Because following rules are for other religions.

[trdsf]

So the Quebec provincial government is about to ban civil servants from wearing gear that identifies their religion -- so Jewish civil servants would not be able to wear a kippah on the job, nor Muslims a hijab.

But the premier of Quebec says crucifixes aren't religious symbols, they represent the values of Quebec.

The stupid and the hypocrisy, it burns.  I'd've expected to hear that out of Texas or Alabama or something, not Canada.

[Unbeliever]

Saying that a crucifix is not a religious symbol is just special pleading, and disingenuous. It's hard for me to believe this is in Canada! I guess there are wanna-be theocrats all over.

[Baruch]

Saying that a crucifix is not a religious symbol is just special pleading, and disingenuous. It's hard for me to believe this is in Canada! I guess there are wanna-be theocrats all over.

The Catholic Church may be stronger in Quebec than in France.

[SGOS]

Saying that a crucifix is not a religious symbol is just special pleading, and disingenuous. It's hard for me to believe this is in Canada! I guess there are wanna-be theocrats all over.

Canada is more inclusive than the US, but Quebec is a special case and not representative of the country.

[trdsf]

Canada is more inclusive than the US, but Quebec is a special case and not representative of the country.

As I recall, his "reasoning" was that both Catholics and Protestants use it, so it doesn't represent one religion.  I don't know how he doesn't grasp that they're both Christian sects... or that the same sort of argument could be used, for example, by Jews to continue wearing the kippah since Reform, Conservative and Orthodox all use it, therefore it doesn't represent one religion.

[pr126]

I think that the authorities want to ban the niqab, the black cloth of face covering, which they ignorantly confusing with the hijab and burka.

However, they haven't got the courage to single out Muslims, so to be inclusive they must ban other religious symbols too.

I agree that the cross is also a religious symbol and excluding it is hypocritical.

Wearing the kippah nowadays at least in Europe with the Muslim population at large is unwise, inviting all sorts of problems.

[Shiranu]

As I recall, his "reasoning" was that both Catholics and Protestants use it, so it doesn't represent one religion.  I don't know how he doesn't grasp that they're both Christian sects... or that the same sort of argument could be used, for example, by Jews to continue wearing the kippah since Reform, Conservative and Orthodox all use it, therefore it doesn't represent one religion.

I'm not entirely sure I could argue that Catholicism and much of Protestantism are the same religion. While they may share the same central figures, the Catholic mythos and the Protestant mythos are extremely different, to the point with many sects it would be hard to find similarity outside of the Trinity. The ceremonies of a Catholic and the ceremonies of say a Southern Baptist are extremely different even if they all revere the same figure (who they share differing opinions on what his opinions are).

I guess in a literal sense they are all of the same religion, but it does depend on the definition of religion and I think in a more practical sense it is simply to vague of definition to warrant using. To talk about the Jewish sects you mentioned, I would find it extremely impractical to call a Reform Jew and a Orthodox Jew just "Jews", and assuming that they are similar enough for that to tell me enough about them.

As for what that has to do with the thread... not much, honestly. Just a nitpick I have with broad labels.

[Blackleaf]

I'm not entirely sure I could argue that Catholicism and much of Protestantism are the same religion. While they may share the same central figures, the Catholic mythos and the Protestant mythos are extremely different, to the point with many sects it would be hard to find similarity outside of the Trinity. The ceremonies of a Catholic and the ceremonies of say a Southern Baptist are extremely different even if they all revere the same figure (who they share differing opinions on what his opinions are).

I guess in a literal sense they are all of the same religion, but it does depend on the definition of religion and I think in a more practical sense it is simply to vague of definition to warrant using. To talk about the Jewish sects you mentioned, I would find it extremely impractical to call a Reform Jew and a Orthodox Jew just "Jews", and assuming that they are similar enough for that to tell me enough about them.

As for what that has to do with the thread... not much, honestly. Just a nitpick I have with broad labels.

Protestants come in a wide variety of forms as well. If you compare Catholics with Lutherans, there aren't very many major differences. Think of a religion as like a species. Some animals within the same species are similar enough to reproduce, while others are too distantly related to do so. There isn't a fine line dividing them, but more of a spectrum. But ask a Christian how many different kinds of Christians there are, and they'll likely say there are two: their denomination and the wrong ones.

[Baruch]

I think that the authorities want to ban the niqab, the black cloth of face covering, which they ignorantly confusing with the hijab and burka.

However, they haven't got the courage to single out Muslims, so to be inclusive they must ban other religious symbols too.

I agree that the cross is also a religious symbol and excluding it is hypocritical.

Wearing the kippah nowadays at least in Europe with the Muslim population at large is unwise, inviting all sorts of problems.

Laicity in France, started this.  The French still want to decapitate everyone ... and the Muslims are jealous.

[pr126]

Laicity in France, started this.  The French still want to decapitate everyone ... and the Muslims are jealous.

Outsourcing the decapitation to the Muslims? Perfectly qualified for the job. :-(

[SGOS]

I'm not entirely sure I could argue that Catholicism and much of Protestantism are the same religion. While they may share the same central figures, the Catholic mythos and the Protestant mythos are extremely different, to the point with many sects it would be hard to find similarity outside of the Trinity. The ceremonies of a Catholic and the ceremonies of say a Southern Baptist are extremely different even if they all revere the same figure (who they share differing opinions on what his opinions are).

I guess in a literal sense they are all of the same religion, but it does depend on the definition of religion and I think in a more practical sense it is simply to vague of definition to warrant using. To talk about the Jewish sects you mentioned, I would find it extremely impractical to call a Reform Jew and a Orthodox Jew just "Jews", and assuming that they are similar enough for that to tell me enough about them.

As for what that has to do with the thread... not much, honestly. Just a nitpick I have with broad labels.

However, Catholics and Protestants wear the same clothes, except for their shaman, and they both may or may not where religious trinkets, so there is no way to visually sort them.  The real divide doesn't show up until we compare more distant Christians like the Amish, where they feel it essential to identify themselves as minority targets by wearing strange apparel.  However, as a rule, the Amish are not known for cutting off the people's heads in order to get attention.  I've dealt with the Amish.  They don't even talk about their religion unless I make a direct inquiry.  And they don't tell me I'm going to Hell. 

There is another more mainline Christian sect that I find even more mysterious than the Amish that I saw around town in Montana.  I was too fearful to ask them what their religion was because it felt impertinent, and also, I didn't want an earful of dogma.  This sect was distinguished by the women wearing full dresses of pastel blue and tiny white scarves worn upon the head.  They looked like Amish on their way to a wild party.  My friend used to call them the Hanky Heads.  I referred to the "Hanky Heads" once among friends and I got shushed.  So I guess that was politically incorrect or something.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Exclusive Brethren"?

[Shiranu]

This sect was distinguished by the women wearing full dresses of pastel blue and tiny white scarves worn upon the head.

I've seen one of them before, and I have to admit just googling their outfit wasn't providing any information either. Creepy.

[Mike Cl]

Most of the protestants in this area I've talked to claim they are christian while catholics are not.  And no, couldn't persuade them otherwise.

[Baruch]

Most of the protestants in this area I've talked to claim they are christian while catholics are not.  And no, couldn't persuade them otherwise.

Did anyone here spend enough time in Christianity to understand why Protestants and Catholics don't get along?  Really??  Ever hear of the Reformation and Counter-Reformation?

Exclusive Brethren are a subset of the Plymouth Brethren.  I have read that the Plymouth Brethren were a great impetus in the 19th century, toward the development of modern Christian Fundamentalism.  Though there were  a lot of whacked-out Christian sects formed in the 19th century.