Italy school crucifixes 'barred'

[Amapola]

Italy school crucifixes 'barred'

"The European Court of Human Rights has ruled against the use of crucifixes in classrooms in Italy.

It said the practice violated the right of parents to educate their children as they saw fit, and ran counter to the child's right to freedom of religion.

The case was brought by an Italian mother, Soile Lautsi, who wants to give her children a secular education.

But the ruling has sparked anger in the largely Catholic country, with one politician calling the move "shameful".

The Strasbourg court found that: "The compulsory display of a symbol of a given confession in premises used by the public authorities... restricted the right of parents to educate their children in conformity with their convictions."

It also restricted the "right of children to believe or not to believe", the seven judges ruling on the case said in a statement quoted by AFP news agency."

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/8340411.stm

[Electronic God-Man]

I recently learned that in many schools in Italy, or at least in Sicily, there is a required amount of time set aside where students have to either study Catholicism or have a break time. Most kids do the religion study and it seems obvious that the schools want you to participate in it.

I also heard that there have been some calls for a study period for Islam as well.

[The Lawspeaker]

"Brussels" out of control again. Italy is a Catholic country.
And this just shows that they are paving the way for Islamization in all of Europe.

[Loddfafner]

Are crucifixes displayed in Transylvanian schools?

[Amapola]

I never thought that the neutrality of a state should mean prohibition? and likewise I never thought that laicism should mean abolition? Where is the religious freedom in Europe, and the censure of the space in the public sphere? What is at play here is freedom, one of the pillars of European identity? In addition, the crucifix is part of the European culture and history; it might have the same meaning like a flag, for example. Shouldn't a sane laicism respect this and every religious symbol as a sign of identity instead of an offense? The only aim of this is cutting down on the presence of religion and faith in the public sphere: state funerals, crucifixes, the right to conscience objection and so on...

[Electronic God-Man]

Are crucifixes displayed in Transylvanian schools?

No. And they refuse to serve garlic in the cafeterias.

[Crimson Guard]

Thats why the European Union is a socialist fraud, a foreign entity dictating laws to a sovereign nation.

Italy is largely staunchly Roman Catholic(especially in the central and southern part) and has largely kept out matters of decadence and debauchery while even combating the gypsy threat-- while central and Northern Europe has opened itself up to Islam among other things unfortunately for them. The pinko politicians in Italy should be hung from their balls or necks with barbwire.

[Treffie]

Some conservatives have already complained about schools dropping nativity plays to avoid upsetting Muslim children

This is wrong - and quite depressing

[Anthropos]

The European Court of Human Rights has ruled against the use of crucifixes in classrooms in Italy.

Notice that it is human rights at work here.


It said the practice violated the right of parents to educate their children as they saw fit, and ran counter to the child's right to freedom of religion.

Notice that freedom of religion has an entirely negative meaning. 'Banishment of religion' would be more fitting.


The case was brought by an Italian mother, Soile Lautsi, who wants to give her children a secular education.

Try that somewhere else?


The Strasbourg court found that: "The compulsory display of a symbol of a given confession in premises used by the public authorities... restricted the right of parents to educate their children in conformity with their convictions."

What about the right to banish egomania? It's only her conviction that noone must be religious that matters, it seems. Note how they used the word "compulsory"; in reality it's not the compulsory display, but simply 'the display', that is banned.


It also restricted the right of children to believe or not to believe, the seven judges ruling on the case said in a statement quoted by AFP news agency.

Apparently it is only the right not to believe that is respected. It is an entirely negative right. One would think that atheists could actually accept that not everyone is an atheist. But no: 'Let's have rights against that.'

[Poltergeist]

Now they should put them everywhere, out of protest.

[Radojica]

This is the shame for Europe and shocked me when i heard that on the news, but two things are falling to my mind:

1. Judgments of The European Court of Human Rights are not binding for the state about the rule is made, it's more like an advice what to do in some particular case and
2. If she had a few thousand euros (the lovely and carrying mother) to pay just to hear that she has the rights and that she is stronger than school system in Italy, i guess she is free to send her kid to some private school where religion is not present.

