A debate is erupting around Islamic face coverings in Finland’s educational institutions.
Archived version: https://archive.is/20250813123725/https://yle.fi/a/74-20177195
Disclaimer: The article linked is from a single source with a single perspective. Make sure to cross-check information against multiple sources to get a comprehensive view on the situation.
But plenty do. Everything from “this is how dish A should be eaten” to “leave your shoes at the door” to “we should be nice to our parents” is a belief, even if there’s no mysticism behind it. Are you going to arrest parents for teaching their kids that dessert is supposed to be eaten after dinner?
So parents should only be allowed to teach rightthink, and the state has a duty to use its monopoly on violence to intervene whenever parents attempt to teach children wrongthink (wrongthink being anything other than what the state, representing society, has deemed as rightthink). You just trampled all over freedom of thought and conscience with that statement, and PS: Fascists can use the exact same line of thought to ban pride flags and minority cultures.
Yeah you’re gonna have to back that one up with numbers.
You did not. You gave no logical framework that justifies state violence in cases of religion and doesn’t justify it in cases of non-religion. Your response to me pointing out that believing in God and believing in human rights can both be affected by your position was “but one is rightthink so it’s fine,” not any kind of logical distinction.
In many societies schoolgirls are, in fact, expected or forced to wear skirts rather than pants for school (see: Japan), and as for the rest: Why do women wear women’s clothing rather than men’s clothing if not for cultural indoctrination? Why do men not wear skirts and tank tops if not for cultural indoctrination?
They’re a belief. They don’t DEMAND you belief in them, else go to hell / get isolated by your family.
Is anybody discussing arrest in the current situation? You’re pulling a classic reductio ad absurdum.
This is not an attempt to ban parents passing their religion on to their kids, it’s merely preventing them from doing so in school, and giving some children potentially their only taste of gender equality that they’ll receive before they turn 18.
You’ve made a lot of claims yourself, feel free to back them up any time.
We’re not talking ‘many cultures’. We’re talking about Sweden, and last I checked they did not force girls to wear skirts. For the record I’m against forced uniform segregation by gender.
That is blatantly untrue. See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filial_piety#Developments_in_modern_society. People of any culture will react negatively when cultural values or traditions they hold dear are ignored or disrespected by their children. This is why homophobia is still going strong in predominantly atheists societies like China and Japan, for example.
Yes, that’s the point. The only difference between banning niqab in schools and my example is extent; fundamentally they’re both using state violence to enforce conformity in child rearing, which is bad no matter how much or little of it you do.
So only rightthink should be practiced at schools? There is no qualifier you could add to this idea that won’t make it fucked up, because imposing rightthink via state violence is bad no matter where you do it.
If you can only respond with “no u,” you should really reevaluate your position. Also I’ll back up any claim you want me to, but you’ll need to be more specific than that.
First this is Finland in the OP. Second, you ignored the second half of that part.
Holy shit the amount of bad rhetoric you’ve gotten into one comment.
Thats sort of impressive.