France Bans Hijabs for Under 18s

[Insaanistan]

Never ceases to amaze me how desperately some liberals and leftists are attempting to make churches bending to their worldview so they can be happy and accepted by them.

I’m not a Christian, but I’m genuinely confused.

[Nakena]

Never ceases to amaze me how desperately some liberals and leftists are attempting to make churches bending to their worldview so they can be happy and accepted by them.

I’m not a Christian, but I’m genuinely confused.

I am not a christian either.

But some people really want to have their cake and eat it too.

[Insaanistan]

But Jesus (peace be upon him) would not have been begotten were it not for Mary (May God be pleased with her).

Correct, and that is why the Most Holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary is extremely honored, and that she is more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond all comparison than the seraphim.

And honored also are the Mother and stepmother of Moses (pbuh), and the wife of Jacob (pbuh) and the wife of Abraham (pbuh).
All these women (May God be please with them), are honored and respected. Why is this honor and respect not enough for them to be allowed to be priests.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

If I sincerely believe that, oh, black people are spiritually different in a way that makes them unsuitable to teach students and I reflect this belief in school policy, then I had better be ready to demonstrate the truth in that belief in a way that everyone, even people who do not share my belief system, will be able to understand, because if I can't then I'm going to get buried in lawsuits.

Same principle applies to the open sexism in Christian churches.

Black men perform the same biological functions as white men, etc. etc. Black women perform the same biological functions as white women. But Black women do not perform the same biological functions as black men, and white women do not perform the same biological functions as white men.

Using only concepts that would be understandable to any reasonably-educated person, since that is the standard I used in my post that you've quoted, explain to me why the biological differences between men and women are relevant for carrying out the duties of a Christian priest.

[Punished UMN]

Black men perform the same biological functions as white men, etc. etc. Black women perform the same biological functions as white women. But Black women do not perform the same biological functions as black men, and white women do not perform the same biological functions as white men.

What do "biological functions" even mean ? Reproduction ? What of men and women who are infertile, or who chose to not procreate ? And why would that even matter ?

Correct. For the other questions I'm not entirely sure, but there's actually like an incredible number of esoteric regulations about the priesthood and even the priest's family, so it wouldn't surprise me if there are lots related to that. For example, if a priest dies, his wife cannot remarry, just like a priest, and a priest's wife is to be honored and is referred to with a number of titles which vary by culture.

[Vassenor]

Never ceases to amaze me how desperately some liberals and leftists are attempting to make churches bending to their worldview so they can be happy and accepted by them.

So are cultural institutions supposed to evolve with the times or not?

Or would religions not be stuck in the dark ages make it harder to turn people against them?

[Punished UMN]

Black men perform the same biological functions as white men, etc. etc. Black women perform the same biological functions as white women. But Black women do not perform the same biological functions as black men, and white women do not perform the same biological functions as white men.

Using only concepts that would be understandable to any reasonably-educated person, since that is the standard I used in my post that you've quoted, why the biological differences between men and women are relevant for carrying out the duties of a Christian priest.

Because the symbolism of the priesthood is directly related to biological sex and the reproductive functions of biological sex.

[Northern Socialist Council Republics]

Because the symbolism of the priesthood is directly related to biological sex and the reproductive functions of biological sex.

So, to lay it out in explicit terms, it is your belief that society ought to consider "symbolism" to be an acceptable reason to treat people of different demographic categories differently?

[Punished UMN]

Correct, and that is why the Most Holy Theotokos and ever-virgin Mary is extremely honored, and that she is more honorable than the cherubim and more glorious beyond all comparison than the seraphim.

And honored also are the Mother and stepmother of Moses (pbuh), and the wife of Jacob (pbuh) and the wife of Abraham (pbuh).
All these women (May God be please with them), are honored and respected. Why is this honor and respect not enough for them to be allowed to be priests.

The priesthood isn't about honor and respect. We honor and respect priests because they are priests, we do not make people priests because we honor and respect them. The priesthood is a ritual function, not part of your personality.

[Neutraligon]

Can I ask what the recent topic of discussion has to do with France banning Hijabs?

