Currently in Israel, a big political question that stands is whether grocery stores or other businesses should be open on Saturday (Shabbat, holy day for a large portion of business owners). Currently, the law stands that businesses that are open on Saturday will receive a fine and the responsibility of enforcing that law has been given to the smaller municipalities (from what I understood, some do not bother enforcing the law).
From what I understand (I have not been living in Israel for a while) that argument of both sides is as follows:
For closing businesses on Shabbat: A practicing jewish business-owner may lose in competition to secular businesses that are open on Saturdays (applies largely to grocery stores, such that the law is often referred to as "the grocery-stores law"). As Israel identifies as a Jewish country, it will be immoral to have a practicing jew unable to conduct business because of his belief in Judaism.
Against closing businesses on Shabbat: secular life-style should not be undermined and the government should not enforce laws that are religious, as the country identifies as pluralistic and democratic (freedom of belief and practice).
I am not sure about the enforcement of the law on the Christian and Muslim businesses in Israel (I believe that this is the reason why the law is enforced mainly by municipalities)
As a north-american secular myself, I tend to favor the second argument and it was my very self-sufficient and naive belief that all progressive countries should not enforce laws to conform with a single religion.
However, I have lived in Germany for a while and it just clicked to me that many businesses are not open on Sundays (to the point that it was very difficult to find a place to do groceries on a Sunday since I did not plan well my shopping throughout the week before). I did a small research and figured that there is actually a law enforcing this close-down on Sundays.
I wanted to ask, did the law have any backlash with the secular population of Germany? and if such arose, how was it settled?
Edit: I re-read my second paragraph and realized it may be passive-aggressive. I actually meant: since I became aware of the arguments for/against this law , I realized that is not necessarily an issue that determines a country to be progressive and pluralist, but an issue about relationship of the private with the public.