As a German, it’s hard to imagine that the German rental model is an improvement to anything. It’s horrible. Private landlords honestly stuck even more than corporate ones. Lots of people who feel entitled to put whatever restrictions they want on tenants, regardless of the law. Racism/favorism are rampant, people are literally paying for appointments to just look at apartments and also to be favored in the selection process.

It’s bad.

As so one who gre up in Bremen: How dare you.

As someone from northern Germany, I can confirm our food is straight up just better than that southern shit.

Or just you know, all of the above :)

Danke Brudi, top gemacht!

Surfshark worked well for me for a long time. Lots of servers, works well for unlocking region blocked content and it’s pretty cheap. If you’re into full privacy, I recently moved to AirVPN who accept payment through crypto, so you don’t have to hand over user data except for an email (which doesn’t have to be a real one, you can delete it later).

That’s literally what freedom of religion means though. To be able to express your religion in both public and private, without the state interfering. Every EU country has committed itself to the “EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief”. Freedom of religion does not mean that people are free to follow their religion behind closed doors or in places that you or the state allow them to practice it.

You left a whole bunch of other stuff out when it comes to the discussion about secular states.

Yes I didn’t quite the entire Wikipedia page, but I think my quote should already point out the incompatibility between banning religious clothing and committing yourself to secularism. Just to be clear: I brought up the idea of secularism in context of the state pushing religion on its people. I wouldn’t even use it as an argument in this case. The best argument to make here is that France as a member of the EU has committed itself to freedom of religion and thus should have no say in how people dress in their public and private life. There have been valid exceptions (such as banning covering your face at protests, banks etc.) for safety reasons, but this clearly doesn’t apply here.

Yes you’re right, imposing your views on others, does cross the line of a secular state. No one is asking that students have to cover their hair, it’s only demanded that they are allowed to do so. Equally crossing the line is the opposite, the state forcing it’s belief onto it’s people, by telling them they can’t express their religion in the form of religious clothing.

It goes beyond your private life and touches laws and values that are part of the state.

Apart from me mostly agreeing that the religious practices you mentioned suck, it doesn’t matter if it goes beyond your private life. Freedom of religion, me as you are free to express you religion in private **and public. ** You’re free to dislike it, but that’s what it is. Seeing people wearing Burkas, prayer beeds, crosses or whatever does not impact your freedom, even if it makes you uncomfortable. As I already mentioned, laws are a different issue. Of course religion is not above the law and of there are valid security concerns such as covering your face in a bank or a protest, there is no reason why the law should interfere with religion. A person wearing a dress at school, is definetly no such concern.

The abaya isn’t just a headscarf, though. It only leaves the face uncovered and I have seen kids who also additionally cover parts of their face with it.

I just googled it and it’s literally a fucking dress. Sure it’s often combined with a headscarf or (I guess this is what most people have a problem with, a Niqab), but how can you tell women (and often also men) not to wear a dress?

You’re right about the homeschooling (not so much on the private schools, but that’s not really relevant to the point), but that doesn’t stop religious radicals to pull their kids from schools so they can better indoctrinate the kids themselves. This was a common problem during the pandemic, where parents who didn’t agree with the state policies pulled their kids from school and it’s a common problem in counties where homeschooling is legal (like the US), where strictly religious or conservative parents pull their kids from school because they’re learning about gender identity and receive sex education.

Personally I think we need to do more to push back against conservatism, not less.

Something we agree on for once. I’m not religious and I hate to see religion being pushed on to kids. However, I’m a all a strong believer in democracy and the freedoms it gives us. That dies mean though, that we have responsibilities as well. You can’t pick and chose when to apply the rules we set up for a better world and when not to. The EU has committed itself to the “EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief” and we can’t throw that out of the window, because we don’t like how Muslim people dress.

That’s very interesting, I didn’t know that.

I wasn’t talking about Frances interpretation though, as I’m obviously not well informed on that. I was more thinking about the EU commitment to freedom of religion as stated in the “EU Guidelines on the promotion and protection of freedom of religion or belief”, in which all EU member states commit to protijg the freedom of religion in the EU (and even outside if possible, see OSCE).

Just as a small excerpt:

(b) the freedom to manifest one’s religion or belief, individually or in community with others, in public or private, through worship, observance, practice and teaching.

