โฒ 406 โผ EU states can ban religious symbols in public workplaces (www.bbc.com) submitted 2 years ago by CAVOK@lemmy.world to c/europe@feddit.de 357 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[โ] Honytawk@lemmy.zip 6 points 2 years ago (3 children) No they can not ban you, but they can ban your cross. If you can't live without your cross, that is on you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Technically, covering your "naughty bits" is a religious taboo. Can they ban that? Other people are calling that a slippery slope, but crosses as symbols absolutely transcend religions as much as clothing as a religious moral. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] sergih@feddit.de -2 points 2 years ago (2 children) thing is most peoplenIknoew, when they wear a cross or smt, it's not even a big deal for them, theyre just just wearing, doesn't mean they are going to siddenly start talking to you about religion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [โ] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those people aren't the problem. The people who can't even take that little step of taking the cross off are the problem. Religion should be kept out of matters of state. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago Religion should be kept out of matters of state. Demanding someone remove jewelry because you don't approve of its religious connotations is not secularism. It's the opposite. If religion is kept out of matters of state, state needs to be blind to religion, not zealously purging all signs of it. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] obbelusk@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Just wear it under your shirt. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago No, it's not on you, that's against the rules now permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 1 point 2 years ago Technically, covering your "naughty bits" is a religious taboo. Can they ban that? Other people are calling that a slippery slope, but crosses as symbols absolutely transcend religions as much as clothing as a religious moral. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] sergih@feddit.de -2 points 2 years ago (2 children) thing is most peoplenIknoew, when they wear a cross or smt, it's not even a big deal for them, theyre just just wearing, doesn't mean they are going to siddenly start talking to you about religion. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [โ] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those people aren't the problem. The people who can't even take that little step of taking the cross off are the problem. Religion should be kept out of matters of state. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago Religion should be kept out of matters of state. Demanding someone remove jewelry because you don't approve of its religious connotations is not secularism. It's the opposite. If religion is kept out of matters of state, state needs to be blind to religion, not zealously purging all signs of it. permalink fedilink source parent [โ] obbelusk@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Just wear it under your shirt. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) Those people aren't the problem. The people who can't even take that little step of taking the cross off are the problem. Religion should be kept out of matters of state. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago Religion should be kept out of matters of state. Demanding someone remove jewelry because you don't approve of its religious connotations is not secularism. It's the opposite. If religion is kept out of matters of state, state needs to be blind to religion, not zealously purging all signs of it. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] abraxas@sh.itjust.works 0 points 2 years ago Religion should be kept out of matters of state. Demanding someone remove jewelry because you don't approve of its religious connotations is not secularism. It's the opposite. If religion is kept out of matters of state, state needs to be blind to religion, not zealously purging all signs of it. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] obbelusk@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago Just wear it under your shirt. permalink fedilink source parent
[โ] OrteilGenou@lemmy.world -4 points 2 years ago No, it's not on you, that's against the rules now permalink fedilink source parent