France: Banning the Burqa?

[X]

Well I was just sitting here enjoying my morning (or afternoon really) coffee, flipping through this week's Time, when I came across this little snippet.

Banning the Burqa?

A group of French lawmakers is urging the government to consider outlawing the head-to-toe garment worn by some Muslim women, arguing that it goes against the country's secular traditions. Now, in a June 22 address, President Nicolas Sarkozy has weighed in, calling the burqa a "sign of subservience" that "will not be welcome on French soil." France, home to Western Europe's largest Muslim population, banned headscarves in public schools in 2004

I couldn't believe what I was reading. France has always been a very liberal-minded country, which makes this whole idea come right out of left field to me.

On one hand you have the issue of women's rights. Seeing the burqa as a sign of "subservience" is true in a way. Forcing women to shroud their faces and bodies has become just that in some Middle Eastern countries (not all, mind you).

But on the other hand, what about religious tolerance? This is what has me scratching my head. While the burqa itself is not specifically referenced in the Qur'an, it's always been considered a part of hijab (the modest dress requirements for Muslims).

It seems to me personally that this is absolutely ridiculious. Wearing a burqa in France is COMPLETELY different from being forced to hide yourself under the Islamic laws of other Middle Eastern countries like Iran or (formerly) Afghanistan. French citizens don't fall under the often times tyrannical dress code of those ME countries, so wearing a burqa and following hijab isn't hurting anyone. If they ban the burqa, why aren't other religious accessories being banned? Why not ban the little golden Crucifix necklace that millions of people wear while you're at it? It's the same exact thing.

So, how does everyone feel on this little bit of news? Not sure how many people I'm going to attract with a post about Islamic traditions, but I'll give it a shot.

 

[HBK-aholic]

Thanks for making this, I was going to and forgot. I'm torn on it personally. I think he's incredibly hypocritical, seeings as it's been said they want it banned because it's sign of female opression. But isn't he oppressing their rights by not allowing them to wear something they like, or want to?

On the other hand, I can see why others may think it's a good idea - it's hard to recognise someone who is wearing something like this, which does bring about security implications and there has been claims it's been used for criminal activity. But in that case, shouldn't we ban hooded tops also?

I think it's wrong to make it illegal, but not to ban it in some professions. I'm not sure if you're aware of a case in Britain a couple of years ago, where a primary school teacher was dismissed for refusing to stop wearing this item. I think the school were right in that way. Teaching is a profession where you need to be able to see facial expressions, especially when speaking to young children. It's almost impossible for an adult to understand meaning when the face is covered apart from the eyes. A child would have no chance.

 

[X]

Thanks for making this, I was going to and forgot. I'm torn on it personally. I think he's incredibly hypocritical, seeings as it's been said they want it banned because it's sign of female opression. But isn't he oppressing their rights by not allowing them to wear something they like, or want to?

Exactly.

On the other hand, I can see why others may think it's a good idea - it's hard to recognise someone who is wearing something like this, which does bring about security implications and there has been claims it's been used for criminal activity. But in that case, shouldn't we ban hooded tops also?

I haven't heard about the security angle, but it seems kind of ridiculious to me. Isn't that in a way discriminatory profiling? To think that anyone wearing a burqa is a security risk or that wearing one could mean you're a security risk seems pretty offensive to me.

I think it's wrong to make it illegal, but not to ban it in some professions. I'm not sure if you're aware of a case in Britain a couple of years ago, where a primary school teacher was dismissed for refusing to stop wearing this item. I think the school were right in that way. Teaching is a profession where you need to be able to see facial expressions, especially when speaking to young children. It's almost impossible for an adult to understand meaning when the face is covered apart from the eyes. A child would have no chance.

I agree with you there, because having a job isn't a right, it's a privelage. But banning a clothing item from being worn in your entire COUNTRY just seems a tad bit on the fascist side to me.

Thanks for responding Becca, I'm glad to see atleast SOMEONE on these forums respond to a thread about a topic like this.

 

[klunderbunker]

Forgot to get to this. Sorry X.

I'm against the banning of it. This is the same issue that I had with the "liberation" of Iraq: how is this their business? I am a Christian man and am very proud of it, but I absolutely do not want religion mixing with the government. There is no reason at all to ban something that is a part of religious life. It's almost as if the French government is saying they're more powerful than the Muslim god, which is saying that man is over god. In my mind, these things should either be completely seperate or completely the same, preferably the former. Yes, in the majority of American/French minds it is a women's rights issue, but what bearing should that have? None. I'm completely against this in this form.

