Recently the decision by the fast food chain Quick in France to switch its entire menu to halal standard in some of its restaurants, notably in Roubaix, raised an outcry in France. The Anglo-Saxon press doesn’t seem to understand the French principle of laicité and look at this situation with its same condescending eye. However if the reaction of the Mayor of Roubaix to sue the chain for discrimination might seem a bit too much, it shows that such a decision by the restaurant is provoking an uncomfortable feeling. Arguing that going to a full halal menu because the Muslim population represents a major part of its customers is a poor argument. The whole problem is that if from a business point of view it does make sense, it does not mean that it is not discrimination against non-Muslim population.

Above all, the mistake of Quick is to take a decision incorporating a religious factor in a country that stand hard to its principle of secularity or laicité. It is obvious that from a marketing aspect it was a success but playing on that kind of conflicts won’t be beneficial in the long term as it will raise tensions between the different populations in France where climate is already unstable. It would have been certainly more diplomatic to offer a halal and a non halal menu especially if there is no difference on the taste of the meat.

Indeed, to an observer this conflict might seem trivial, however it directly attack one of the principle of the republic in a bad moment. It raises several legitimate questions: to what extent does the laicité need to be respected? Usually in France, religion isn’t a subject that it widely discussed as it is seen as something private and thus people feel a bit uncomfortable in the face of visible religious symbols that does not traditionally belong to France. I do not believe that it is because they are racist or intolerant. After all, there are a lot of different foreign communities living in France and being assimilated. On the other hand, how can a community be assimilated when it arrives in a different nation if it persists in keeping its traditions? There is nothing wrong in doing thing differently as long as it does not bother the others. Freedom is a right and must be welcomed nevertheless does it mean that I should have the freedom to do what I want to do and this even though it seem to annoy others?

-C