Absolutism Should Be Banned

Decent Essays
IHRL opposes both policies on forced religious associations and blanket bans on religious symbols, therefore, the state should neither deny nor impose religious beliefs or manifestations of religious beliefs. Although some states may argue the wearing of certain items such as particular hats or the hijab are more cultural than religious, it is not up to the state to define or interpret the meaning of religious symbols. What is decisive is that the individual considers it to be a manifestation of his or her religious belief. By imposing bans they are denying those who believe it is their duty to dress a certain way.
In the case of S.A.S v France , the French parliamentary commission believed that the Muslim face veil was not required by religion
…show more content…
IHRL requires that the state should be neutral in matters of religion-an important guarantor of religious freedom. Secularism has started challenging freedom of religious practise by attempting bans that deny the wearing in public places of a manner of religious affiliations linked to particular religions, undermining the principle of religious neutrality. The excuse that it makes living together in a safe environment and harmony difficult is difficult to prove, and contradictory, as outlawing a certain dress or symbol does the very same…show more content…
It is not the role of the State to decide which religious beliefs were valid. A society that is truly free allows for different beliefs, codes of conduct, customs and tastes, a blanket ban would come in place of other less restrictive methods. The interests of women like the applicant in S.A.S v France , who had to decide between wearing the veil and breaking the law, were much more seriously affected than the interests of those who disapproved of women wearing the veil. Further, the ban punished the women it was meant to protect by imposing criminal sanctions on
Get Access