Dear comrades,

Some of you will be aware that the Republican Plot in Milltown Cemetary in West Belfast which holds the remains of, among others, hunger strikers Bobby Sands and Joe McDonnell, was viciously vandalised by mindless loyalist thugs.

I've copied and pasted the following from another site, please do what you can.
(I've visited this place, it's awe inspiring)

Daithi ...

For anyone who can afford to make a contribution to offset the cost of refurbishing the Republican plot in Milltown Cemetary

Donations can be sent to:

The National Graves Association,
c/o 537 Falls Road, Belfast

And please post this address on other websites you visit.

Some people have definitely no respect for anything...
In France such a crime is severely punished (we had some troubles like that with people vandalising Jewish cementary).

Nazis?
We have such a problem with satanists...

The situation is tense at the moment here between the different communities. Arabs against Jews, Jews against Arabs and Racists against everyone. Not to mention the new anti-French racism. The next local elections might prove to be worse than the last presidential elections. I'm afraid far-right might get more power. The hell, I'll just fuck off from this mad country.

Slan agat

Charlotte, giving the latest French law on hidjabs, kipas and crosses, I sometimes think that Chirac and socialists are worse than someone like Le Front National.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3416091.stm

Belarus,
this is a very complicated problem. Personnally I agree with this new law. But i guess it can only be understood under the French principles and it's hard to explain all that to someone outside France, yet if it interests anyone, I'm willing to try.

Slan agat

Well about the BBC article, they are damn misinformed.
Beards are not going to be banned.

Slan agat

Charlotte, as for me I'd like to discuss this topic.
BBC is mot misinformed - I've read a correct qoutation from French minister Ferry:

Mr Ferry, in a National Assembly legal committee hearing about the draft law, said the definition of a religious symbol in the proposed law was broad so that pupils could not bypass the law simply by deviating from a list of proscribed items.

Some Muslim girls wear bandannas to cover their hair as an alternative to the traditional headscarf, feeling it is easier to blend in to the crowd.

Asked about beards, as worn by many Muslims, Mr Ferry said: "As soon as it becomes a religious sign and the code is apparent, it would fall under this law."

Reuters uses the same quotation.

Well, Mr Ferry might be minister of Education, he is not actually the one making the decision. Better to ask Mr Sarkozy (though he's only Minister of interior, he's seen everywhere and talks of all subjects and is the most popular member of our government).

Now, let's try to explain the principle of Secularism (La�cit�) in France. First of all this principle exists for a long time in France and was meant to get full religious liberty. Voltaire asked for it to fight religious fanaticism. It even turned to atheist fanaticism during the 1789 Revolution. The law actually begins in 1881 and was decided by Jules Ferry (not Luc, the current minister of education). This law was meant to part the State from the Church. It means that the State has no religion and that therefore everyone is allowed to believe in any religion, or to be an atheist (though that was already the case before). It also meant that no money would be given to the Church and that religion would be no part of education or wouldn't have to be a criteria as regards for example hiring someone in the administrations.
This principle of secularism is one of the most important principles of France. Some City halls even added the word beside our Libert�, Egalit�, Fraternit�, La�cit� (Liberty, Equality, Fraternity, Secularism).

Now there is this new law which is only meant to make sure that Secularism is to be respected. And the matter that occurred is that many people wondered if Secularism meant that all religions are allowed in the public domain or if it means that none should be shown. The answer is the second. There are many explanations to that. I'll explain that later in this post.
This new law actually has always been respected in France. But it had never been put into a law. When I was a child, I have been told in my school not to wear an headscarf, a kippa, a big cross or a t-shirt with a picture of the Pope or whatever. No sign should show too clearly which religion I am. Yet, we were allowed discreet signs, little crosses and Blessed Virgin medals (I even had mine hidden under my t-shirt), Fatima's hands or David's stars around our necks. Yet, recently, two girls refused to take off their headscarf arguing that the law allowed them to be any religion they wanted. Those girls were asked to compromise. They were allowed to wear a bandanna or even their headscarf providing that they would accept to uncover their ears and necks (or if they prefer, wear a sweater covering their neck). They refused to compromise. The case got worse and the two girls were finally expelled from the school after several months of negociations. (I think it is relevant to mention that other girls in this same school wore the headscarf but accepted to compromise.) And this is how the problem started. After those event several people asked for the principle to be put into a law, which would legitimate fully the decision that had been taken. The teachers, of course, as they are teaching secularism in schools. There was also an association of girls, mostly Muslims, who call themselves "Ni Putes, ni Soumises" (No whores, nor submissive) who claim for women's rights. Their motto is "It begins with the headscarf and ends with woman's slavery". They asked that those girls should not be forced under the headscarf and, as they consider it wrong, they count on the Republican School to teach Secularism (which they associate with religious Liberty) to those girls.
Now, back to the point. Why is it forbidden to show religious signs in public domain. First of all because it is considered as offending by many people (I was criticised by Muslims schoolmates for wearing my Blessed Virgin medal). Then because it's a way to practice religious propaganda, proselytism. As well because it is considered as a first step towards other demands like special holydays in schools for religious feasts, public schools for girls only, and a first step to inequality between men and women, etc... Moreover, though very few people talk about it, there are some very tense relationship between Jews and Muslims at the moment in France. Wearing a kippa in school is almost dangerous in some places. But I must say the Jews never asked to be allowed to wear it in schools. This is also why this law is seen as anti-Muslim by some. They are just the only ones to be against.

