While studying law, I realized that the philosophers of French Enlightenment were the ones who contributed the most to the creation of a secular legislation in my country; first, with the Constitution of 1848, and then with that of 1948.
The main goal of French secularism is to underline that all ideologies are juridically equal (so religions are equal to atheism, or agnosticism) and their philosophical and ideological content is irrelevant before the law.
That's why no Church, no religious denomination deserves a particular special treatment, or a particular legal discipline. Because if there was such discipline, atheism would be disrespected, and considered juridically inferior to religions.
Radical secularism is perceivable in the law of the French republic of 1905, known as Loi sur la Laicité which states the no Church or religious denomination is supposed to be financed by the state, and that religious public manifestations are to be forbidden.
So..I will answer my own questions:
1) In my opinion, the Constitution of my country is not secular enough, since it doesn't underline specifically its secular basis, considering the possibility of some special legislation on the relations between the state and a particular religion, destroying the concept of equality before the law of the religious denominations.
2) Of course not. Well...the legislation of my country de facto promotes secularism in public spaces, like schools. In fact I attended a public school and I received a strictly secular education. In Italy teachers are, by contract, forbidden from speaking about religions, or worse, making religious propaganda. All history and science books speak of Evolution, and teachers are not allowed to contradict the books.
Also de facto, politicians make Christian propaganda when it deals about legislating family rights.
3) What kind of laws should the state implement in order to make the state more secular?
----I would change some articles in the Constitution. For instance, first article. I would rewrite it this way: "Italy is a democratic, liberal, laic republic founded upon Labor". Then I would underline that before the law, all manifestations of freedom of thought (including religions and other ideologies, such as atheism, etc...) are protected under the law, and are juridically equal before the law. None of them gets a special treatment. Their content is juridically irrelevant.
Another article will underline that Italian laws are based upon Reason and Ius Naturale, so any religious influence in the making of a law will be considered unconstitutional.
Another article will state that only the Italian law is supposed to be applied in the territory of the state and in any Italian Courthouse. Religious courthouses have the right to exist, but their documents have absolutely no juridical value before the Italian law. So laws like Canon law will definitively lose their juridic relevance before the Italian law.
it seems that the state is influenced by the pressure of the Vatican and that's why the Concordat of 1929 needs to be revised and to lose its effectiveness, in its most parts. That measure is considered necessary in order to reduce the indirect and implicit influence of the Vatican in the matters of the secular Italian republic.
---Secondly: Religions in public spaces. I would make a law stating that religions are a private matter, that is supposed to be practiced in the specific worship buildings. Any public manifestation of religious worship, such as Christian processions or street prayers must be forbidden. Besides, people are required to wear lay people's clothes, especially if they are public employees, in any public administration space. This law doesn't apply to the religious personnel/staff: priests, nuns, etc...
Thirdly: Religions and education. I would radicalize the already secular legislation, by forbidding teachers from making religious propaganda in any public school or university. Since there is an optional weekly hour of Catholic teaching in public school, I would suppress it (even if it's optional) and replace it with a subject called "Religious education" in which all religions are studied from an exclusively historical and scientific point of view. Students and teachers are required to wear secular clothes. Any kind of religious clothing will be forbidden.
Fourthly: Religions and Politics: I would make a law that will forbid politicians from creating political parties based upon religious principles. Since , as the constitution says, law is supposed to be based upon Ius Naturale and Reason exclusively, parties such as "Christian Democracy" or any party which promotes the principles of religious denominations will not be allowed to present their candidates during state or regional elections. Nevertheless any non-political party or association which is based upon religious principles and values has the right to exist and will be protected by the law.
4) How tolerant is the government of your country towards atheist propaganda in public spaces such as schools?
Technically, the state approves of teachers speaking about atheism, which is inevitable, when you have to speak about philosophy and history. Because it encourages rationalism in the students' mindset.
5) Do you think that atheistic propaganda and religious propaganda should be treated equally by the state?
Of course.