 

[Raw Power]

I am totally against its ban - but just so this doesn't become a liberal-hippy-commune, I'll try and throw some other arguments out there.

When you go into a petrol station, motorcyclists are forced to take their helmets of for security reasons. Why should the Burqa be exempt from this - it is equally as restrictive in identifying someone, and so shouldn't it be subject to the same rules?

 

[Dave]

I am totally against its ban - but just so this doesn't become a liberal-hippy-commune, I'll try and throw some other arguments out there.

When you go into a petrol station, motorcyclists are forced to take their helmets of for security reasons. Why should the Burqa be exempt from this - it is equally as restrictive in identifying someone, and so shouldn't it be subject to the same rules?

Tell me you are kidding!

Motorcyclists are not bound by wearing those garments in their religion you fool. That might be the most idiotic thing I have ever heard on here. You're fine but these comments are not.

My personal thoughts on the situation is that I am absolutely apalled and shocked at this. Telling peopl that they are not welcomed somewhere just because of their beliefs is just ridiculous, not to mention intolerant and verging on racist. As you say xFear, France has always been a very tolerant country and to my knowledge have always been very tolerant of other religions etc. The fact that the premiere has come out and said something as audacious as this is a travesty. What a bad example to set and an even worse message to send to your people.

I know that people are a little more defensive now since the war on terror but this just takes it to the extreme. Sarkozy should be dressed down for those comments. I cannot get over this.

 

[Razor]

Sarkozy is flip flopping all over the place. In '04 he writes a book arguing for the further integration of church and state. In 2007, he gave a speech in Rome that touted the virtues of Islam and Christianity.

And, now, he's attacking a central part of the Islamic faith. The Burqa. It's not necessary for Muslim women to wear them, but some choose to. It's like the Yamukah (I so just butchered that spelling, I'm sure) for the Jews. Next he'll be crying because Jews that wear their little hats are demeaning themseves in some new, twisted logic.

It'd be one thing if men were going around in France forcing women to wear Burqas. But France is not full of Islamic extremists. Him banning the Burqa could also be argued as equivalent to him banning dresses. Because they're perpetuating the theory that girls should be modest. So France should ban them.

He's legislating against freedom of choice, not religious oppression. Though that's exactly what he's dressing it up as.

 

[Raw Power]

Tell me you are kidding!

Motorcyclists are not bound by wearing those garments in their religion you fool. That might be the most idiotic thing I have ever heard on here. You're fine but these comments are not.

So what if it's their religion - religion shouldn't be placed on a pedestal that gives it special credence in a secular society. What if a religion bound its members to carry around an Uzi at all times? Should that justify an exception to a well established and well justified law? Religion is not untouchable, and in any case you're misinformed, because the wearing of the Burqa is not "bound" upon Islamic women in the first place - but that's beside the point. What Im saying is just because it has to do with religion doesn't mean it's untouchable, or should be exempt.

 

[Dave]

So what if it's their religion - religion shouldn't be placed on a pedestal that gives it special credence in a secular society. What if a religion bound its members to carry around an Uzi at all times? Should that justify an exception to a well established and well justified law? Religion is not untouchable, and in any case you're misinformed, because the wearing of the Burqa is not "bound" upon Islamic women in the first place - but that's beside the point. What Im saying is just because it has to do with religion doesn't mean it's untouchable, or should be exempt.

You don't understand. People choose to wear this in a show of faith and good practice of their religion but you are lumping them together with criminals. I understand that you think that because we cannot see their face, they are more succeptible of doing crimes and getting away with it but that is just insane. If you actually think that not allowing people to wear something that has strong ties to thier religion because they could be criminals then that is just stupid. I mean come on, you have to be pretty much dead set on your faith if you choose to wear a burqa. Remember, it is a life choice and not a simple one to make. After you've done it, there is no going back. Anyaway, as I was saying. If you choose to wear a burqa then so be it. No one has the right to tell you what you can and can't do, where you can and can't go or what you can say and can't say. Sarkozy is a tool.