Of course, this is bringing some other questions to the table: where will it stop now when others see they can bring this question, or similar ones and what's the next step of "We are all citizens of the World" Brussel's agenda, especially knowing the number of Muslim immigrants in all EU countries...

It's bullshit, EU, UN and it's parts become a joke

[Poltergeist]

The woman who stirred the whole case seems to be an immigrant, from somewhere in Northern Europe.

It's funny thing how some people are so obsessed with islam that they bring that topic even there where it is totally unrelated to the whole specific case (as we have here), which can be seen from some comments in this thread.

This entire legal battle is about an old struggle between the principle of secularism/laicism, postulating that no religious denomination should interfere with the affairs of the state (and this is a public school, thus it is indirectly an affair of the state), and the contrary principle, that church and religion should play some role in the state (but that role was never absolute, since in Europe there was never any theocracy in the pure sense of the word).

Seen from the practical point of view, this is pure hair splitting. Italy is not going to become some "clerical republic" (as some hysterical anti-clericalists seem to fear) because of some crucifixes in some classrooms - because, from what I read, it is not mandated by the law that there should be crucifixes in all classrooms, but it is optional, meaning that some school may decide in one way, others in some different way in the matter.

On the contrary, this whole case could revive the specter of theoconnism or theoconservatism (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Theoconservatism), an originally American and Protestan political ideology which has been gaining some ground in Europe as well in the last 7-8 years, in some Catholic circles too. Theoconnism is misuse of Christianity for political aims of some so-called Conservative (Christian Democratic, Liberal Conservative, right-of-the-center) political parties and agendas. They are no-less pro-globalist and no less fanatical supporters of the Western Alliance and its ruling elites, than the "left", but try to shroud and cloud everything into some pseudo-"Christian" rhetoric, usually criticize "secularism", "laicism" etc.

In cases like this theocons may take over the agenda of the "defense of the crucifix" and manipulate for their own ends the rightful anger people feel for some hair-splitting judicial beaurocrats and their absurd decisions.

[Bard]

I recently learned that in many schools in Italy, or at least in Sicily, there is a required amount of time set aside where students have to either study Catholicism or have a break time. Most kids do the religion study and it seems obvious that the schools want you to participate in it.

I also heard that there have been some calls for a study period for Islam as well.

You are right, I'm one of those who have the break time btw, young people don't believe in catholic stuff so much (expecially in the north) and personally I'm agnostic so I don't care much about religious things if I'm not sure about anything.
About the crucifixes I can just say that is the now common "islam loving" politic, I'm not angry about the crucifixes but about the fact that some muslims come to our land and we have to put away the crucifixes, try do to the same in any islamic country with their stuff and they will hang you, really.
Oh and by the way the kids don't give a fuck about the crucifix itself, we were used to burn it, and turn it upside down :laugh:

[Anthropos]

About the crucifixes I can just say that is the now common "islam loving" politic, I'm not angry about the crucifixes but about the fact that some muslims come to our land and we have to put away the crucifixes, try do to the same in any islamic country with their stuff and they will hang you, really.
Oh and by the way the kids don't give a fuck about the crucifix itself, we were used to burn it, and turn it upside down :laugh:

I see. And you are supposed to be much different from muslim and humanist fanatics then?

[Bari]

This is madness. Since when are the host the one that should change according to his guests? Its like walking into some house and start redacorating the way you want it. The problem today is that houseowners of Europe seem to accept any rampage on their home as long as they are not labelled as racists/extremists.

Whats so fucked up is how people act careless about how their traditions and culture are being alienated to satisfy the feelings/ego of 3rd world muslims. They have been welcomed into tolerant countries where they get respected for their faith, are safe, having been saved from war zones/troubled areas and instead of acting humble and thankful, they start complaining about how local traditions are different from their own. HELLO? You just fucking immigrated to another country. Why not choose your a country in your own region which is not in war, that share your same values if integrating into Christian Europe is so hard(despite all the social goods)?

