Europe

8324 readers

1 users here now

News/Interesting Stories/Beautiful Pictures from Europe 🇪🇺

(Current banner: Thunder mountain, Germany, 🇩🇪 ) Feel free to post submissions for banner pictures

Rules

(This list is obviously incomplete, but it will get expanded when necessary)

Be nice to each other (e.g. No direct insults against each other);
No racism, antisemitism, dehumanisation of minorities or glorification of National Socialism allowed;
No posts linking to mis-information funded by foreign states or billionaires.

Also check out [email protected]

founded 1 year ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

412

EU states can ban religious symbols in public workplaces (www.bbc.com)

submitted 1 year ago by CAVOK to c/[email protected]

302 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You are ignoring his point..... The whole point of separating Church and state is to both protect the government from the influence of the church, but also to prevent the government from controlling your freedom of expression.

People are allowed to express their religious beliefs so long as it does not inhibit others from expressing their own beliefs.

You don't have to be religious to understand the consequences of giving the government the ability to police self expression. If we made rulings that handed power over expression to the government, you honestly think conservatives wouldn't utilize that when they eventually came to power?

[–] kameecoding 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

you last argument idls that of a slippery slope which is almost exclusively a fallacy.

as for your first, keyword is, inhibit, do you categorize feeling uncomfortable as inhibiting someone's rights for example?

let's say I am a lone satanist, working at a government building, I am fetting judgy looks all day by Christian coworkers wearing crosses and it drives me away from the job, isn't thst inhibiting me?

let's say I am a public facing worker, couldn't me displaying my satanist symbols be inhibiting the public looking for whatever government service?

isn't it easier and better for everybody involved to leave that shit at home and keep the workplace free from all that?

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

you last argument idls that of a slippery slope which is almost exclusively a fallacy.

Ahh yes, legal precedent. Famously always fallacious....... Also, the slippery slope fallacy requires a series of actions leading to a negative consequence. This is just a direct consequence of a single action.

You are attempting to establish a law that is preventing people from expressing their legally protected beliefs. You don't think setting that precedent isn't going to have consequences?

you categorize feeling uncomfortable as inhibiting someone's rights for example? let's say I am a lone satanist, working at a government building, I am fetting judgy looks all day by Christian coworkers wearing crosses and it drives me away from the job, isn't thst inhibiting me?

Lol, where in the legal system does it claim that you have the right to be comfortable at all times?

let's say I am a public facing worker, couldn't me displaying my satanist symbols be inhibiting the public looking for whatever government service?

You have every right to display satanic symbology. How does this prevent members of the public from looking for a government service. Plus, logically if you are the government worker, they already have found the government service.....

Let's change the scenario slightly. Let's suppose you are a person of color working for the government, and a member of the public is wanting service, but is racist. Is hiring a person of color inhibiting his rights? Of course not.