The Crucifix and Cross damage undoubtedly disturb the seven judges of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg, namely: Francoise Tulkens (Belgium, President), Vladimiro Zagrebelsky (Italy), Ireneu Cabral Barreto (Portugal), Danute Jociene (Lithuania) , Dragoljub Popovic (Serbia), Andras Sajo (Hungary), and Isil Karakas (Turkey).
Motivation is the most generic ° " The presence of the crucifix ... constitutes "a violation of the right of parents to educate their children according to their convictions" and a violation of "freedom of religion" . Indeed "The presence of the crucifix - says the court's ruling in Strasbourg - could easily be interpreted by students and people of all ages as a religious symbol. To alert to be in an environment that has the mark of a given religion. " All this continues, "could be encouraging for Christians, but annoying for those who practice other religions, particularly if they belong religious minorities or are atheists. "
There is no need to enter into debate or express opinions on a highly questionable decision: they would be only a drop in the bucket of the discussions in recent days have flooded the media. We merely note that the Court is still clearly able to understand how exposure in the classes of public schools or in public places in general, a symbol that can reasonably be associated with Catholicism, may serve the educational pluralism which is essential for the maintenance of a democratic society as it was conceived by the European Convention of Human Rights, a pluralism that is, however, recognized the Italian Constitutional Court.
A reflection is very spontaneous, however: According to the Court of Strasbourg, the emblem of the Calabria Region and the Province of Reggio Calabria should be banned! In fact, both the Cross has a predominant role:
Motivation is the most generic ° " The presence of the crucifix ... constitutes "a violation of the right of parents to educate their children according to their convictions" and a violation of "freedom of religion" . Indeed "The presence of the crucifix - says the court's ruling in Strasbourg - could easily be interpreted by students and people of all ages as a religious symbol. To alert to be in an environment that has the mark of a given religion. " All this continues, "could be encouraging for Christians, but annoying for those who practice other religions, particularly if they belong religious minorities or are atheists. "
There is no need to enter into debate or express opinions on a highly questionable decision: they would be only a drop in the bucket of the discussions in recent days have flooded the media. We merely note that the Court is still clearly able to understand how exposure in the classes of public schools or in public places in general, a symbol that can reasonably be associated with Catholicism, may serve the educational pluralism which is essential for the maintenance of a democratic society as it was conceived by the European Convention of Human Rights, a pluralism that is, however, recognized the Italian Constitutional Court.
A reflection is very spontaneous, however: According to the Court of Strasbourg, the emblem of the Calabria Region and the Province of Reggio Calabria should be banned! In fact, both the Cross has a predominant role:
About the coat of arms CALABRIA REGION fact, the analysis provides heraldry: "The pine larch is the region's natural beauty. The column points out the age of Magna Graecia. The Byzantine cross, reminiscent of the Byzantine Empire in Calabria has been a member. Enhanced Cross, already present in the arms of Calabria Ultra Citra and Calabria, Calabria recalled the value of the Crusaders during the First Crusade " 
Similar crosses are in the arms of the province of REGGIO CALABRIA!
. . .
It 's the case of ineffable wonder of the seven judges of the High Court if it is okay to delete these crosses also our coats of arms (perhaps replacing them with small stylized lupare or some twisted horn of a compass)?
0 comments:
Post a Comment