If i had such despickable houseguests i would have kicked their asses out of my house and property before they had finished any demands.

[Amapola]

Let's be serious... in order to ensure the religious freedom, the expression or religious freedom needs banning? and by the way, by a lady's (Finnish inmigrant in Italy) request...!

For whatever may come... I am getting some cans of paint to fill Granada with crucifixes

In school, Obama, not being a believer at that moment, had to swear alleigance to the flag (a custom they have in schools) and he said "well, all of my life I have had to swear that alleigance ..." which includes the words "God and swear" and that never meant trouble of any kind.... If in situations like that, there is not trouble, surely, a crucifix in a school could never be considered to go against anybody's freedom.

I think there are two different dimensions of the issue but they intertwine:

1) One part is identity, i.e. Europe is what it is and we are what we are ... and in this respect, removing the religious references of public life would be just like trying to blot out ,at a stroke, 2,000 years of history which is, simply, crazy. What will be next? the processions in Easter? It's our patrimony.

2) On the other hand, there is the legal point, i.e. : to what extent, the freedom claim of a person may lead to prohibit the expression of freedom for the rest? there is not an objective question here - "Constitution or any of the rules imposed by the Strasbourg court"- that refers to the crucifixes or such a concrete thing .... So obviously in a judment of this characteristics there is a very important element of subjectivity from the judge although we don't know the foundation of it.

Then we have the matter of the minorities defeating majorities... so I think that in the end, in a system like ours, the social, political and reliigious context should have to be taken into consideration.

[Anthropos]

Secularists have no case in point of fact. Since to them, religious symbols are fictional, they could equally as well direct their aggressive tendencies towards the local cinema, bookshop, fine arts museum and opera theater, as well as any instance of fiction playing a part in their education. But the truth is that they are really hardcore fanatics, whose aim is simply to dominate, and they are selective in targetting one single kind among all the fictions that they are faced with.

[Bard]

I see. And you are supposed to be much different from muslim and humanist fanatics then?

I am.
I'm not a fanatic of anything, you can worship even a wooden table if you want imho but don't bother other ppl.

[Kadu]

I never thought that the neutrality of a state should mean prohibition?

It means no regime of exception. All religious manifestations must be displayed only outside of public institutions, therefore public buildings and the sort.
It's even debatable if temples, churches, mosques, etc... should face the front of a street as it stands clearly as a demonstration of power. At least it's what one of your Catholic brothers implemented here in the old times of Fascism, Salazar you know.

[Anthropos]

I am.
I'm not a fanatic of anything, you can worship even a wooden table if you want imho but don't bother other ppl.

Bother other people? If you bother yourself, it is not the fault of anybody else, but if you disrespect religious symbols by burning them and turning them upside down, I really think it's you bothering the religious and not the other way around.

[Bard]

Bother other people? If you bother yourself, it is not the fault of anybody else, but if you disrespect religious symbols by burning them and turning them upside down, I really think it's you bothering the religious and not the other way around.

Oh lawl, I didn't understand you were angry because of that, when you are a kid you simply don't understand what you are really doing, we did that kind of things just to be "transgressive" or call it like you want, now I obviously wouldn't do that.

[Tony]

Most schools here , especially the new ones or the renovated ones , don't even have a crucifix , because neither pupils nor their families ask formally for it , why?because at this point Italy has became a mostly secularized country but still we can't stand impositions from abroad telling us what is right and what's wrong.
Despite not being a catholic myself I cannot deny 16 and more centuries of catholic influence upon architecture , art in general , ways of thinking , even names and I really can't grasp how such a small sculpture might bias the learning process of pupils or the teachers in any way , nor their personal freedom.
Italy has a tradition in Catholicism and everyone but the ignorants know that , so get used to it or leave (I'm talkink for example to that Finnish woman) this ruling has causing much of an uproar in all Italians , both left sympathizers and more conservative ones and I too think the judges up there should mind their business and not interfere so blatantly in ours.

