Granted, this is all playing out in Britain, but in the US I suppose it would depend on whether or not it is a public or private school. In public, it would be accepted that certain allowances are made for the 1st Amendment. Although last night's Boston Legal was a thought-provoking case on Scientology and whether or not a private employer can fire someone just based on not liking their religion.
The veil may seem obtrusive and separatist, but integration is a step up from, say, immigrant ghettos where ethnic groups never deal with anybody non-ethnic.
I'm not sure I agree with your use (not your invention, I know) of the term "secular, liberal society." I'm not sure that by *not* being religion-specific I think the Founders, in our case, meant non-religious. Now, in Europe, the attack on Christianity has gone a little differently, granted. But I tend to favor a plurality in society where the religious and non-religious are given equal treatment and access rather than the presumption that religion is somehow banished. The problem with giving secularism a "clear edge" is that secularism is a religious belief as well.
I think public should mean just that...open to anybody, free, and without limitation. I think Western culture is more about de-regulated society in terms of what is required in public behavior. Ah, there's my libertarianism again. LOL
I take your point though. It is a totally valid debate.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-18 03:47 pm (UTC)From:The veil may seem obtrusive and separatist, but integration is a step up from, say, immigrant ghettos where ethnic groups never deal with anybody non-ethnic.
I'm not sure I agree with your use (not your invention, I know) of the term "secular, liberal society." I'm not sure that by *not* being religion-specific I think the Founders, in our case, meant non-religious. Now, in Europe, the attack on Christianity has gone a little differently, granted. But I tend to favor a plurality in society where the religious and non-religious are given equal treatment and access rather than the presumption that religion is somehow banished. The problem with giving secularism a "clear edge" is that secularism is a religious belief as well.
I think public should mean just that...open to anybody, free, and without limitation. I think Western culture is more about de-regulated society in terms of what is required in public behavior. Ah, there's my libertarianism again. LOL
I take your point though. It is a totally valid debate.