[Punished UMN]

Because the symbolism of the priesthood is directly related to biological sex and the reproductive functions of biological sex.

So, to lay it out in explicit terms, it is your belief that society ought to consider "symbolism" to be an acceptable reason to treat people of different demographic categories differently?

For functions which are explicitly and entirely ritually symbolic? Depends on the institution, but sure.

[Insaanistan]

And honored also are the Mother and stepmother of Moses (pbuh), and the wife of Jacob (pbuh) and the wife of Abraham (pbuh).
All these women (May God be please with them), are honored and respected. Why is this honor and respect not enough for them to be allowed to be priests.

The priesthood isn't about honor and respect. We honor and respect priests because they are priests, we do not make people priests because we honor and respect them. The priesthood is a ritual function, not part of your personality.

Women are the ones that birth the Prophets (pbuh), yet cannot be priests.
While men can be priests simply because Jesus (pbuh) was a man?

[Insaanistan]

Can I ask what the recent topic of discussion has to do with France banning Hijabs?

You see it...
Ah. Nothing really.
Sorry. Time to get back on topic.

[Fahran]

Boy oh boy, wait till you see my race and what I think of white nationalism...
Hint: it is REALLY cursed and will probably get me banned from NS

There are plenty of white nationalists on NS. We don't ban folks for having cringe ideologies or being wrong. Props for self-awareness though, I suppose.

[Vorausen]

Can I ask what the recent topic of discussion has to do with France banning Hijabs?

From my knowledge almost nothing at all.

Let me try to get things back on track.

Banning hijabs for those under 18 is not a law against Islamic people. There may be Anti Islamic people who support such a law, but not all people who support it are necessarily these racist anti Islam people.

[Cekovia]

Boy oh boy, wait till you see my race and what I think of white nationalism...
Hint: it is REALLY cursed and will probably get me banned from NS

There are plenty of white nationalists on NS. We don't ban folks for having cringe ideologies or being wrong. Props for self-awareness though, I suppose.

having a cringe ideology will actually guarantee that you'll stick around, in fact! only be afraid to speak ur mind if u have sensible politics

[Insaanistan]

Can I ask what the recent topic of discussion has to do with France banning Hijabs?

From my knowledge almost nothing at all.

Let me try to get things back on track.

Banning hijabs for those under 18 is not a law against Islamic people. There may be Anti Islamic people who support such a law, but not all people who support it are necessarily these racist anti Islam people.

There might be supporters of it who don’t hate Muslims, but the law is definitely anti-Muslim and in a way plays a little bit into the white savior complex.

[Fahran]

I have a friend in Germany. She has pakistani roots. Her father is a devout muslim (as per what she told me). Her parents told her not to wear the hijab until she was married. As they believed it might get her too much attention. However when she was 21, she wore it. Her muslim friends also adviced her to take it off and only wear it after she got married. (Apparently, wearing it after marriage is common in the German Muslim community.) She on the other hand did not listen. And then at the age of 22 she took it off. Idk why. She didnt tell me. And then at 23 she wore it again. She told me that often times people never directly say things at her. But she had a hard time getting along. Especially with the rising influence of identitarian movements. She also told me she had a hard time getting jobs.
Now the question I have here is. How come marriage? Why does a muslim woman in Germany have to have a husband before she can freely wear the hijab. I couldnt get much detail out of her, because shes sort of hard to talk to (Frequency does not meet. Lol). From what i heard tho. Feminists have a quite strong voice in Germany. But then what about her. Shes woman. And its obvious that hijiab was her choice. Her friends and family adviced not to do it till marriage, yet she didnt want so. Because shes got her freedom. It was not oppression, rather her choice. If western europe is a land of freedom. How come she isnt able to freely do what she wants? You might say the west is messed up. Its not true. I got friends in UK. Athests, Christians and Muslim. Most of them are around 13-20 years of age. Sure Boris Johnson is a white supremacist and a hater. But lets forget about him shall we. Back to my British Friends. they dont mind each other being different. 2 of the Muslims wear hijab, yet from what i see they fit along with the others perfectly. And the non muslims also like them. They barely mind the fact that they are wearing hijab. So whats the deal with France.

