My local town in the UK has a religious group of Moldavians who wear blue scarves, they've been in the country for around 100 years and are pretty British-ish, seems harmless to me

Still at least in France there is none of this nonsense about not enforcing vacination for children.

I am a devout of Saint Gertrud religion. Fortunately they didn't prevent me from entering France but, wisely, I was not displaying any signs of my particular devotion.

Lobo--not even a ring?

On a private visit, you can display (or cover) anything you want. The only restrictions are for official activities. Nuns, for example, must go to police stations and courtrooms bareheaded, and their identity documents must display an uncovered head, just like anybody else in France.

I should qualify that last remark, since you cannot cover the face in public with a niqab, a burka or a motorcycle helmet.

Yes sure :-) I could say I was wearing gloves, but in August it would have been quite weird and certainly catching a lot of unwanted attention.
As far as the thread is concerned I believe that diversity is more enriching that uniformity. When uniformity is enforced, sooner or later, it will end in violence. Yugoslavia after Tito as an example.

Uniformity? There is no uniformity in France. It is a country of total diversity.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/11/wo...education&_r=0

Relevant article in today's NY Times on the role of French teachers teaching French values, etc. But one question they can't answer - "How come kids can't wear the head scarf in class but they can wear it on field trips?"

Can't answer? That is a stupid question. It is the difference between the hijab inside an official establishment or outside such a place. It is one of the reasons it was decided that veiled mothers could accompany school trips even if they cannot enter a school with a hijab.

The NYT is as clueless as ever.

Nivelles or t'other one?

<i>a very very salient point and at the crux of the problem that many French I know seem not to realize as even my liberal French friends largely support the ban on head scarves in school and the burka in public.</i>

Time to re-read Rousseau, if only his article on Political Economy in the Encyclopédie which is absolutely pertinent to the issue at hand because it defines the French republican principles. It goes like this: There are human rights (not defined in the article) that apply to everyone. The good state adheres to those rights, but also defines a subset that applies to its citizens. States are equal to each other, thus the self-definition of a state (its Social Contract--not used by Rousseau in this article but became the title of his most important political oeuvre) cannot be said to be better or worse than another state’s as long as both adhere to the principle of human rights. Beneath the definition of rights given to all citizens are habits, mores and practices of sub-communities, such as religious communities. These are tolerated as long as they do not infringe or contradict the rights of a citizen (i.e. what is granted and maintained under the social contract). Rousseau also has a long section on the need for education to make sure that children become good citizens, and by implication rise above the practices of their local community. It sounds more than a little fascistic, but illustrates the difference between the rights of a citizen under French (and generally continental law) and the rights of the individual under American law.

I suspect that the European experience of the 20th century, particularly W.W.II and the Holocaust, is what has expanded the toleration for minority rights in Europe. But these are within self-described communities. Thus the Dutch accept gay marriages and fear the outsider’s, i.e. Muslim, fundamentalism. I suspect that France accepts the assimilated Jew who goes to temple as the non-militant Catholic goes to church, but only tolerates the Hassid who is different in the public space.

"The NYT is as clueless as ever."

The article does not say that question can not be answered. It says this is a question posed by young students. The article then explains the law under which it is required.

Relevant article in today's NY Times on the role of French teachers teaching French values, etc. But one question they can't answer - "How come kids can't wear the head scarf in class but they can wear it on field trips?"
___
The logic is only clear to the French. So the attack on the NY Times, in this occurrence, is an attack on logic and clear reporting.

looking for lobo_mau.. has anyone seen him lately?

I am here (always looking after the Red Hiding Hood). If you have any query to ask in private, my email is [email protected] Otherwise I'll keep checking this thread.
Lobo Mau (aka Lobo Malo, Big Bad Wolf, etc)

Have sent you an email.