Yes, you. In [thread=556118]this Flying Dutchman thread[/thread] from last year. The OP was complaining that Quebec women, when having their health card photo taken (a time when they need to remove their veil to ensure their identification), wouldn’t be guaranteed access to a female clerk, but might have to come back at another time when one would be available. Or remove their veil in front of a male clerk. You posted this:
But now in this thread’s OP, you say this:
So now you see no problem with requiring veil-wearing women to remove it to identify themselves (presumably even if they have no immediate access to a female officer). Of course Australia isn’t a “French-speaking area” to use your terminology, so perhaps you’re more patient with them and more willing to concede that they’re acting in good faith.
As for your being accused of racism for comments about Quebec, I don’t know what that was about and I probably won’t try finding it. (Oh, who am I kidding? Of course I’ll search for it, as soon as I find the time. ;)) To be honest I thought you were talking about this thread from last year. But if it was 10 years ago, then I guess not.
Now as for the sub-discussion about the ban on religious symbols in France, I think Capitaine Zombie and the other participants are speaking past each other. The Capitaine and the other French posters can correct me, but as far as I know there is a big difference between how France and other countries (especially the US) view the place of religion in the public sphere. France guarantees you freedom of worship, but religion must always remain a private affair. Even wearing religious symbols when you’re in a government-mandated setting (studying, or working as a public servant, etc.) is frowned upon, and (as the Capitaine’s posts tell me) seen as tantamount to proselytism. This is the difference between “large” and “subtle” religious symbols: the large ones can’t be missed, so you really express something to the world when you’re wearing them. The subtle ones are more private. They are for you alone.
Personally, I’m more sympathetic to the American or Canadian (and I assume Australian etc.) philosophy which is that religious symbols you wear on you are a private expression of your faith. But of course this means that the government doesn’t have a duty to accommodate the wearing of them. It can do so, but only if it serves the public good and doesn’t cost too much upon us. If it isn’t unreasonable. And I’m also not willing to condemn the French position as racist or xenophobic. It’s based on a sound philosophical basis, only one that I disagree with.
(And also, Capitaine Zombie, and the other French posters I’ve seen use this terminology: as far as I know “Frenches” isn’t a word in English. You say “Frenchmen” or “Frenchwomen”, or “French people”.)
Aren’t you tired of blaming everything you disagree with that has to do with Muslims on “cultural Marxism”? I’m starting to wonder if you’re a bot.