To this, I would add that I find that Muslim demonstrations (in France and other places) are a very dangerous reaction. First of all things have been heard and seen in the Parisian demonstration that are really shocking. I mean there was only a few hundreds of women, surrounded by several thousands of men. No journalist could approach the women to talk to them. And some mottos were "We are against Israel","as regards the headscarf, we are extremists" or "We don't understand why you're shocked by the headscarf and not by homosexuality". I think this is a pity cause I want to believe some women in the crowd had valuable arguments I am willing to hear and nswer to. And the worst thing about it, and what scares me most is that the French Muslim Community is scaring many people in France. I've heard people saying that they're ivading France, that they want to force our daughters under the headscarf or that they want to make of France an Islamic state. France has the largest Muslim Community in Europe (about 5 millions Muslims in France) and this got some people scared. So I am wondering what is going to happen at the next elections. All they did with this demonstration is proving to the people who are scared of them, that the Muslims are not willing to compromise.

Slan agat

Charlotte, thank you for such detailed reply.
I'll reply a little bit later.

Charlotte,

So there are some my questions and ideas on that problem.

1) What is secularism in France? Is it about 'a State for atheists - first-class citizens' and banning signs of one's personal religion or about 'State does not meddle in religious affairs, churches don't meddle in the affaires of State'?

2) What kipas, headscarfs or crosses do with fanaticism? Why should a moderate Muslim or a Jew break his laws of his religion? Do you really think that crosses, headscarfs and kipas are weared only by religiuos fanatics?

3) I don't understand where there's respect for secularism, when State bans someone in school being a proper Muslim or Jew or banning you to wear a visible sign of your Christian religion? Do you realy think that kipas, crosses and headscarfs are means of religious propaganda?

4) As for Muslim fanaticism, I think that moderate religiuos Muslims will become only more tempting targets for extremist propaganda when then they see they can't be proper Muslims in French secular state, that French laws discriminate their religion.
Imagine yourself on their place.

5) I think it is much better for secularism and assimilation when everybody is allowed wear signs of his religion - it is a best way to teach tolerance, nor fanaticism.When sign of my religion offends someone - it is not my problem for noone perhaps will ban red 5-pointed stars and communist symbols which offend me.

6) There was a reaction from Pope:

Religious Liberty Under Threat in Europe, Pope Says
Mon January 12, 2004 04:55 PM ET

VATICAN CITY (Reuters) - Pope John Paul said on Monday religious freedom might be threatened in some European countries that confused the official separation of church and state with a ban on religion in the public sphere.
Addressing the Vatican's diplomatic corps, the pontiff said a recent debate about mentioning the continent's Christian heritage in the European Union's planned constitution showed some states had trouble accepting religion in public life.

He did not explicitly mention another debate about banning Muslim headscarves in public schools in France, Germany and Belgium, but the wording of his speech delivered in French hinted strongly that he also had this in mind...

"In this recent period, we have been witnesses to an attitude in some European countries that could effectively endanger religious freedom," the pope said.

He said officials often defended a decision to keep religion out of public life by citing the separation of church and state, but this was a wrong understanding of the concept.

"In a pluralist society, secularism means there is a forum for communication between various spiritual traditions and the nation," he said.

France is planning to ban all religious symbols in public schools as a way to bar Muslim schoolgirls from wearing headscarves. All major religions in France have opposed the ban and Muslim leaders say it discriminates against Islam.

Germany and, to a lesser extent, Belgium have also debated banning the veil, which many Europeans see as a sign of growing Islamist influence among their Muslim minorities.

France has western Europe's largest Muslim minority with five million people, or eight percent of its overall population.

"The difficulty to accept religion in the public sphere has been shown by the recent debate about the Christian roots of Europe," the pope added, referring to efforts by traditionally Catholic countries to have the EU constitution mention religion.

