to believe any fiction they want, there is no reason why a certain selection of fictional ideas need a special status.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        07 months ago

        They are given a special status by being banned though. Freedom of expression extends to being free to express your religion through clothing, these laws exempt them from this right and give them a special banned status.

        • Kalash
          link
          fedilink
          English
          47 months ago

          There is nothing wrong with banning dangerous ideologies and their symbols.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -4
            edit-2
            7 months ago

            So you want religion banned across the board? If its a dangerous ideology surely simply banning it in public workplaces is insufficient but any religious institution, place of congregation, text or item ought to be confiscated and rooted out

            Edit: also lets be clear here, by dangerous ideology you are not referring to all religions because these bans affect some religions more than others and very conveniently not the predominant one, but the one constantly maligned and singled out as a “dangerous ideology”.

            • Kalash
              link
              fedilink
              English
              47 months ago

              So you want religion banned across the board?

              No, just dangerous ideologies (which include all major religions). Religions like pastafarism or the satanic temple are totally fine.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                17 months ago

                So religions are not inherently dangerous ideologies but some of them are.

                By what criteria should a government decide which religions should be banned?

                • Kalash
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  37 months ago

                  I’d start with looking through their club charters and apply general hate speech rules.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    -17 months ago

                    But we are talking about banning an entire religion and any symbol or item associated with it from the public and workplace, not some clubs and their signage. My question is how should a government decide if e.g. christianity as a religion is a dangerous ideology, and should therefore be banned, or whether it isn’t? We are not talking about banning some clubs here, but your claim that some religions are inherently so dangerous that any religious display or symbolism should be banned from the public and workplace. And presumably since they are so dangerous probably ought to be banned in entirety.

                • Kalash
                  link
                  fedilink
                  English
                  27 months ago

                  What means dangerous in this case?

                  Just it’s regular textbook definition.

                  And what makes the major religions dangerous?

                  Claiming a monopolity on truth, indoctrinating people with lies, promiting homophobia, xenophobia, rape, violence, slavery, etc.

                  • @[email protected]
                    link
                    fedilink
                    English
                    07 months ago

                    Most governments indoctrinate their people with lies. Christianity and islam and strongly against xenophobia (I don’t have much knowledge about judaism, so can’t speak for or against it). Same goes for rape. Slavery is legal to this day in the USA for example.
                    I hope you can see my point, that standing on the moral basis of the modern western societies can make it seem like people, who live their lifes following different rules, may be “backwards” or “morally inferior” but you are lacking the logical foundation to claim something like that.

    • @CancerMancer
      link
      English
      37 months ago

      Considering most religions are death cults, openly religious people have very different priorities than I do, and many of them do not think my life has value. Some even think I am not truly alive without belief.

      Not terribly comforting.

    • Tante Regenbogen
      link
      fedilink
      English
      17 months ago

      I dont believe people should wear crosses or headscarves in public sector jobs. Public sector jobs are supposed to be neutral ideologically.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        -17 months ago

        Why should your beliefs dictate whether another person has to choose between their religion and job? And why these two things in particular, what about Orthodox Jews, people with a bindi and so on?

        Do you have any material reason to discriminate against people like this? Particularly since this discrimination will be felt by minorities more harshly than the rest of the populace.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            -17 months ago

            Why not? If you are looking to diminish someone’s right you need a better reason than “I don’t like it”. If you are looking to restrict someone’s rights you need to give a reason not the other way around.

            Let me give you an example of what I would think would be a good argumentation. I think we should illegalize circumcision. While this would restrict a parents right to raise their children with the religion of their choosing, circumcision goes against the childs right to be free from bodily harm which trumps the parents right to raise their children in the religion they see fit. The protection of a third persons rights is in my opinion a valid reason to diminish someones right.