this post was submitted on 25 Sep 2026
75 points (97.5% liked)

Global News

6949 readers
127 users here now

What is global news?

Something that happened or was uncovered recently anywhere in the world. It doesn't have to have global implications. Just has to be informative in some way.


Post guidelines

Title formatPost title should mirror the news source title. If you don't like the title of article, look for an alternative source instead of editorializing it.
URL formatPost URL should be the original link to the article (even if paywalled) and archived copies left in the body. It allows avoiding duplicate posts when cross-posting.
[Opinion] prefixOpinion (op-ed) articles must use [Opinion] prefix before the title. Opinion articles refer to articles that their publisher doesn't explictly endorse.
Country prefixCountry prefix can be added to the title with a separator (|, :, etc.) if the news is from a local publisher who doesn't clearly mention the country.


Rules

This community is moderated in accordance with the principles outlined in Article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which emphasizes the right to freedom of opinion and expression. In addition to this foundational principle, we have some additional rules to ensure a respectful and constructive environment for all users.

1. English onlyTitle and associated content has to be in English.
2. No social media postsAvoid all social media posts. Try searching for a source that has a written article or transcription on the subject.
3. Respectful communicationAll communication has to be respectful of differing opinions, viewpoints, and experiences.
4. InclusivityEveryone is welcome here regardless of age, body size, visible or invisible disability, ethnicity, sex characteristics, gender identity and expression, education, socio-economic status, nationality, personal appearance, race, caste, color, religion, or sexual identity and orientation. Any kind of discrimination will not be tolerated.
5. Ad hominem attacksAny kind of personal attacks are expressly forbidden. If you can't argue your position without attacking a person's character, you already lost the argument.
6. Off-topic tangentsStay on topic. Keep it relevant.
7. Instance rules may applyIf something is not covered by community rules, but are against lemmy.zip instance rules, they will be enforced.


Companion communities

Icon generated via LLM model | Banner attribution


If someone is interested in moderating this community, message @brikox@lemmy.zip.

founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Rome (AFP) – Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni's cabinet adopted a decree law Thursday banning burqas and niqabs in schools and capping the number of students with a poor command of Italian per class.

It introduces "A 30 percent cap on the number of students in a class who do not have an adequate command of Italian, more tools for learning our language, and a ban on the burqa and niqab in schools," Meloni wrote on social media.

If a child seriously struggles to integrate at school, social services will be called and the parents will be obliged to attend free Italian lessons.

Failure to comply will be punished with a fine of up to 1,000 euros ($1,140).

Italy is a frontline country for migration and integration is a hot campaign issue ahead of next year's general election.

Save the Children warned forcing children to change schools or enrol in a different institution from their peers simply because of their nationality or limited proficiency in Italian would "create 'first-class' and 'second-class' students".

But Education Minister Giuseppe Valditara said "inadequate language proficiency... hinders educational progress".

"Parental participation in their child's educational path is fundamental for academic success", he told journalists.

...

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Brokentooth@piefed.ca -1 points 1 week ago (2 children)

The leftys sticking up for islam makes no sense to me at all. Human rights? Women's rights? wtf?

[–] SaveTheTuaHawk@lemmy.ca 4 points 1 week ago

Human rights? Women’s rights? wtf?

Now do the Catholic church.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

It's a tolerance paradox.

Do you accept religious freedoms as an excuse to withdraw women's rights, or anybodies autonomy?

Is it the states place to determine which is more important to the individual?

Is it appropriate to call out one specific headdress, which directly specifies one religion?

I think a fairer example would be to say no indoor headcoverings or hair accessories larger than 3 inches in any dimension (except for wigs and toupees). No religious exemptions. Absolutely nothing concealing the face without a medical exemption.

That covers burqas, beanies, and baseball caps. Gaiters and ghutrahs. Turbans and taqiyahs. Also covers yamulkes and everything else right on up to the papal tiara.

Thats a fair safety and security measure for a public building, I think. That covers nearly all religions headdresses (which ultimately have no place in a school...we don't let God in, ergo he can't judge, right?), as well as anything that could be used to obfuscate a person's identity (which is one intent of the burqa restriction).

[–] Hacksaw@lemmy.ca 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Oh yeah, "absolutely nothing covering the face", you're a real advocate for the leftists right to be IDd at protests and rallies so we can be arrested later at home by lazy cops and their facial recognition cameras.

God Internet atheists are such idiots.

[–] JasonDJ@lemmy.zip 0 points 1 week ago

The context was in school. But nice try.

[–] Roucan@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 week ago

I don’t think they’ve banned the nuns from wearing their religious garb

[–] NoneOfUrBusiness@fedia.io 2 points 1 week ago

Problem: That's a blatant violation of individual freedom that directly contradicts the fundamental underpinnings of liberal democracy. If you get to ban hijab, conservatives get to ban pride flags. It's both or neither, which is why freedom of expression is a thing. Turning the state into a tool of enforcing one's beliefs is a famously risky prospect.