Cypher, that's an interesting question: What makes tolerance of religion a virtue...
Stated another way though, what makes tolerance of diversity a virtue?
The way I see things, diversity is another form of the evolutionary arms race through knowledge. To enforce homogeneity is to reduce the amount of new ideas that may enter the marketplace of ideas. Thus, diversity, although uncomfortable to many is a necessary speed bump to encourage the development of ideas.
Quote:
|
Why *should* France tolerate something which is detrimental to national function and security, and which most likely acts as a barrier to cultural integration
|
The way this is stated causes me to pause:
Tolerate--in that the majority should have the ability to dictate the ways in which minorities live? Is this a matter of tolerance or of accepting the necessary consequences resulting from a freer state?
With respect to national function and security, I'm curious how a blanket ban on burkhas function better than mandatory identification laws. In other words, the Burkha ban is far broader than necessary to effectuate the legitimate state goals of security..
Finally, as I stated before, cultural "integration" strikes me as unnecessary as it:
1.) Limits the marketplace of ideas.
2.) Imposes a standard by the majority on to a minority.
3.) Creates a subclass of individuals who "ought" to be shunned since they aren't integrated.
Should we persecute the amish because they don't 'integrate' and don't permit their children to attend secondary education? After all, their religion limits the economic opportunities of amish offspring. They're 'failing to integrate' aren't they? And how would you define integrate? Everyone speaks the primary national language? Wear clothing according to the majority of the individuals of that state?