"Please try to respect (if you can't try to understand it) France's century long approach to ostentatious religious signs in public schools."


France indeed has a century-long strong tradition of secularism, and especially in schools.

However, until the recent law on this issue, french courts consistently ruled against outright bans of scarves (or other religious symbols), except in specific cases, when :

-The religious symbol/statement/whatever was so conspicuous as to amount to prozelytism, according to the court.

-In specific cases, for safety issues (for instance scarves worn during physical education courses or while operating machines).

And *never* had a court allowed a school to ban headscarves, despite multiple cases being brought to them.


Had this law been submitted to the Constitutionnal Council (and it wasn't), it likely would have been struck down as unconstitutionnal. Though maybe not. The composition of the CC is signifiantly different from the composition of admnistrative courts. We'll never know.


Besides, this law didn't target "religious symbols" but specifically the islamic scarf. Of course, they had to add other similar religious symbols like for instance the jewish Kippah, but these were essentially "collateral damages". Everybody debatted about the veil, not about the Sikh's head cover or big crosses.

And this law was a result of an unlikely agreement between people as different as secularist schol teachers, leftists feminists and extreme-right nationalists.

Imhornet, according to you, American tourists in France should account for 30 % of this country's foreign tourist spending. You are slightly overestimating our dependency on the narrow base of your compatriots who actually hold a passport, since in 2004 they only accounted for 12.6 % of the foreign visitor income to France (source: French ministry for Tourism, www.tourisme.gouv.fr). Not negligible, I agree, especially if you compare this figure to the meagre 3.5 % they represent in terms of foreign entries into the territory. But far from your alledged 30 %.

Thanks Tracy - I assume the RER is the train - I'll check out parisshuttle.com, we're getting in a 7am after flying all night so I'd prefer the convenience of the shuttle anyway.

"since in 2004 they only accounted for 12.6 % of the foreign visitor income to France (source: French ministry for Tourism, www.tourisme.gouv.fr). Not negligible, I agree, especially if you compare this figure to the meagre 3.5 % they represent in terms of foreign entries into the territory. But far from your alledged 30 %."

If those are the data, then I stand corrected. I still don't see how people who come for 2 weeks from faraway don't spend more money than people who spend a day or a a weekend, but there it is. The on;y explanation is that Americans must be very cheap.

No, actually, Imhornet, your intuition was right (a coefficient 3 between the proportion of nights spent and the proportion of foreign tourist income), it's just your base that was too high! The Japanese follow the same pattern: 0.7 % of nights, but 2.4 % of income. And, conversely, European tourists bring about negative coefficients: UK + Ireland - 18% of nights/15% of income; Germany - 18/11.7, and of course, the real cheapos, following their reputation of being thrifty and bringing all their food along, are the Dutch: they account for 14% of the nights, but only 6% of the income!

re: discussion of americans being nervous nellies about travel in comparison to Europeans. I say "everything is relative." I was an exchange student in germany in the 70's and i was struck by what a "big deal" it was for my german family to travel (drive) to switzerland. it was about a 4 hour drive, and based on the amount of physical and emotional prep that wenr into it I was expecting a minimum 10 hour trip. Just as I was getting settled in, we stopped for a "rest break." I toss my kids in the car for a 7.5 hour drive to Grandma's several weekends per year. Many Chicagoans hop in their cars for a 4 or 5 hour drive for a weekend at their northern Wisconsin cabins. As a kid we drove form WI to FL nonstop (15-20 hours). If Germany had beaches I doubt Germans would be travelling to Spain. When Americans travel to Europe it is to experience a different culture. When Germans drive to Spain, it's to sit in the sun, not to experience Spanish culture. Also, am I woring in mush assumption that the number of american touriosts to europe vastly outnumbers hte number of european tourists in the US?

Germans have beaches

re: americans being "nervous nellies" about travel in comparison to Europeans.

If England had sunny beaches would Brits be travelling to Spain in the same numbers? When Americans travel to Europe it is for the purpose of experiencing a different culture, not to sit on the beach (that's what FL is for). When Germans drive to Spain for vacation, that's the moral equivalent of a Cheesehead flying to Ft. Lauderdale-- to sit in the sun, not to experience a different culture. So I don't think it is a fair comparison to say that bc Brits (or Germans or whoever) travel to Spain (or other warm European spot) in great numbers but Americans stay in the US that Americans are nervous nellies about travel.

If Florida were a foreign country, the percentage of US passport holders would be alot higher. If our gov't would allow us to go to Cuba, we'd be there!!! (I guess it's a good thing for everyone else that we can't go-)

(BTW, I do wholeheartedly agree with the point of view that Americans are not sufficiently aware of what's going on in the rest of the world, etc.).

I think that the term "travel nellies" did not refer to the lack of your compatriots' cultural curiosity, but to their extreme sensitivity to any potential "danger" abroad, fear rendered easier by their general ignorance of the world we are living in. It is true that there are ugly pockets of little Britain, little Germany, little Denmark, little France in some resorts on the Costa Blanca, Majorqua, Ibiza, the Canary Islands, Cyprus, Tunisia, Morocco, etc. But the difference in the proportion of Americans vs Europeans spending their vacation abroad is so overwhelming that I think that in raw numbers every year you get more Europeans really experiencing a foreign culture than Americans. Plus don't forget the fact that Europeans typically get 4 to 6 weeks holidays a year, compared to 2 to 3 for Americans. And you can't beat the geography: drive 3 hours in most European countries, and people will speak another language, so you just can't escape bumping into different cultures.

From a very unpromising beginning, starting with a banal question (to which the obvious answer is Yes) this has become an informative, even learned, thread.

My recollection is that secularism was a very hard-won battle in France, 100+ years ago. Overall I support it, as I do here in Canada, where politics and public life were once riven by Catholic-Protestant divisions. (I'm from "Orange" Ontario)

I also support cultural and linguistic assimilation -- as a counterbalance to the huge centripetal forces that France, as a cross-roads of Europe, must face.

Here in Canada we have, as the newpapers remind us daily, too many citizens for whom citizenship is a convenience bestowing benefits but no duty of loyalty.

Of course, we have many more for whom that citizenship is their most precious acquisition. But it is deemed politically incorrect to make any distinction of law or policy between the two camps.