The ban on Muslim clothing has begun

[lkwalker]

Nah, BE...not any less valid.

But let me ask this - what would be the rallying cry for your kids and my kids to show loyalty to? What is our cultural identity that our kids share? Would it go too far to say that instead of a national or religious idenitity, our kids only have a consumer identity? (By the way, in Canada it's very rare to see a Canadian Flag on anything but a government building and we only sing the anthem at hockey games. Depending on where you are, the Canadian anthem is not usually sung in schools except during assemblies.)

The defining principle I've instilled in my children is a simple one: the Jeffersonian idea of ever expanding rights. That doesn't require flags or gods or national slogans. And it is enough. In Hebrew the concept is defined as "dayenu." Worth googling.

[Pana]

That's good.

I teach mine the same with the addition of the responsiblity to civic duty. With rights comes responsibility. Otherwise people end up just thinking, "me, me, me". There must be some motivation to uphold social solidarity. Without social capital, communities suffer.

[lkwalker]

Civic duty is an important principle- superseded on by the higher duty of civil disobedience.

[Pana]

lol

There is so much civic disobedience going on nowadays by different groups...

but people enmasse don't give a shit cause they're more concerned with their own rights.

No social capital, BE!

[lkwalker]

civic disobedience

That's not the issue. The term 'civil disobedience' has a real mean meaning in terms of political discourse that 'civic disobedience' lacks.

[Pana]

Morning,

I stand corrected.

Civil disobedience.

I maintain my flippant remark about it though. Everyone feels that their particular rights are being trampled on from paedophiles to overweight people. The honourable activity of Ghandi, Thoreau, the Burmese Monks, the Tibetan Monks and so on....has been diluted and watered down with people feeling they have the right to exploitation, one airplane ticket for two seats, and spewing crap.

In terms of the burka and niquab, 3,000 to 5,000 people out of 65 million people feel their rights supersede the majority.

[lkwalker]

3,000 to 5,000 people out of 65 million people feel their rights supersede the majority.

And they are correct. In America, at least, this is the very reason for the Bill of Rights guaranteeing that individual liberties- like the right to free expression- can not be taken away by majority fiat.

[Pana]

But it can be challenged and superseded when it interferes with public order.

[lkwalker]

But it can be challenged and superseded when it interferes with public order.

I guess that can be argued- but that same argument can be used to prohibit any legal activity that's deemed disorderly, can't it?

[MrPenny]

this is the very reason for the Bill of Rights guaranteeing that individual liberties- like the right to free expression- can not be taken away by majority fiat.

A democracy is free to define what an individual liberty consists of and take it away by majority fiat. The U.S. model does it often.....it may be a liberty that we find repugnant, or someone else considers to be completely acceptable, but it can be taken away by majority fiat. France has done so.

Now we get to one of your favorite sticking points...defining terms. "Individual liberties" is a constantly evolving definition. Some things are clearly not of that genre....yelling "fire" in a crowded theater for instance; generally recognized as not being protected speech or expression. I may think it's my individual liberty to walk down a crowded sidewalk shouting obscenities at random people....but it's not accepted.

Someone merely "wanting to do something" does not necessarily make it as lofty a practice as a liberty.