To summarize it concisely, people often become uncomfortable with cultural attitudes and conventions distinct from their own. This discomfort intensifies, especially when coupled with the realization that cultural attitudes or conventions distinct from and often antithetical to their own are becoming more ubiquitous. In the case of these garments, their popularity is more pronounced among younger generations in France than it was among their parents and grandparents. It represents a drift towards a more socially conservative brand of Islamic expression. The French simply aren't bothering with the old pretenses when it comes to how we in the West handle religion.

This is not from the people but the government.

As far as I can see, it's both, at least in the broadest sense.

This is no way okay,

I agree on this.

but it would have been less outrageous if it was Poland doing it. Poland is basically the Christian version of Erdogan Turkey.

Eh, Poland and Turkey are pretty different. I will grant that they're both illiberal, religious nations, but their precise policies and culture are quite distinct.

Britain has so many hijabi girls and yet i dont see their nation being taken over by Islam. What does France see. Maybe they see something we dont.

Muslims are 5.1% of the population in the UK. Muslims are 5.6% of the population in France, though that number climbs to around 10% for people under 25. Beyond having a slightly larger percentage of its population comprised of Muslims, France also has realized that its Muslim population is becoming more fundamentalist, more conservative, and more observant rather than less so. The French, like a good many Europeans, are no longer accustomed to pronounced and visible religious piety being a widespread in their society. The Wars of Religion and Enlightenment have soured them over the whole thing. In short, France expects Islam to present a cultural and ideological challenge to French liberal hegemony. The UK doesn't expect the same or doesn't care. That's not to say the French are correct or reacting well, but I think that provides a good explanation. It's not dissimilar to Iran banning non-hijabi barbies.

Maybe they are the great nation we need in order to make the world a better place. These rich white men are gonna make the world a better place. With naked women and drunk men. Because nakedness and drunkness is what shows that the country is free from oppression

Well, there's a lot to unpack on this one.

[Vassenor]

Can I ask what the recent topic of discussion has to do with France banning Hijabs?

From my knowledge almost nothing at all.

Let me try to get things back on track.

Banning hijabs for those under 18 is not a law against Islamic people. There may be Anti Islamic people who support such a law, but not all people who support it are necessarily these racist anti Islam people.

And restricting voting locations in the US isn't a law against black people. It just happens to affect black people disproportionately. Totally.

[Fahran]

having a cringe ideology will actually guarantee that you'll stick around, in fact! only be afraid to speak ur mind if u have sensible politics

Your politics are cringe though, Ceko.

[Vorausen]

From my knowledge almost nothing at all.

Let me try to get things back on track.

Banning hijabs for those under 18 is not a law against Islamic people. There may be Anti Islamic people who support such a law, but not all people who support it are necessarily these racist anti Islam people.

There might be supporters of it who don’t hate Muslims, but the law is definitely anti-Muslim and in a way plays a little bit into the white savior complex.

If you don’t mind me asking what exactly is the white savior complex.

I’m not trying to justify the law, it is against liberalism and basic religious rights. I’m instead trying to see form a different perspective and different view. However I do have to say I am not a French Muslim so I may not fully understand what it is like to be in that position.

[Suriyanakhon]

The priest acts in persona christi, that is, as a symbol of the person of Christ, calling down the holy spirit which proceeds from the Father, to consecrate the Eucharist, all of these actors are male, and the Spirit's procession from the Father, and Christ's begetting from the Father, are male actions. Because of the symbolism involved, the priest has to be male in order to act in this role, because the priesthood is fundamentally symbolic. This is why eunuchs and even men who have had medically necessary surgery which has altered their reproductive system cannot be priests, among other restrictions.

But Jesus (peace be upon him) would not have been begotten were it not for Mary (May God be pleased with her).

Isn't this pretty much the same thing as the prophets of Islam all being male though?

