(Or so…)

In France, since 1801,

the state was linked to the Churches by the « Corcordat ».

In the 19th century,

this causes a split

between a France that supports the domination of the Catholic Church

and a republican France,

indifferent to its citizens' convictions.

Republicans eventually carry the day

and, in particular, create the secular school in 1882.

But one of them, Emile Combes,

defends a control of the cults

and put up a strong resistance to religions.

In 1902, whereas he is the head of the government,

2500 catholic churches

are close.

In response, the Vatican broke off diplomatic relations with France in 1904.

The concordat lapses.

The nation is then deeply divided

and the situation becomes explosive.

In 1905,

the issue of the separation of church and state

is the opportunity of heated debates in the National Assembly.

Emile Combes and his supporters defend a “laïcité”

that would eliminate religion from the public space

and control the cults.

While other Republican congressmen,

led by Aristide Briand,

defend a law of compromise

respectful of individual freedoms

and strictly separating the state and the cults.

Briand’s vision eventually carry the day,

and the parliament vote, by a majority,

the separation of the churches and the state.

The adopted text is a soothing act

that ends a century of conflict.

The “laïque” republic rests on four pillars

that flow from this law of 1905,

the Declaration of Rights of Man

and of the Citizen, and the constitution of 1958.

The first pillar is freedom.

Citizens are free to believe or not believe

to change religion and to have none

they can express it at home but also in public space

within the limits of the respect of public order.

They are therefore free to wear a veil or a cross in the street,

a kippah to vote for mayor,

or a Sikh turban in the subway.

Second pillar: the separation of the churches and the state.

Cults are not involved in state management

and law only emanates from the people.

Conversely, the state does not interfere

in the internal organization of worship.

Third pillar: the neutrality of the State.

It concerns the agents of the State and the public service

but not its users.

For example, police officers, judges or teachers

should show no affiliation.

But neutrality does not mean indifference.

The Minister of Interior may maintain relations

with representatives of cults.

Last pillar of equality.

All citizens are equal before the law and public service,

regardless of their beliefs.

In fact, secularism allows everyone

to freely express his convictions,

when they respect with the law and others.

However, the secular Republic remains firm,

both against the fundamentalist excesses against the law,

but also against those who call for hatred

of religions and believers.

(Almost) easy

But two recent laws are often confusing.

A 2004 law prohibits

public schools and high schools students

from wearing symbols or clothes

by whichthey ostensibly manifest

a religious affiliation.

However, students can wear

religious symbols as long as they are discreet.

This law aims to preserve children from the pressures,

including pressures of their peers,

so they can then make their own choices.

But it does not concern private schools

or universities whose students are adults.

It does not concern the parents or outsiders,

like those of the Abbé Pierre Foundation

or the Red Cross.

The 2010 law also gives ride to confusion.

It prohibits people from "hiding their face" in the public space,

in other words to wear a full veil,

a motorcycle helmet, balaclava, etc.

But this law is not based on the principle of “laïcité”,

it was written in an objective

of "security and public order."

In fact, “laïcité" is not an opinion,

but the framework for all.

Being “laïque”,

only means adhering to laws and principles.

One can be christian and “laïque”,

atheist and “laïque”,

muslim and “laïque”,

jewish and “laïque”, etc.