That's how I know this law will absolutely be used to target specific religions unless the fundamentalist Christians take it too far.

Would be too funny to see Markus Söder's face if this would actually happen. "DeClInE oF tHe OcCiDeNt" or something like that.

I think they are already illegal by the Grundgesetz and Bavaria is just Bavaria and do whatever they want.

Yes please ban those too

The rest of the quote is: "Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people." Take from that what you will.

I also don't know that most people who identify as or are called left wing would call Marx their hero.

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.

The problem is that you have to treat religion equally and for a lot of European countries that would mean pushing Christian symbols out of public offices as well. Most Nordic countries, Greece and Malta have crosses on their flags for example. Many countries like Germany have parties, which are explicitly Christian. The Bundeswehr uses the Iron Cross as a symbol, which is in direct heritage from a crusader order.

The problem for those countries is that baning Islamic symbols is very often just racist rethoric to hit Islam, rather then a proper separation of state and religion.

The right wing is pushing specifically for the banning of things like the hijab or other religious head coverings usually worn by women. They justify it by saying that these head coverings are a symbol of oppression against women, and have no place in a free society.

Thing is though, how free is a society if it feels it has to dictate what women can and can't wear?

Because banning something so petty like a hijab is just a dick move which serves no purpose other than cause more tension, if any women is wearing something by her choice, who the fuck are we to judge? Isn’t that the whole point of tolerance and being left wing?

acoustic pollution caused by the church bells.

I really, really wish religious people would finally switch to clocks and phone notifications for their niche events like everyone else. Many people also have an odd romantic notion of this noise pollution. Sort of like the idiots who think loud motorbikes or sports cars make them look cool.

That will never happen. If religion is erased from the equation, ideology or culture will take it's place and cause friction

I’m not sure a hijab is a religious symbol. It’s just a covering worn for religious reasons.

The problem is, far rights won't care.

This isn't about banning people from wearing their religious merchandise in public. This is banning religious objects from workplaces. More precisely just public workplaces. Of course a secular state should also have secular workplaces. And the way labour rights are personal life can be completely banned from your workplace. Why would religion be treated differently?

I mean, it's more about code of vestment. Let's say the code of certain workplace say that you have to have your face fully visible, you can't wear anything that obstructs your face, if religious symbols were allowed you can justify yourself with "religious obligation", the "atheist headscarf" was banned from the start