[Amapola]

It means no regime of exception. All religious manifestations must be displayed only outside of public institutions, therefore public buildings and the sort.
It's even debatable if temples, churches, mosques, etc... should face the front of a street as it stands clearly as a demonstration of power. At least it's what one of your Catholic brothers implemented here in the old times of Fascism, Salazar you know.

I still don't see it... a neutral regime that declares itself promoting the religious freedom and it's banning any manifestation of the same is contradictory. I am bold enough to believe that a majority in Italy is Catholic... so what are they democratically doing then? Doing what they want by not taking into consideration the religious context?

Appart from that, what you suggest is impossible... we cannot re-invent ourselves and start from the scratch, it's just crazy, we have to face the fact that there is a 2000 year history of Christianity behind us.

If we really take to being neutral without imparciality, why don't we start banning symbols in our culture that represent something that we don't like or we find ofenssive? Any symbol can be offensive, depending on who is looking at it. A society without symbols is a society of insects. I could easily go to the Court and say that I find the symbol of the communist party offensive because of the many crimes they perpetrated and I don't want to see any public display of it.

[Anthropos]

Oh lawl, I didn't understand you were angry because of that, when you are a kid you simply don't understand what you are really doing, we did that kind of things just to be "transgressive" or call it like you want, now I obviously wouldn't do that.

Okay, I see, how should I know what stage you're in? I wasn't really angry, by the way, I just think that it is a bad tendency overall that Europeans don't even show some fundamental respect for their heritage. But I got some bad upbringing myself, you know, so it's not like I'm playing totally innocent. After all, we are so far gone on the slope that it takes a reaction against the way we were brought up to actually get on our feet again, in many cases anyway.

[Thorum]

Good to see a little rationality. Religion has been shoving it's ridiculous supernatural beliefs on mankind long enough...

[Poltergeist]

Good to see a little rationality. Religion has been shoving it's ridiculous supernatural beliefs on mankind long enough...

Yes, an immigrant prescribing to Italians what they should have in their classrooms. That's very rational.

[Anthropos]

Good to see a little rationality. Religion has been shoving it's ridiculous supernatural beliefs on mankind long enough...

I'm sure that's a real problem because of bad upbringing, or because you were harassed by Benny Hinn, but there's nothing rational at all in what this stupid woman did.

[Osweo]

harassed by Benny Hinn
Is 'N' next to 'L' on a Swedish keyboard? ;)

I actually find the crucifix in itself a rather creepy thing, especially the lifelike ones that Catholics like. I don't like Roman Catholic art in general, finding it too sickly sweet and cloying. My (post-)Protestant atheistic mother always sneered at this sort of thing in Catholic relatives' houses...

... but this Italian situation is outrageous. :mad:

I can't believe the brazen insolence of outsiders who complain about their hosts' way of life. She wants deporting, this woman-creature.

But I am even more disgusted with locals who SUBMIT to such madness. Why do we accept insane laws and directives from our 'politicians'?!? If every school in Italy refused to go along with this madness, not EVERY headteacher could be prosecuted or disciplined

There is a similar case with our traditional English weights and measures, which are being 'phased out' against the wishes of the people. Tradesmen have been fined and harrassed for serving old women in the only way they understand. :cussing

I read in the paper the other day, that a woman was officially cautioned by the police for using the 'offensive' term 'fat' to describe a man who had broken into her home. Her husband hit the man, and now has a criminal record for 'Gross Bodily Harm'. The law has gone mad, and judges are often the worst to blame. We need to start again from scratch.

[Kadu]

I still don't see it... a neutral regime that declares itself promoting the religious freedom and it's banning any manifestation of the same is contradictory

Simple as when a Mother asks her children to wash their hands before dinner.