 

[Raw Power]

You don't understand. People choose to wear this in a show of faith and good practice of their religion but you are lumping them together with criminals. I understand that you think that because we cannot see their face, they are more succeptible of doing crimes and getting away with it but that is just insane. If you actually think that not allowing people to wear something that has strong ties to thier religion because they could be criminals then that is just stupid. I mean come on, you have to be pretty much dead set on your faith if you choose to wear a burqa. Remember, it is a life choice and not a simple one to make. After you've done it, there is no going back. Anyaway, as I was saying. If you choose to wear a burqa then so be it. No one has the right to tell you what you can and can't do, where you can and can't go or what you can say and can't say. Sarkozy is a tool.

People chose to wear motorcycle helmets to be safe. They're not criminals, probably just people who can't be bothered to take of their helmet when they go to pay for their petrol. But they're not allowed to. I'm not lumping them in with criminals, I'm saying that precautionary measures against crime should apply to everything that covers your face, regardless of whether they're wearing it for religious purposes, road safety, fancy dress or if they're a superhero of some sort. If we have an exception for religion, what next? Are we going to let people wear V for Vendetta masks walk into shops on the grounds of respecting their political beliefs? One rule should apply to everyone - regardless of religion.

 

[X]

So what if it's their religion - religion shouldn't be placed on a pedestal that gives it special credence in a secular society.

How is wearing a clothing item "putting religion on a pedestal"? Are people not allowed to wear what they want anymore?

What if a religion bound its members to carry around an Uzi at all times? Should that justify an exception to a well established and well justified law?

How are those two scenario's in ANY WAY similiar? An uzi can kill someone, a Burqa can't. It's a piece of cloth.

Religion is not untouchable, and in any case you're misinformed, because the wearing of the Burqa is not "bound" upon Islamic women in the first place - but that's beside the point. What Im saying is just because it has to do with religion doesn't mean it's untouchable, or should be exempt.

No, you're apparently the one that's misinformed. The Burqa is a part of hijab, which is a major part of Islam.

The safety angle you're trying to play is absolutely ridiculious. If burqa's are a safety threat, then France better start banning ALL baggy clothing of any kind as well as all dresses, hooded sweatshirts, and basically the majority of clothing that youth's wear. You realize you can safely hide a 12 gauge shotgun inside of a pair of jeans, without anyone noticing it? Should they start banning jeans as well?

 

[Raw Power]

Well, you're not allowed to walk into airport security with a balaclava, motorcycle helmet or Spiderman Mask on, so no, people are not "allowed to wear what they want anymore". i want you to specifically deal with this before I address the other parts - I will do, don't worry - I just want to see a coherent argument to this first - and one that doesn't rely on the weak argument of "it's their religion" - the other items are banned because they conceal identity, regardless of the reason for wearing them. Why should religion, then, be a relevant factor to be taken into consideration if it is not being put on a pedestal?

 

[X]

Well, you're not allowed to walk into airport security with a balaclava, motorcycle helmet or Spiderman Mask on, so no, people are not "allowed to wear what they want anymore".

That is COMPLETELY different from this though. This isn't banning the Burqa from high-security places like airports, this is banning it ACROSS THE COUNTRY. As in, you can't sit alone in your house with all of the doors locked alone and wear a Burqa. How is THAT a security risk?

The comparisons you're using are piss-poor.

i want you to specifically deal with this before I address the other parts - I will do, don't worry - I just want to see a coherent argument to this first - and one that doesn't rely on the weak argument of "it's their religion" - the other items are banned because they conceal identity, regardless of the reason for wearing them. Why should religion, then, be a relevant factor to be taken into consideration if it is not being put on a pedestal?

...BECAUSE WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT A FUCKING AIRPORT OR A BANK. We're talking about the entire COUNTRY. Are motorcycle helmets, balaclava's or Spider-Man masks banned from the ENTIRE COUNTRY? No, they aren't.

If you're going to argue me on this, atleast come up with a halfway decent argument. Because the one you're using is laughable.

 

[Raw Power]

Oh no, I said in my first post that I agreed the ban wasn't a good idea, this is just a different spin on the topic, because otherwise the thread was (as I said) just going to be a bunch of people agreeing with each other. Of course they can wear what they want in normal situations, I was referencing the security issues in specific places as an alternative. It is a different (but linked) issue - sorry for the confusion. What is your view on the Burqa in places of security like an airport or bank then?