EU leaders delayed approving the constitution last month because of a dispute over voting rights, leaving the religion issue unsolved until the text is debated again in coming months.

The pope said some European countries "have read history through reductive ideological glasses, forgetting what Christianity has contributed to the continent's culture and institutions."

Because of its long struggle against the political power of the Catholic Church, France is especially strict in keeping religion out of politics and the public sphere.

� Reuters 2004.

1) The State doesn't have to meddle in religious affairs and religion doesn't have to meddle in the State affairs. Therefore, there's no room for religion in our schools, hospitals, administrations, etc...

2) I didn't say it had to do with fanaticism, I only mentioned it in the history of French secularism. I'm no religious fanatic, yet I wear a cross and Blessed Virgin medal. In school, I hide it under my clothes.

3) & 4) I prefectly imagine that. But I also think that when you live somewhere, you have to respect the law, unless it's a really unfair law. Everyone is allowed to wear religious signs, to go to Church, mosque, sinagogue, or whatever, everyone is allowed to practice one's religion. The only places where religion is banned are schools, hospitals, administrations (those last two only if you are an employee in it.). I must say I do not understand why it is so difficult to accept that one single place in this world would be a place where you are not a believer, but only a citizen of the Republic.
To this I want to add that many Muslims perfectly agree with this law and are willing to respect it, just as Christians, Jews, Hindies, etc... I've heard a Muslim man saying on tv that he came from a country in which he had no religious liberty at all. Why should he be angry against France, a country in which he can believe in anything he wants, or not believe in anything at all ?
These are risks, indeed. But if I were you I'd be much more scared of the average French who is going to vote soon. I don't want to see le Front National in our National Assemblee.

5) Many of those women under their headscarf aren't allowed to get out of their homes. They're kept in by their husbands and brothers. They're allowed to go to school and come back home straight after. They hide under their headscarf because they don't want men to see them. How would assmilate to anyone in such conditions ? Schools are a place where you can be friends with everyone and learn together. You're not talking to a jew, a Muslim or a Christian, or anything else. You're talking to a future French citizen. And I think that's what this law means. Making of us French citizens before being God-believers.

6) About the Pope, well I guess he only expresses some people's fears. But I do also think that he is wrong. FOR THERE IS COMPLETE RELIGIOUS LIBERTY IN FRANCE, and I think it's with USA one of the first countries to do so.


I am a Christian and I believe in French Secularism. It has never been a problem for me to wear my cross under my clothes and I don't understand why it should be a problem for those women to wear a bandana rather than an headscarf. When my cross was still outside my shirt, they were the first ones to be shocked and ask for Secularism to be applied. Just as they would be if tomorrow, being a teacher, I was to come to teach in her class, dressed as a nun. And this kind hypocrisy, I find it hard to accept.
My best friend is a girl from Morrocco. She does not wear the headscarf. She's a perfectly integrated Muslim. She agrees fully with this law. When we were younger, one girl was refusing to take off her headscarf in our school. I was saying I personally didn't if she wore it but my friend was very against and I think she is the one to convince me that Secularism is a grand thing.
I don't want to live in a country where the President at the end of his speeches would say "God bless France" or where my religion would be written on my identity card.

Slan agat

[QUOTE] 1) The State doesn't have to meddle in religious affairs and religion doesn't have to meddle in the State affairs. Therefore, there's no room for religion in our schools, hospitals, administrations, etc... [/QUOTE]

I think that there lies a main mistake. For religion is a private affair and that is why state can not demand 'hide your personal beliefs and signs of your religion', state can demand 'be impartial when working for the State', 'don't make any preference for any religion' and so on.

When someone wears a cross in school it does not means he brings religion to state, he just does it for his own soul comfort. State can fire this man out of his office if this man actually used his office to promote any religion, but everybody has right to act freely in his personal affairs - to wear skirts, costumes, beards, long or short haircuts, headscarfs or crosses.

[QUOTE]2)I didn't say it had to do with fanaticism, I only mentioned it in the history of French secularism. I'm no religious fanatic, yet I wear a cross and Blessed Virgin medal. In school, I hide it under my clothes.[QUOTE]

But why should you? Why Muslim gilrs should not wear their headscarfs if they want? If some one _presses_ them - that another question, but today french government makes just the same - it _presses_ them to take headscarfs off.

[QUOTE]The only places where religion is banned are schools, hospitals, administrations (those last two only if you are an employee in it.).[/QUOTE]

What do yoy mean 'religion banned'? What is the sense of this words?