Appart from that, what you suggest is impossible... we cannot re-invent ourselves and start from the scratch, it's just crazy, we have to face the fact that there is a 2000 year history of Christianity behind us.

We cannot re-invent yes but we can put a stop to that.


I could easily go to the Court and say that I find the symbol of the communist party offensive because of the many crimes they perpetrated and I don't want to see any public display of it.

I don't remember seeing or hearing about an hammer and sickle in public schools, maybe in the old Soviet Union, but we are not talking about totalitarian regimes but of Democratic secularist regimes.

[chap]

Crucifixes should be barred in government schools, why should this secular mother (taxpayer, or wife of taxpayer) subsidise Catholic ornaments.

[Hussar]

Crucifixes should be barred in government schools, why should this secular mother (taxpayer, or wife of taxpayer) subsidise Catholic ornaments.


Yes, should be banned from public places. But i thought that crucifies are a CHRISTIAN symbol, not a specifically catholic one.

[Tony]

For the record , there ain't any official law here that requires crucifixes to be put in schools or other public spaces but there isn't any official law that forbid it as well ...
it's a matter of sensitivity , it's up to those in charge put it or not , case by case , a situation of absolute freedom I'd say.

[Electronic God-Man]

But i thought that crucifies are a CHRISTIAN symbol, not a specifically catholic one.

Crosses are Christian, but I've only ever seen crucifixes used by Catholics.

[The Lawspeaker]

Crucifixes should be barred in government schools, why should this secular mother (taxpayer, or wife of taxpayer) subsidise Catholic ornaments.
She is not Italian and hence she doesn't pay taxes. Why should she have the right to use a public school for her children anyways AND set the rules.

[Treffie]

She is not Italian and hence she doesn't pay taxes. Why should she have the right to use a public school for her children anyways AND set the rules.

Foreigners living in Italy don't pay tax? Since when? She is technically an Italian citizen, right?

[The Lawspeaker]

Foreigners living in Italy don't pay tax? Since when? She is technically an Italian citizen, right?
Is she ? Then I misread. Not that I care about it because the issue stays the same: who is she to determine whether a Italian public school should have a crucifix or not when she herself is not Italian.

[Poltergeist]

Foreigners living in Italy don't pay tax? Since when? She is technically an Italian citizen, right?

She seems to be an immigrant though. Not extra-European immigrant, not Muslim immigrant, but still immigrant. It is not clear whether she is the an Italian citizen. From what I read about it today, it seems she isn't.

[Tony]

Crosses are Christian, but I've only ever seen crucifixes used by Catholics.
Right , the cross is symbol universally recognized as Christian while the Cruci is mora Catholic thing , in fact in the early ears there weren't depictions of Jesus on the crucifix , then gradually it started to be depicted on a cruci but in the form of chriustus triomphans , meaning his victory over the death , only in the XIII century the Franciscans created a new symbol , the christus patiens (that it so say suffering the pains and in despair) by the way neither Protestants nor the Orthodox really never adopted this new kind of crucifix image.


She is not Italian and hence she doesn't pay taxes. Why should she have the right to use a public school for her children anyways AND set the rules.
The woman is Finnish but married to an Italian long ago thereby gained the citizenship automatically at the time of her marriage , she's been waging this personal war of hers against the cruci for very long , I'd say a ten year if not more , she first appealed to Italian courts of all grades , after being rejected on and on she finally decided to appeal an European tribunal.
By the way one doesn't need to be citizen in order to pay taxes...;)

[Poltergeist]

Maybe she's just awfully bored in her life and that's the true motivation for her waging of this incessant war against crucifixes.:p

[Osweo]

Crucifixes should be barred in government schools, why should this secular mother (taxpayer, or wife of taxpayer) subsidise Catholic ornaments.

I am a little horrified at that tone of thought. Italy is a Catholic country, its schools should reflect that, as their job is to prepare children to live in that society. Didn't you sing hymns and say prayers at your school? Would you happily stand aside if that was attacked by an outsider on a mad mission?