This includes the duty to rescind discriminatory legislation, implement legislation that protects freedom of religion or belief, and halt official practices that cause discrimination, as well as to protect people from discrimination by state and other influential actors, whether religious or non-religious

So the state has a responsibility to protect the freedom of religion, within it’s territory.

You actually have no idea what you’re talking about, sorry.

I’m glad we finally landed on Islam though, it shows that this law is supported by islamophobes and people like you are the perfect way to show this to the world.

Just a one minute Google search and you could have saved yourself from this absolutely embarrassing answer. Here let me do it for you:

A secular state is an idea pertaining to secularity, whereby a state is or purports to be officially neutral in matters of religion, supporting neither religion nor irreligion.[1] A secular state claims to treat all its citizens equally regardless of religion, and claims to avoid preferential treatment for a citizen based on their religious beliefs, affiliation or lack of either over those with other profiles.[2]

Prohibiting people from expressing their religions is strictly anti secular.

I can imagine that just fine and it’s horrible. I love in a country with a fuck ton of Muslim immigrants and I’m sure a lot of their children would prefer not to have to cover their hair (that’s what we’re talking about, not a burka as you describe it).

Yes it’s a powerful tool to keep kids under the influence of their parents religion. But taking away the symbols of that religion won’t make the kids atheist or magically take them out of the influence of their families. If you think that parents who enforce the strict rules of their religion because the kid can’t wear certain clothing at school, you are Truely delusional. Best case the lod doesn’t wear it in school, but still has to do so every other minute in their life. Worst case the parents pull their kids out of school, because the school threatens their influence. A lot of those kids are going to end up home schooled by their radical families or simply go to a private school, where such rules don’t exist. Neither is going to help the kid.

Said every authoritarian ever. So you don’t believe in freedom of religion and being able to express that?

You have a very odd understanding of what “secular state” means. It doesn’t mean that the state can dictate where or how you’re allowed to express you religion. It doesn’t mean that some parts of religion are to be tolerated, where as those that you see as bad can be forbidden at will.

All it means, is that the state institutions, can’t force you to partake in a religion or activities related to that religion. Kids who voluntarily want to express their religion are free to do so. Whether that kid is forced into following that religion, is not an issue of a “secular state”.

Im not denying that there are problems with integration. I’m not denying that some kids are forced into religion.

I’m saying that taking away the liberty to express your religion, won’t change anything about that. All it does is appease people who are offended or threatened by religion (Islamophobia, anti semitism etc.).

A kid that is forced into religion won’t become an atheist if it can’t wear a headdress or a cross chain in school.

So you bar people from expressing their religion so they don’t get bullied? Absolute gigabrain move.

“Should we punish the bullies? Maybe take measures so the teachers know how to better deal with conflict? No. Let’s punish the kids getting bullied by taking away their right to express their religion. Surely the bullies won’t find anything else to bully these kids.”

Sorry to burst your bubble, but people in other countries (like Germany) where they are allowed to display religious symbols are able to bond just fine. If you can’t “bond” with someone because they’re wearing a cross on a chain or cover their head with religious clothing, that sounds like a you-issue. Regardless of why they practice their religion, it’s not up to you or the state to tell them how to practice it. Sure some are forced into it by their parents, but banning religious symbols in schools isn’t going to fix that. What it does do however, is stop students from practicing a religion they freely chose.

This law is made by people who are intimidated by things they don’t understand and that probably have their roots in racism and islamophobia.

So much for freedom of religion.

“When you walk into a classroom, you shouldn’t be able to identify the pupils’ religion just by looking at them,”

What a dumb fucking reason. Really, that’s the best he could come up with? Why not? What’s so bad about knowing someone’s religion, when they are obviously not shy about it?

I get banning religious symbols from schools, because the institutes themselves are supposed to be non-religious (seperation of state and church and so on), but if the students themselves want to express their religion, let them.

What do you mean “when paired with your own clients”?

I just subscribed to AirVPN and while basic, their Eddie client is… serviceable :D

How exactly does aligning with the west change your culture and way of life?

Also, let’s not forget that China is literally putting people into “re-education camps” for having the wrong religion.

Furthermore, Russia and China are not part of the same block. China stands alone because it can afford to do so.

Tell me you know nothing about politics, without telling me you know nothing about politics. Ever heard of a little union called BRICS? You should google it and pay special attention to what the C and R stand for.