this post was submitted on 11 Dec 2025
98 points (100.0% liked)
World News
1028 readers
330 users here now
Rules:
Be a decent person, don't post hate.
Other Great Communities:
Rules
Be excellent to each other
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
If a religion is fundamentally incompatible with gender equality it deserves "anti... feelings."
That goes for all religions. No reason to single out Muslims.
from a personal choice? sure. you can be a douche to these peoples.
but if my religion says “no beards” and a gov agency say “must beards” .. what right does a gov have in controlling my choice? completely inappropriate.
Your comparison is bad. Let's say you have a religion that mandates all boys wear silly hats. Except that hats (of any kind) aren't allowed to be worn during school. Especially not in elementary school.
Is the government overstepping by saying that boys cannot wear hats in school just because their religion says so? No.
I'll just come out and say it: Religion isn't important in school. That's a personal thing that should stay at home.
From a government protective, all religions are entirely made-up and completely arbitrary! You could declare yourself a Jedi and say you're being discriminated against for not being able to carry dangerous weapons in school. Doesn't matter: Your religion (Jedi) is completely unimportant to schooling. You don't get an exception just because it's a deeply held religious belief (or similar).
Governments should absolutely not give any religion special treatment. Why is it the government/school that must accommodate (sexist) religious beliefs and not the other way around? If your religion can't handle girls going without their heads being covered that is a flaw in your religion. Obviously! It is completely inflexible and cannot withstand even the tiniest accomodation of not having girls cover themselves in public.
It's so immodest for girls to put head scarves on in a society that doesn't typically wear them! It's like wearing a neon suit; drawing tons of attention to the person. It says, "look at me as I flaunt my religion!"
To some people headscarves represent sexism and oppression of women but that's not actually the real (government) concern. As much as people want it to be some sort of persecution it's so much simpler: Head coverings for young children are nothing but trouble (for schools)!
Keep all the (little) kids wearing similar clothes and no one can be singled out for that and teachers don't have to worry about being accused of giving some kids special treatment because of their religion.
That's very different. Its more like a religion telling men to always wear gloves for modesty reasons and the government saying that you can't wear them in school.
The reason "for modesty" and only one gender is kind of important. That makes this a gender equality issue.
The law still feels a bit weird, but Islam has to modernize, just like Christianity is doing. Both have a lot of work left and this government is probably more islamophobic than they care about equality.
if $reason is from $religion - then state has no say outside of other existing laws. if the state was “truly” concerned DCF would be called. we already have child safety laws. why have they used those laws? because it’s about intimidation and control instead.
a school should have zero say in what parts of a person’s faith is valid or not unless they are going to use existing mandatory reporting laws. not stupid control via things like dress codes because it’s not even a dog whistle at this point.
I disagree. I think the religious indoctrination of children is bad.
In my opinion the weirdest part is, that they are banning hijabs, but circumcision on babies is somehow still legal. Seems like we're mixing our priorities a bit.
i never said if i think it is bad or good. just that a nation state should not be legislating it via side channel controls like school “policy” but instead, if care was had, through child laws.
I agree with your point.. but i think the problem here is how can the government judge whether one is wearing it out of fear, culture.. or simply a personal choice. Now the fact this is applied to under 14 only cancels out the personal choice thing, but there is no way for the government to differentiate between fear based / internalized misogyny or just simply something they wear because its just a cultural thing to do, A lot of progressive muslims wear hijab simply as a personal choice or as identity
Also a lot of muslims start clinging to stuff like hijab more after they feel their identity is being continuously suppressed, banning it simply attacks a symbol rather than the core issue.. you cant fix coercion by coercing them the other way, it can only be fixed through education and ground up change.. Christianity didn’t modernize while being in under attack, it modernized when people inside weren’t fighting for their existence (they were erasing others lol but i digress), but rather when they had their basic conditions met and were thinking about stuff like liberty, equality, freedom of expression etc.. andeven then it was a very messy and slowly moving discussion
Its a complex issue I think personally, but the fact that the right wingers are the one pushing for this makes me think its definitely them wanting to erase identity/culture than anything about equality as u said
Yea, this might be a good law, but not from this government.
You can’t.
So remove it entirely because it’s so fucked up that we can’t even tell if a person is “willingly” doing it due to being brainwashed or because they’ll be killed by their family if they don’t.
Because your religion never stops at you. History has shown that every chance it can, religion will try to control peoples lives.
It’s like being anti-capitalist. Wanting a revolution would infringe your freedom to choose to exist in a capitalist society, but everyone else would be better off for it.
i am indeed anti capitalist. the thing is - a state has laws already for breaking down systems of religious control through child safety laws. yet here it’s done via “policy”. why?