this post was submitted on 28 Nov 2023
406 points (97.0% liked)

Europe

8484 readers
1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

  1. Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
  2. No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
  3. No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out !yurop@lemm.ee

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Klystron@sh.itjust.works 17 points 1 year ago (2 children)

An argument I've heard against it is that it's overly harmful against non-western religions, specifically Islam. A pretty common tenet in Islam is some kind of head covering for woman. Banning that is a pretty sweeping reform. Christianity and Catholicism don't have anything like that, and if you really wanted to wear a cross you could just hide a necklace under your shirt. And Judaism, most non -orthodox Jews don't wear a yamaka 24/7. So in the end (typical) white religions aren't affected while minorities are.

Personally for me I don't care about wearing a religious symbol as long as you're not pushing your agenda. I don't care if my boss has a Bible on his desk any more than if he had a copy of dragon Ball z.

[–] CybranM@feddit.nu 4 points 11 months ago

I would vastly prefer if my boss had DBZ rather than a Bible. BDZ is just literature, the Bible is a symbol of indoctrination, I don't want my boss to be influenced by some made up nonsense

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip -5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Nuns and priests would not be allowed to wear their religious clothes either, so I’m okay with that.

It is not the secular state's fault that one religion chooses to be more backwards than the others by requiring religious clothing from all women, and is thus more affected by a ban on religious symbols.

Adapt to modernity or get the fuck out

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

And you expect that to be enforced?

Given that in one German state it was mandatory by state law to have a cross in every public building, from a party that is very overt about banning hijabs, i strongly doubt that.

The reality will be that this will target muslims everywhere and maxbe a few stry christians. But the vast majority of christian strongholds, like Germanys catholic south will simply not enforce it against christians.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So, we should just accept backwards superstition and archaic societal ideals because Bavaria is made up of Christian reactionaries?

Enforce it from Berlin then. Deploy personnel to monitor the application. If Bavaria tries to play favorites, big fines for each case.

As a german I am tired of conservative obstructionism, especially when it’s Bavaria, the german state embodiment of selfish and short sighted backwardness.

[–] tryptaminev@feddit.de 3 points 1 year ago

So, we should just accept backwards superstition and archaic societal ideals because Bavaria is made up of Christian reactionaries?

Enforce it from Berlin then. Deploy personnel to monitor the application. If Bavaria tries to play favorites, big fines for each case.

While i agree with your sentiment the reality is that christian fundamentalists (in appearance, in behaviour they are devilish unchristian) are still powerful in German politics and we see a resurgence in their popularity among the voters. The majority of the German people is happy with persecution of muslims and doesnt care about favoritism towards christians.

[–] brainrein@feddit.de 0 points 11 months ago (1 children)

So, we should just accept backwards superstition and archaic societal ideals

No, we should fight that. With words. With arguments. And not by banning clothing.

Clothing is just a symbol and the meaning changes all the time and from context to context. People who want to ban clothing are just in favor of putting pressure on other people, on forcing others to be like them. It’s despicable.

I was a teenager with very long hair in the seventies. I loved my hair, it told the world that I was a free spirit. And it was a very powerful asshole-detector. Every now and then some backwarded adult would come up to tell me I would have been sent to concentration camp under Hitler. And it was quite obvious that they wished Hitler to come back and do so again. Just for me wearing long hair.

I don’t think you believe, but I am convinced that there are quite a number of young Muslimas here in Berlin who chose to wear a headscarf to uni while their mother says "Please, don’t risk your career!"

And they say: "Mother, this scarf tells them where I'm from. And if they keep me from having a career it’s not because of the scarf, it’s because they hate who I am."

"All this pseudo-liberal, pseudo-tolerant, pseudo-feminist, pseudo-open-minded assholes, I would never detect them without that scarf! Now leave me alone, I’ve got a heritage to defend."

You’re much closer to Söder than to a humanist.

[–] GregorGizeh@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 months ago

So you whipped up a whole fictitious little story in which I’m the evil reactionary based on me being anti theist? Okay then.

And just for the record, you comment also illustrates perfectly the cognitive dissonance employed here. A muslim immigrant that is proud of their muslim heritage isn’t brave or admirable, it’s the same dumb shit as any german christian who would try to argue that.

I don’t want people to feel free to be ultra conservative religious quran thumpers because we are so liberal and tolerant. I want them to be taught that this shit isn’t welcome here and if they want to be they have to leave it behind.