Flawed argument

If you read my letter again, you will see that all I was pointing out was that there was a factual error in Cantara Wali Ruhi's letter of October 4 where the writer stated "The cross bears the sign of a particular religion, so why not ban that?"

Mr. Arshad Khan was only trying to show that there was a factual misrepresentation of France's law by Ms. Cantara Ruhi. France has banned all religious symbols from their public schools. People, who think that their religious rights are being curbed by the French law, can go to private schools if they wish. If people want to follow their religious traditions in their private homes, on streets or in their religious places, French people have no problem with that. Jewish skullcaps, Christian crosses and Sikh turbans are equally important for many religious people and may have been hurt by that law. But the law was created for greater good! Do we want France to be ruled by the laws of Bible or secular laws that respect all religions?

Dev, Boston, USA