In my school, a Methodist minister used to come now and then to give us a talk on his take of Christianity, and I'm glad he did. It didn't harm anyone, and may have done some good. We said the Lord's Prayer every day at assembly, and sang a Christian hymn. I am no Christian, but would not object to my own children receiving the same introduction to the historical religion of my country as I did.

Catholics like to demonstrate their religion more materially, that's their choice, and it should be a part of their schools, if that's the tradition. This might be a very old school that has always done this, even for centuries perhaps, and then some fanatic blazes in and stops it all? All it is is two bits of wood and a bit of tin or ceramic, after all... The woman's sick in the head.

I wouldn't mind if Italians became more secular, but it should be the PEOPLE who do so first, and the authorities following THEM.

[Crimson Guard]

Right , the cross is symbol universally recognized as Christian while the Cruci is mora Catholic thing , in fact in the early ears there weren't depictions of Jesus on the crucifix , then gradually it started to be depicted on a cruci but in the form of chriustus triomphans , meaning his victory over the death , only in the XIII century the Franciscans created a new symbol , the christus patiens (that it so say suffering the pains and in despair) by the way neither Protestants nor the Orthodox really never adopted this new kind of crucifix image.

There is no denying the very important symbolism of the crucifix in not only Christianity and of course Catholicism but also with the culture of Italia as a whole. It is traditional as well as religious along with the rosary beeds ect.




As far as I'm aware one of the earliest Christian symbols is the fish, or of the two fish and trident-- which was probably a disguise for the cross symbol. The Bishops(which the Pope is a Bishop--Bishop of Rome to be precise) use the fish and in Catholicism the fish is a very important symbol and still a seal within Christianity. The Pope wears the ring of the Fisherman( Annulus Piscatoris or Anello Piscatorio).

Mark 1:17: "Come after Me, and I will make you become fishers of men."


Among the symbols employed by the primitive Christians, that of the fish ranks probably first in importance. While the use of the fish in pagan art as a purely decorative sign is ancient and constant, the earliest literary reference to the symbolic fish is made by Clement of Alexandria, born about 150, who recommends his readers (The Pedagogue III.11) to have their seals engraved with a dove or a fish. Clement did not consider it necessary to give any reason for this recommendation, from which it may be safely be inferred that the meaning of both symbols was unnecessary. Indeed, from monumental sources we know that the symbolic fish was familiar to Christians long before the famous Alexandrian was born; in such Roman monuments as the Capella Greca and the Sacrament Chapels of the catacomb of St. Callistus, the fish was depicted as a symbol in the first decades of the second century.

Read more:

http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/06083a.htm

[Electronic God-Man]

I was just told by a Sicilian friend that most schools in Italy will likely not actually take down their crucifixes.

I don't know what could happen if they refuse.

[Amapola]

We cannot re-invent yes but we can put a stop to that.

So why not treating every expression of it equally? let’s stop all the rest of Catholic/Christian religious expressions: Easter processions in Seville, religious funerals, baptisms, communions, crucifixes in cemeteries and a long etcetera…


I don't remember seeing or hearing about an hammer and sickle in public schools, maybe in the old Soviet Union, but we are not talking about totalitarian regimes but of Democratic secularist regimes.

Actually I have seen it in bars or in the streets during the elections; I have seen pictures of The King (What if I am Republican?) or the president of the moment in schools too: Under that logic, I could feel offended too. What I want to highlight here is the fact that “democracy” or whatever doesn’t treat things equally: why can’t we vote if we want to have the crucifixes in the classes or not? Is not democracy supposed to let people decide? For example: where are the rights of those who have not deemed appropriate to bring a lawsuit against the crucifixes display?

On a final note:
Article 9: "1. Toda persona tiene derecho a la libertad de pensamiento, de conciencia y de religión; este derecho implica la libertad de cambiar de religión o de convicciones, así como la libertad de manifestar su religión o sus convicciones individual o colectivamente, en público o en privado, por medio del culto, la enseñanza, las prácticas y la observancia de los ritos.