[Dowaesk]

I have a friend in Germany. She has pakistani roots. Her father is a devout muslim (as per what she told me). Her parents told her not to wear the hijab until she was married. As they believed it might get her too much attention. However when she was 21, she wore it. Her muslim friends also adviced her to take it off and only wear it after she got married. (Apparently, wearing it after marriage is common in the German Muslim community.) She on the other hand did not listen. And then at the age of 22 she took it off. Idk why. She didnt tell me. And then at 23 she wore it again. She told me that often times people never directly say things at her. But she had a hard time getting along. Especially with the rising influence of identitarian movements. She also told me she had a hard time getting jobs.
Now the question I have here is. How come marriage? Why does a muslim woman in Germany have to have a husband before she can freely wear the hijab. I couldnt get much detail out of her, because shes sort of hard to talk to (Frequency does not meet. Lol). From what i heard tho. Feminists have a quite strong voice in Germany. But then what about her. Shes woman. And its obvious that hijiab was her choice. Her friends and family adviced not to do it till marriage, yet she didnt want so. Because shes got her freedom. It was not oppression, rather her choice. If western europe is a land of freedom. How come she isnt able to freely do what she wants? You might say the west is messed up. Its not true. I got friends in UK. Athests, Christians and Muslim. Most of them are around 13-20 years of age. Sure Boris Johnson is a white supremacist and a hater. But lets forget about him shall we. Back to my British Friends. they dont mind each other being different. 2 of the Muslims wear hijab, yet from what i see they fit along with the others perfectly. And the non muslims also like them. They barely mind the fact that they are wearing hijab. So whats the deal with France.

To summarize it concisely, people often become uncomfortable with cultural attitudes and conventions distinct from their own. This discomfort intensifies, especially when coupled with the realization that cultural attitudes or conventions distinct from and often antithetical to their own are becoming more ubiquitous. In the case of these garments, their popularity is more pronounced among younger generations in France than it was among their parents and grandparents. It represents a drift towards a more socially conservative brand of Islamic expression. The French simply aren't bothering with the old pretenses when it comes to how we in the West handle religion.

This is not from the people but the government.

As far as I can see, it's both, at least in the broadest sense.

This is no way okay,

I agree on this.

but it would have been less outrageous if it was Poland doing it. Poland is basically the Christian version of Erdogan Turkey.

Eh, Poland and Turkey are pretty different. I will grant that they're both illiberal, religious nations, but their precise policies and culture are quite distinct.

Britain has so many hijabi girls and yet i dont see their nation being taken over by Islam. What does France see. Maybe they see something we dont.

Muslims are 5.1% of the population in the UK. Muslims are 5.6% of the population in France, though that number climbs to around 10% for people under 25. Beyond having a slightly larger percentage of its population comprised of Muslims, France also has realized that its Muslim population is becoming more fundamentalist, more conservative, and more observant rather than less so. The French, like a good many Europeans, are no longer accustomed to pronounced and visible religious piety being a widespread in their society. The Wars of Religion and Enlightenment have soured them over the whole thing. In short, France expects Islam to present a cultural and ideological challenge to French liberal hegemony. The UK doesn't expect the same or doesn't care. That's not to say the French are correct or reacting well, but I think that provides a good explanation. It's not dissimilar to Iran banning non-hijabi barbies.

Maybe they are the great nation we need in order to make the world a better place. These rich white men are gonna make the world a better place. With naked women and drunk men. Because nakedness and drunkness is what shows that the country is free from oppression

Well, there's a lot to unpack on this one.

Thank you. I quite agree with you.

[Thermodolia]

Never ceases to amaze me how desperately some liberals and leftists are attempting to make churches bending to their worldview so they can be happy and accepted by them.

So are cultural institutions supposed to evolve with the times or not?

Or would religions not be stuck in the dark ages make it harder to turn people against them?

Nak is more saying that people should be atheists if the religion they where brought up in, doesn’t align with their current worldview.

[Salus Maior]

Never ceases to amaze me how desperately some liberals and leftists are attempting to make churches bending to their worldview so they can be happy and accepted by them.

So are cultural institutions supposed to evolve with the times or not?

Or would religions not be stuck in the dark ages make it harder to turn people against them?

"Dark Ages" never existed, my guy.

No scholars accept that term to describe the Middle Ages anymore, because it's mostly based on false conceptions of backwardness.