I wrote an article to the newspaper we're subscribing to, Vårt Land. I'm posting it here, first in norwegian, then translated.
Basically the case is, there's this organization calling themselves "Human rights service" (not translated, for some reason they choose an enlish name) who have been trolling ... no, it seems they're serious, incredibly. Anyway, with french president Chirac now disallowing muslim headscarves in schools, they have said they thought this was a good idea, and that students should not be allowed to wear any religious signs in schools, as it hampers integration.
They call themselves a human rights group, and they have just suggested depriving students of freedom of religion and freedom of speech? Nice.
-------------------------
Trosfrihet
Human rights service, snakk om misvisende navn! De, som kaller seg menneskerettighetsaktivister, forstår de ikke at det er en menneskerett å gi uttrykk for sin tro? Nei, det er TO menneskerettigheter faktisk - trosfrihet og ytringsfrihet.
Vel er det et overgrep å tvinge noen til å bære et sjal eller noe religiøst symbol om de ikke vil. Men kan de ikke forstå at å nekte noen det samme, når de ønsker det selv, er et minst like stort overgrep?
Sekularisme er et livssyn på linje med kristendom og islam, selv om tilhengerne ikke alltid innser det. Å tvinge troende barn til å gi inntrykk av at de ikke er troende, hvorfor er det noe bedre enn det motsatte?
Selvsagt kan foreldre øve stor innflytelse på hvilke normer og verdier barna skal få med seg. Mye av denne innflytelsen er sikkert uheldig, og noe bærer kanskje preg av tvang. Men hvis ikke foreldrene skal få påvirke, hvem skal da gjøre det? Samfunnet? Staten? Jeg kan ikke se at disse alternativene er så mye bedre. Tror Human rights service at samfunnets gruppepress aldri bærer preg av tvang? Eller at staten skal kunne stå for nøytral påvirkning av barna gjennom skolen? Hvem skal i så fall bestemme hva som er nøytralt?
Det overgrepet som nå foretas mot skoleungdom i Frankrike er bare å beklage, men det er forhåpentligvis en mulighet for at EUs menneskerettighetsorganer ordner opp. Heldigvis er ikke alle som jobber for menneskerettigheter like ureflekterte som Human rights service.
H.K, Ålesund.
-----------------------
Freedom of religion
Human rights service, talk about misleading name! They, who call themselves human rights activists, don't they understand that it is a human right to express your faith? No, it's TWO human rights actually - freedom of religion and freedom of speech.
It is indeed an infringement [against human rights] to force someone to wear a headscarf or any religious symbol against their will. But can't they understand that to refuse the same to those who want it is an equally severe infringement?
Secularism is a world-view on par with christianity and islam, even if its adherents don't always realise it. Forcing believeing children to give the impression that they are not believing, why is that any better than the opposite?
Of course, parents have very much influence on the norms and beliefs of their children. And much of this influence can be bad, some of it may even be coercive. But if the parents shouldn't be allowed to influence their children, who should? Society? The state? I can't see that these alternatives are any better. Do Human rights service believe that society's peer pressure is never of an opressive nature? Or that the state should be able to influence the children in a neutral manner through the schools? If so, who gets to decide what's neutral?
The infringements upon the rights of schoolchildren that are now made in France are regrettable, but hopefully the Human rights organs of the European Union will clean this up. Thankfully, not everyone who works in human rights are as shortsighted as Human rights service.
H.K
---------------------