[QUOTE]I must say I do not understand why it is so difficult to accept that one single place in this world would be a place where you are not a believer, but only a citizen of the Republic. [/QUOTE]

Do you really think that Christian must deny his allegiance to Christ when 'in public'? Do you really think that it is possible for a Christian to be 'sometimes Christian, sometimes not'? So in public offices Ten Commandments 'do not work'?

[QUOTE]I've heard a Muslim man saying on tv that he came from a country in which he had no religious liberty at all. [/QUOTE]
I do believe in that. For ex. Saudi Arabia. Everything except Islam is banned.

[QUOTE]But if I were you I'd be much more scared of the average French who is going to vote soon. I don't want to see le Front National in our National Assemblee.[/QUOTE]
If you were me? What do you mean?

[QUOTE]They hide under their headscarf because they don't want men to see them. [/QUOTE]
It is their right. Isn't it?

[QUOTE]How would assmilate to anyone in such conditions? Schools are a place where you can be friends with everyone and learn together. [/QUOTE]
It would be much more difficult to assimialte them, if they stay at home at all or go to some private Muslim schools instead.

Ok. So this is what your Cardinal says about militant secularists ins France.


Anti-religious militants in France are using the current political climate to exert increased pressure on Catholics says a French cardinal.

Cardinal Jean-Marie Lustiger, archbishop of Paris said bishops around the country had reported dozens of cases in which Roman Catholic girls had been harassed for wearing a cross, or nuns criticised for appearing in public in their habits.
"At a university in Paris, a woman wearing a small cross had it torn off by other students," Lustiger said. "A nun who was crossing a street in the dress of her religious order was told by passers-by: 'You shouldn't go out in your habit'.
"I could tell you dozens of other cases the bishops have reported," he added.
Lustiger blames politicians for stirring up old passions by debating a planned ban on the Muslim veil in public schools.
The law, which a wide spectrum of French politicians and voters support as a bulwark against rising Islamist influence among Muslim immigrants, would be "just the beginning of a long crisis", he told France-Inter radio.
"This law, with all its excesses, risks opening up a war of religions... The politicians should realise what they are stirring up."
Leaders of France's five-million strong Muslim communities have also reported recent cases of harassment, such as banks and municipal offices refusing to serve veiled women, since President Jacques Chirac announced the planned ban last month.
Lustiger said France's strict separation of church and state in 1905 had calmed tensions after the sometimes violent struggle of anti-clerical politicians who curbed the privileges of the once-mighty Catholic Church.
For many French people, that struggle ranks second only to the 1789 revolution as a milestone in the creation of modern Frace - one reason why so many refuse to make concessions now to Islam.
Lustiger stressed France had "religious peace" now but added: "This law, with all its excesses, risks opening up a war of religions... The politicians should realise what they are stirring up."
The cardinal, the son of Polish Jewish immigrants and a teenage convert to Catholicism, said the Church accepted the secular system and would not oppose a law once passed.
But he doubted it would be effective, predicting instead an endless series of trials.

Reuters

[QUOTE]When my cross was still outside my shirt, they were the first ones to be shocked and ask for Secularism to be applied. [/QUOTE]
It was their mistake, they should tolerate your religious beliefs but why should you repeat their mistake?

With sincere respect,
Belarus

I'll answer this long post a bit later.
But I want to enlight two points :
- we're talking about children (-18). Therefore, submissed to their parents' will, including about religion. I'm not sure if those girls who say they took the headscarf freely actually did and if so, did they do it knowing what it means exactly?
- As a French speaker, it's hard for me to translate all the "technical" words into English. So don't ask me what I mean by some very particular words, because I'm not even sure of my own words.
Thanks

Charlotte
But I want to enlight two points :
- we're talking about children (-18). Therefore, submissed to their parents' will, including about religion. I'm not sure if those girls who say they took the headscarf freely actually did and if so, did they do it knowing what it means exactly?

I'm not sure too. Actually I think that part of them wears headscarfs because of the religion, part of them think that it is more like some tradition of their people and some are simply told to do this ('my father/brother told me I must wear it').

But it is just another problem of parent's authority. Prohibiting headscarfs has nothing to do with it.
Education on child's rights - has.

- As a French speaker, it's hard for me to translate all the "technical" words into English. So don't ask me what I mean by some very particular words, because I'm not even sure of my own words.
No, I didn't meant that their is any language problems. (Just the opposite, I think your English is better than mine)
I want to ask what does it meas theoretically and practically 'banning of religion'. What is the idea behind it - promoting equality or supressing of one's views?

Why you can not wear a T-shirt with the foto of Pope in school and can wear T-short with the foto of Britney Spears, for ex.? Why someone is free to make a true idol of pop-singer or politician (like Che Gevara) but your expression of your religious views is banned?

Sincerely yours :)
Belarus