I perfectly know what I am saying. I heard a thousand times all the great speeches of "diversity" and "against discrimination" which doesn't really have any concrete sense in our societies. there are only speeches. How nice and useful. You seem to forget that I am a literary girl: I have a great critical sense and I can't stop myself to criticize the society.
I agree on the fact that a good education from a state doesn't pronounce istelf on religious matters. Again a great speech. You can't study a single book in class which doesn't present a negative critique of the religion. That doesn't bother me: sometimes the critic is well-deserved. Just that example to show how senseless religious neutrality is.
So far, I agree with all that.
In our "civil education" classes we learn that we must be kind with Muslims and homosexuals (quite cliché) even if they don't have anything in common. So again the topic of religious beliefs is considered by the government.
No, that is not the topic of religious beliefs. That is the topic of tolerance.
Even if this same government tries to prevent the religious communities to make their traditional pilgrimages on the street because it would violate the Laicism. Even if these same pilgrimages are allowed in the Constitution.
Does the French government do that? Really? :O That is nonsensical! Every person has the right to practise the rite of his religion.
Furthermore, that does not violate the principle of Laicity. Do not forget that Laicity refers to
the state's laicity; it means that
the state will not endorse any religious practices or beliefs, but will permit all of them. By definition, it is impossible for the citizens to violate Laicity. So, if the government tries to prevent that pilgrimage, it is the government itself breaking its own principle.
Yes, I know my own identity, culture and history. But you really should consider the number of Europeans who don't even know when the cathedrals were built! That is supposed to be the role of the school to teach such a thing. I come from a privilege environment, but I also live in the real world.
What does the construction of the cathedrals have anything to do with it? I do not know when the cathedrals were built, and I could not care less! Europe is not supposed to have her roots in Catholicism, so knowing when the cathedrals were built is irrelevant to ‘[knowing one's] own identity, culture and history’, as you said. America already has her roots in Christianity, and we all know what problems that has brought. But I believe that the government must be separate from the church, and it saddens me to see whatever traces are still left of Europe's shameful past of religious affiliation with Catholicism, much to the detriment of religious minorities. I defend that, for Europe to be a just and fair union of nations, she must be made up of laic countries and respect adequately and equally all religions.
Europe can do whatever it wants, it won't erase it Christian origins. It seems that Portugal and France are actually quite different, as in my country the Laicism is ironically called "the new state religion". We learn at the ages of 3, 4, 5, that "liberty,egality, fraternity" and laicism are the most important keys of our country and the entire world follows our example, thanks to the Déclaration des Droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen. That is our sacred text!
Of course Europe's Catholic tradition, unfortunately, can never fully be erased! However, the government should its best to erase any religious inequalities which arise from Europe's Catholic tradition. It is not a problem to keep a few aspects of this tradition (this would be particularly useful in maintaining abortion and gay marriage illegal — which is why I am a right-wing conservative/Christian democrat). However, the state should be silent in religious doctrine.
When I talked about the "good" education in the state, I was quite ironic actually. And yes, the suppression of Ancient Greek, Latin (and Hebrew in some schools) is the first step to a generation of clones.
What? I have never learnt Greek, Latin or Hebrew in school. It does not make sense to learn that at school, since it is essentially useless. I fail to see how that is related with ‘building a generation of clones’.
The intellectual community is unanimous and I agree with it: this is so much easier to control a youth which doesn't know and study its Founding texts and yes, the Bible is one of them. I also consider everyone should have a good knowledge of the Founding myths. The perfect laicism at school can't be anything but a myth. Just as the idea of thinking by himself if the perfect definition of what I would call a "fashion" myth.
It is nonsensical to force students to study the Bible. That would fly in the face of the principle of Laicity. Moreover, you actually said, ‘I agree on the fact that a good education from a state doesn't pronounce itself on religious matters.’ So, how can you now say this?
I personally totally support religious classes which would teach the knowledge bases of every main religion.
I would be utterly against that. The state has neither the right nor the competence to teach about religions. Evidently, many wrong things would be taught. For example, just take Christianity: in a country with a Catholic tradition, what would be taught would be Catholicism, with disregard to Protestantism, which is much, much closer to the true Christianity (but that is a story for another time).
Moreover in the mentalities you don't deserve any credit for just following your parents' example when it comes to religion. And the religion is only the "totalitarian" thing that all the great authors denounce for some uncultivated in my class. This is what they always heard at home, true -but at school too. And I don't blame them for that! They can't respect something they don't know.
I did not just follow my parents' example; I analysed and studied everything accurately, and I finally concluded that the Baptist doctrines are the most correct ones. With that in mind, I have established a list of doctrinal beliefs which can be biblically proven (which you can read in my profile page), and these are the basic doctrines upon which I want to build a stable home — needless to say, therefore, my wife needs to agree on all that and share my convictions —, and then eventually pass these beliefs on to my children (if I have any).
The bottom line is this: the state is laic, and I believe that it should remain like that, so that it may respect all religions equally; however, the state must establish a single, obligatory educational system for everyone — one which is silent in religious matters.