The law is anyway contradictory as I said before and here it shows, no matter how many mothers ask their children to wash their hands :p Berlusconni has nevertheless said they are not going to remove the crucifixes from the classes, hurray for them.

Anyway, kadu, you being an evil liberal commie and me being an evil conservative, won't ever come to an agreement regarding religion or the expressions of it. :D

[Tony]

Berlusconni has nevertheless said they are not going to remove the crucifixes from the classes, hurray for them.
Hope you can grasp some Italian , this was a program originally set to celebrate our 4th of November (the WWI victory) but soon turned into a pro/anti crucifix matter , the man is our Defense Minister , skip at 4'59'' when he says referred to the European judges who ruled about it "they may die but no way we will ever remove any crucifix from our schools" :D

goWDmbvNGr0

[Jamt]

I don’t understand Italian but I think you have the classiest politicians in Europe.

[Amapola]

Thanks, I understand most of it :)

[Bard]

I don’t understand Italian but I think you have the classiest politicians in Europe.

I'm laughing hard.

[Jamt]

I honestly mean they are better than the ones in the rest of EU.

[Óttar]

I think it a sensible policy. If it is a public school then crucifixes shouldn't be displayed. If it is a private Christian school then non-Christians don't have to attend.

[Kadu]

Actually I have seen it in bars or in the streets during the elections; I have seen pictures of The King (What if I am Republican?) or the president of the moment in schools too: Under that logic, I could feel offended too. What I want to highlight here is the fact that “democracy” or whatever doesn’t treat things equally: why can’t we vote if we want to have the crucifixes in the classes or not? Is not democracy supposed to let people decide? For example: where are the rights of those who have not deemed appropriate to bring a lawsuit against the crucifixes display?

On a final note:
Article 9: "1. Toda persona tiene derecho a la libertad de pensamiento, de conciencia y de religión; este derecho implica la libertad de cambiar de religión o de convicciones, así como [B]la libertad de manifestar su religión o sus convicciones individual o colectivamente, en público o en privado, por medio del culto, la enseñanza, las prácticas y la observancia de los ritos.




You are confusing apples with oranges. We are not arguing about the right of single individuals to display religious symbols but the exemption and laicism that a democratic secularist state should impose to its citizens on public institutions.

[Poltergeist]

Here we have coat-of-arms of the state in classrooms. In some places, but very rarely, also crucifixes can be found, beside the coat-of-arms.

[Tony]

A few updates:

Italian mayors respond to Strasbourg ruling by hanging more crucifixes in schools


Rome, Italy, Nov 12, 2009 / 01:49 pm (CNA).- A number of Italian officials have responded to the ruling by the European Human Rights Court that ordered schools in Italy to remove crucifixes from the classrooms by taking unprecedented measures to preserve the Christian symbol.
According to the Italian daily “Avvenire,” the mayor of Sezzadio, Pier Luigi Arnera, has leveled a fine of 500 euros against anyone who removes a crucifix from a public place.
Arnera explained that the displaying of the crucifix in “places other than churches does not affect the dignity of anyone, because it is one of our cultural references.”
Likewise in the cities of Sassuolo and Trapani, officials have acquired dozens more crucifixes to display them in public schools.
In Montegrotto Terme, digital billboards that normally are used to inform the public are now displaying the crucifix with the phrase, “We will not take it down.” The mayor of Assisi has ordered that Nativity scenes be displayed in addition to the crucifix in public offices.
In Varesotto a local contractor placed a 16-foot cross on his farm in order to express his indignation over the EU court ruling.

http://www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=17681

[Idun]

So now it is wrong to show respect for a country's culture and traditions. No one except Italy decides what is best for Italy. This EU way of destroying and showing contempt for the member countries' individual culture and traditions has to to stop.