Is the French policy a new one or has it been in place for a while? I can see being upset if it’s new, but if it’s been known to be that way for a long time and it’s important to the athletes to wear their hijab, then the athletes should have explored other options such as competing for Bahrain or Turkey like others have done.
France doesn't back down. It's female Olympic athletes won't be allowed to wear a hijab and Amnesty International is outraged
Pro News/Info/Results
Distance
-
70
-
Exploring Options wrote:
Is the French policy a new one or has it been in place for a while? I can see being upset if it’s new, but if it’s been known to be that way for a long time and it’s important to the athletes to wear their hijab, then the athletes should have explored other options such as competing for Bahrain or Turkey like others have done.
You shouldn't be able to wear anything on your head, no wigs, no weaves, no swimmimg caps.
16 -
LetsRun.com wrote:
“This means that they must respect the principles of secularism (laïcité) and neutrality, which, according to French law, means prohibition from wearing outwardly religious symbols”
I didn't read through the whole thread but could this also apply to crucifixes/necklaces with Christian symbols?
Seems a bit controlling.
72 -
Dwightarm wrote:
LetsRun.com wrote:
“This means that they must respect the principles of secularism (laïcité) and neutrality, which, according to French law, means prohibition from wearing outwardly religious symbols”
I didn't read through the whole thread but could this also apply to crucifixes/necklaces with Christian symbols?
Seems a bit controlling.
It ain't.
38 -
Impala31 wrote:
shahs wrote:
Quick question: without searching, do you know what does jihad mean, in its most basic sense?
Jihad really just refers to a struggle you endure for the sake of Allah. In the context of early Islam, yes it was used to refer to refer to the act of going to battle for the sake of Islam, but that’s not the only way it’s used. Jihad can be the struggle of trying to stop swearing, from losing your temper, or kicking an addiction.
Women have been wearing hijabs since before Muhammad (PBUH), in the Middle East in that time, women would wear hijabs, the difference being they would leave their chests exposed, so the concept of hijab as a headscarf wasn’t new to the Arabs.
Now, if you want to call it domination, that’s your own prerogative. But I just wonder where you got that idea from, because I’m not familiar with that idea of the hijab being a method of domination over women. Maybe you had a revelation sent? Also, fun fact, Islam really doesn’t have a symbol. That moon and star isn’t really the symbol of Islam, that just sort of happened.
Removing a symbol doesn’t remove an idea. Pivoting, removing pride flags doesn’t mean that queer people just stop existing. They were there before the flags, and they’re here now.
Ask iranian woman if they like islamic headscarf imposed on them.
It's the same in every country where ismamists rule : they impose their retarded dogmas, woman lose most of their right and the country their culture.
Removing the symbol removes the propaganda.
You would call these women oppressed and ban their style of dress.
Women in Iran should not be forced to wear a headscarf and women in France should not be forced to take theirs off.
How hard is that?
144 -
Dwightarm wrote:
LetsRun.com wrote:
“This means that they must respect the principles of secularism (laïcité) and neutrality, which, according to French law, means prohibition from wearing outwardly religious symbols”
I didn't read through the whole thread but could this also apply to crucifixes/necklaces with Christian symbols?
Seems a bit controlling.
Yes it does. You're not supposed to wear any religious symbol if you're representing the nation or the government, or if you're in a public space such as a school or library or a museum. And no face coverings in public at all.
The complaint from french muslims is that it's never enforced on crucifixes, turbans or yarmulkes, just on the religious clothing that muslims wear.
151 -
The French need to watch Chariots of Fire
01 -
Dwightarm wrote:
LetsRun.com wrote:
“This means that they must respect the principles of secularism (laïcité) and neutrality, which, according to French law, means prohibition from wearing outwardly religious symbols”
I didn't read through the whole thread but could this also apply to crucifixes/necklaces with Christian symbols?
Seems a bit controlling.
i have been in some of the french government buildings in paris, and the guide pointed out crosses that had been painted over.
30 -
political nonsense wrote:
Sifan and Dalilah are both Muslim and have won Olympic gold without a hijab. I don't think Dalilah wears one at all but Hassan often has a head covering when she's not competing.
Hassan's world athletics photo is her in either a hijab or chador (the line is hair exposed or no and it's right on the border so I'm not fully sure)
On an unrelated note, her dominance in her prime was insane. Her birthday is January 1, 1993 which might mean she's actually 1-2 years older (just the fact it's January 1 makes me think it might not be fully accurate) but look at this:
Highest World Ranking Positions
Women's 10,000m: 1; 152 weeks
Women's Overall Ranking: 1; 104 weeks
Women's 1500m: 1; 84 weeks
Women's 5000m: 1; 16 weeks
Women's Road Running: 1; 11 weeks
Women's Marathon: 2; 10 weeks10 -
Put me down for thinking that France is wrong. I think they're taking it too far and infringing on freedom of religion and expression. You can say that athletes represent their country but they are not civil employees.
27 -
I am not against the hijab. You have the right to wear whatever you want whatever is accepted in your religion and society. But running with a hijab? Won't that be difficult for the athlete especially as they are supposed to reduce as much weight as possible?
This post was edited 35 seconds after it was posted. Reason provided: Grammar mistake32 -
"It is female athletes?"
FFS
01 -
A lot of you seem to be finding out for the first time that the laws and liberties of the United States are not global. Maybe you can see why some of us love this country and what it stands for. Maybe you’ll begin to see why it is so important to let others voice their beliefs, even when unpopular, without having their lives ruined.
France has been sliding backwards for a few decades, but it’s important to remember they birthed much of what hold dear in the United States today. From a great Frenchman in the 18th century:
”Think for yourselves and let others enjoy the privilege to do so, too.”
20 -
USAer wrote:
Maybe you’ll begin to see why it is so important to let others voice their beliefs, even when unpopular, without having their lives ruined.
That's a good place to start, but after a little while you encounter something called the paradox of tolerance.
Religions are literally designed to assimilate and dominate, and France has proud traditions of dealing with the oppression of the church. They're not looking to find another oppressor. Especially not one that's way worse than the modern catholic church.
And the US' cold war era policies of reinforcing religion as a counter to "marxist atheism" has done untold harm. Revising the pledge of allegiance to the version we have today in 1954 and adding religion to the dollar bill in 1957 are just two examples. And you can't become President without pretending to believe in (the "right") god.
40
What People Are Talking About On LetsRun
No top threads at the moment. Check back soon.