Secular Fundamentalists vs Religious Fundamentalists - 2

NMP Thio Li-ann sees atheists thick secularism as anti-religion religion and secular fundamentalists oppressively seek to mute religiously informed convictions in public debate as in the recent AWARE saga.

Video source: Channel NewsAsia

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Singapore
• Parliament
• NMP
• Thio
• Li-ann
• AWARE
• Secular
• Fundamentalists
• Religious

[goodjmate]

Keep it sweet keep it simple... leave religion outta politics...

[TheGreatDeciever55]

its also funny because a child can go into a school in France---take off their turban---and put it back on afterwards----its a matter of their conveneince though-----the religious belief sikhs hold IS THAT THEY CANNOT CUT THEIR HAIR----so you fool---this is NOT BEING INFRINGED UPON!!!! the Turban is a conveneint invention and not necessary to the sikh rleigion----it is a cultural icon also used to denote respect and nobility---but no scripture insists upon its wearing--your so wrong its painful

[TheGreatDeciever55]

keep in mind that Secular nations are run by people who do not always stick to secular ideology----thats why you have religious bannings---not because of secularism----but because of peoples and organizations own agendas---but regardless...you can wear a turban anywhere in france so long as its not a government run facility (and most actually do allow it too) where such apparel can conceal weapons---like hats or trench coats---you dont see nudist getting upset about no shirt no shoes no service

[TheGreatDeciever55]

the issue is whether or not these bans are a result of FUNDAMENTAL SECULARISM----if religous apparel is being banned---then the banning is ANTI secular---because part of secularism ideology is that religion and its apparel cannot be banned---hence any banning of religious apparel is ANTI-SECULARIST....see the funny thing is--I KNEW you were incredible unknowledgable about ACTUAL secularism so i did you the benefit of informing you---and then you accuse me of lack of knowledge? Bite me you prick

[TheGreatDeciever55]

...excuse me? i said no secular nation prohibts the wearing of religious apparel---your references are to PUBLIC SCHOOLS----everywhere else in France you can wear whatever the hell you want----not only is the ban being appealed, but in most schools in france YOU CANT EVEN WEAR HATS---its a dresscode issue---not a religious one---but SINCE it has religious connotations...it has become a religious issue...incredible lack of knowledge?--i know this intimitely---this is NOT the cause of secularism

[Funkifized]

@TheGreatDeciever55 if you can't access the links, just google "french secularism laicite turbans" or something replace "turban" with some other religious apparel. or maybe search "Singapore school girls tudung". i think i shall forget about replying you any further. you show an incredible lack of knowledge in this area and it's not worth debating anymore.

[Funkifized]

@TheGreatDeciever55 hku.hk/sociodep/bbf/BBF%20Read­ings%20W9/W9%20TheSikhTurban.p­df , concordatwatch.eu/showtopic.ph­p?org_id=1551&kb_header_id=700­1

Please do your research.

[TheGreatDeciever55]

to elaborate EVEN further->this is a actually a case of religious people being upset that secularism prevents their relgion from being fully authorative---NOT becuase it prevents it from existent or being (reasonably) expressed---it only makes it so their (mainly supersticious) beliefs are halted from affecting our governments---so naturally the religious side claims its predjudice against them to give them a foot hold on the argument---but real secularists know this to be a logical fallacy

[TheGreatDeciever55]

to truely be a secular fundamentalist you must believe that you cannot use religious doctrine/belief to affect law and force people into your religious thinking---AND you must also believe that you cannot use anti-religious belief to force people into an athiest way of thinking----to elaborate further--the reason religious fundamenalists get all up in arms againt secularism is because they believe their god is law---NOT because secularism prevents the worship or expression of said God

[TheGreatDeciever55]

---->>unless it involves murder or other generalized criminal activity---besides America does not possess a Syariah court (thank "God") Malaysia does but it isnt in any sense secular just because it possess a constitution....aswell polygamy is also seen as criminal (although this is actually being debated right now in the supreme court) in that its viewed as abusive to women---some people think it violates civil rights but some people dont---hence secularism allows open discussion and decision

[TheGreatDeciever55]

in other words America cannot just allow anyone to infringe on other peoples potential safety just because the item or potentially dangerous event is deemed religious--because if so, then Jihad would be permitted in America (heavily comprised of fighting non-muslims) its a matter of when one persons right infringes upon others---so certain religious activities must be regulated or in extreme cases banned---but noone in any secular nation cannot enjoy their religious apparel/activity in private