Simplistic Solutions for a Secular Society

The French legislation to ban the wearing of headscarves by Muslim women within state schools has passed its first reading. Presented as everything from a bigoted attack on Muslims to a sensible extension of France's liberal, secular traditions; controversial barely describes the proposal. Banning overt religious symbols from schools does far more to promote religious freedom than the legislation's critics would like to admit, but is, ultimately, counter-productive.

Despite the claims of many critics, the French legislation is not an attack on personal religious choice. The vast majority of children do not have personal religious beliefs. Instead they copy those made by their parents. Fear of the authority figure is a far more likely reason for a religious choice than any belief on the part of a child. What the opponents fear is not that children will be unable to express their religious belief, but that the ability of parents to indoctrinate their children in their chosen religion will be lessened.

Tolerance of others' religious beliefs is laudable. Indeed, I am sufficiently libertarian to believe that religious acceptance is an end requiring no justification. The problem is that many religious beliefs do not include tolerance of other beliefs. Religious tolerance requires us to accept that our children's beliefs may not match our own, but are equally valid. Yet most people claim the right to shape their children's religious beliefs. Interference with that right is seen as evidence of bigotry and persecution. I cannot accept this. The child's right to free belief surely out weighs the parent's right to create unthinking clones. Indeed, there is only a small step from indoctrinating your children to the sort of idiocy that sees the invasion of Iraq as an opportunity to convert thousands to the "true religion" of Christianity.

If we believe in freedom of religious belief, we have to accept that children must be protected from the pressure to conform to their family's expectations. Children must be allowed the room to feel that they are themselves first and foremost, and that religion is a choice for them, not their parents. It is this atmosphere of tolerance that the French legislation aims to foster. By banning head scarves, Muslim girls can spend time in a society where they are seen as women, not Muslims, and can decide whether the strictures of their parents' religion is right for them. As an aim, this is to be applauded. But is it the right means to the end?

The problem with the French legislation is that the focus is on symbolic representations. Yet the most wide-spread religion in France lacks these symbols. Most French Christians do not wear obvious symbols of their religion. Perhaps a small crucifix, easily hidden under clothing, and not covered by the French law anyway. Yet there is no religion more keen on indoctrination than Christianity. When a small child is told by their parents that teachers discussing evolution are mistaken, they do every bit as much damage as that suffered by any child forced into a head scarf or skull cap. This is an attitude not confined to the Bible Belt of America - it's alive and well in Scotland.

By focusing on clothing, the French government is focusing on signs of religion that are disproportionately displayed by the minorities. Meanwhile, the equally unacceptable behaviour of the majority religion is untouched. Unsurprisingly, this makes those minorities feel victimised. They will, naturally, react by withdrawing their children to private schools where the restrictions do not apply. They will close ranks. They will increase the indoctrination of their children during the times they do control. The legislation is counter-productive. By attempting to create an appearance of a tolerant, secular space, the French government is instead creating an atmosphere of fear and distrust.

If the French government genuinely wishes to create a tolerant, secular society where religious tolerance is the norm, they instead need to create schools where the exchange of ideas and beliefs can be freely carried out. Tolerance grows from familiarity with others, religious freedom from an environment in which you are treated as you first, your religion as minor an issue as the colour of your eyes.

Creating such a society is possible, but difficult. Removing the trappings of religion is easy, but true tolerance requires us to embrace our differences. Acceptance of the different cultural backgrounds represented within a given school will not happen by sweeping the outward manifestations of those differences out of sight. It certainly won't happen when the odd behaviour of the majority religion is ignored totally. Instead, schools need to promote dialogue and friendship between the different religious groups. That task becomes more difficult when one group is learning from their parents to feel alienated and victimised.

French legislation to ban overt religious symbols from schools has laudable aims. The creation of a tolerant, secular society is an aim worth pursuing. But there are no easy means to creating such a society. By taking an apparently easy route, the French government may well feel that it is tackling the problem, but it is ignoring the underlying complexities, and alienating the very people who need to be brought into the dialogue if a tolerant society is to be formed.

Graham Robinson. 11th February 2004.

archives :: links :: faq :: feedback

Find out how you can support Online Opinion

Online Opinion is a trademark owned by Graham Robinson. All rights reserved. The copyright on all articles, columns, and letters on this site is owned by the original author. The copyright on all other material is owned by Graham Robinson. Permission is granted to download and store these pages for personal or research purposes only, and only as is consistent with normal viewing of web pages. All other rights reserved. Permission is granted to freely link to any page within this site, as long as ownership of the material linked to is clear. No advertisements may be associated with this site, whether explicitly or implicitly, without prior written permission.