I just read that France is passing a law banning full face-covering burquas, and a couple of other European countries are trying to pass similar legislation.
I'm all for the laws and totally on board, but I worry about what will happen to the muslim women when the legislation goes into effect. Thoughts?
I have mixed feelings about it. the Muslim community is large in France but it says only about 2000 women still wear the burqua. It is not required by the Koran, it is their preference. It will be interesting to hear these womens views over the next few months. yes, they must assimilate, but also it is part of their culture. it seems there is more than assimilation they are concerned about.
http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/14/world … tml?src=me
i agree with what some posters are saying. i have no problem with muslim women wearing them when they are just walking around but if they go into stores, government buildings or anywhere that requires that they be visible for identification then they should not be allowed.
my biggest problem with letting them wear the burquas is that the muslim community will then try to have more of their ways made acceptable. shira law is something they are trying to get allowed in canada and i will fight tooth and nail against it.
I think that if the law is worded in a way to be area specific like schools and such for security reasons that it is okay but to be very broad based as in any public venue is a little unfair.
"The bill passed Tuesday bans face-covering veils everywhere that can be considered public space, even in the street, but the Socialists only want it in certain places, such as government buildings, hospitals and public transport."
http://www.comcast.net/articles/news-wo … .the.Veil/
Not that I am defending or disagreeing because I do not know the extent of the situation that has caused France to take such measures but I am curious, are you a christian and if so would you like it if France made it illegal to wear a cross or crucifix? Just curious.
I'm a recovering Catholic, thankyouverymuch. And I really could care less if France banned wearing the cross or crucifix. I mean seriously, it's their country. If they required folks to wear red wellies/boots, what the heck? No skin off my back. I'd just take them off when I got home.
My support of the bill (for what it's worth since I live in the USA) has everything to do with women's rights and nothing at all to do with religion. I mean geez, I lived in Miami for several years, and I would have done backflips if someone had made it a law that the South American immigrants had to learn basic English.
It's not considered to be appropriate in France to wear a crucifix to work or any other social context except church.
Are you sure about that ? It is not that long ago that I was there and cucifix etc was a common adornment, especially old ladies who would often carry a rosary and pray with it in public at a frequency that increases the closer to the end they get.
LOL really ? When was that exactly? LOL
Oh - you mean there is a clash between Katholiks and MUslim religionists at the heart of this dispute?
That would have been about 12 years ago - are you trying to say that kristians don't get on with 'otehres' then - are you sure about that, they tell me they love everyone !!!!
This is about a clash between religions and cultures. Oddly - it started in a swimming pool.
You cannot wear loose shorts in a swimming pool here - health hazard - speedos only - don't know if it is true or not - and some girl wanted to wear a burka into a public pool because of her religious beliefs.
Arguments ensued, women wearing burkas into public buildings as a protest - now they are banned.
Religion? What can you do? Irrational belief systems will always cause fights.
That is why I am against them.
How are loose swimming shorts a health hazard, are you sure this is not another load of religious bo****ks swinging around !
I would dispute that this is any kind of religious issue except that it is being used in the media war on Islam as a racist based law. I have no feelings for Islam or Christians alike except that like many in the forums I think they are following a collection of ancient laws, morals and rules that are not useful in getting humanity past the infantile stage of killing each other en masse.
However - legislating against cultural dress and habits are just pathetic constitutional racism. Anyone can dress this argument with any line and it will have some truth in it, yes 'they' do require women to cover themselves etc etc - but this law does not come from a religious government applying its own laws - this law from France is applying a religious law as a racist act.
I have not been able to determine if there is a health hazard or not. Either way - some bozo in the Government Inc decided that there is and there is a law against wearing loose clothing in public swimming pools which has been around for some time and the issue did start in a swimming pool when a young woman wearing a burka was refused admission.
All you need to do is replace "religion" with "political party" and the whole thing makes sense. We have a largish and unhappy Muslim community that feels unfairly treated and one of the ways they have been putting pressure on the Katholic political party is using women in full burkas to walk into public buildings as a protest.
Now they have what they wanted - the burka is illegal and they can bitch and fight against "discrimination."
Honestly - this is a big mess and going to continue to cause conflict. At the root of it is the competition for souls between the two big political religions. More souls = more power and money. Combined with a nonsensical desire on the part of the Government Inc to combat a shrinking population by importing large numbers of North Africans from the former colonies because they breed heavily.
Each little mayor derives political power in the regional government based on the size of the population in his district. So - they are all building little concrete boxes to house immigrants. But - the immigrants do not want to do the jobs being offered them, the indigenous population does not want to employ them and we have a lot of young Muslim men sitting around smoking spliffs and complaining about how unfair life is.
I hate politics, but stating that this is a "racist" law is far too simplistic.
Nicely summed up and described.
I worked in France for a year nearly 20 years ago and it was clear that the Muslim community were regarded as second class citizens at that time, along with anyone with any skin colour that was not pure white, or mediterranean gold!
I am sure this law is founded in the religious division and I am sure it is overtly political - but all its aims add up to racism still in my opinion.
Well - you have muslims and Muslims. Trust me - the Muslim Sheiks on the Cote D'Azur get treated like the royalty they are and can literally get away with murder - and while the muslim in the street may complain, he gets treated far better in Paris than he ever did in Algiers.
Think it depends what part of France your talking about. Here in Brittany, even talking about religion is considered the height of bad manners.
Well, I would say that they might re-consider traveling to those locations, if they are to remain within their religion.
Or maybe, they will decide for themselves what their own next step will be for their life, instead of letting religion demand what they do.
I'm not sure the ban is enforceable and just another level of government, in many countries, where government is already too involved and that's the problem.
But, I do find your interest in worrying about these women, and the effect it will have. I'm going to leave it at that. Because, everything else gets into religion and this is under social issues.
Grant it, religion is a social issue, but unlike many others.
Well, this really is a political and not religious issue. The French government is trying to protect their secularity and they believe that ALL immigrants should assimilate. From a human rights standpoint, I'm all for this bill--trust me. But I think it sets dangerous precedents over there.
I am not qualified to discuss the political positions of the government of the world, because I find politics, in and of, itself, cheap and deceitful.
Politicians do nothing but lie, when the truth is known or comes out, then only then, do they even attempt to minimize the damage.
When their actions in the first place is what's called into question? I mean, for politicians, America is no better than the rest of the world. None of them are trustworthy anymore and have not been for a long time now.
So, I guess I'll see my way out of this discussion. I do hope you have better luck with other responses.
I think the ban on the facial covering is a good idea. France is a secular state and is expressing its preferences. I don't see it any different from Saudi Arabia that forces all women regardless of what their religion is, to cover up when you live there.
Really good point Flightkeeper and like I said Irohner I really do not know enough about the whole situation to have a serious opinion. My response was and is a knee jerk reaction to the whole issue of religious freedoms.
P.S. What exactly is a recovering Catholic?
Is the motivation for the law banning them a security issue - so people cannot hide themselves or weapons etc?
France hasn't given birth to an enlightened idea since Voltaire
Then, I'm surprised! Would they be after banning scarves I wonder? Hats? bubushkas? hoodies? big sunglasses? no? just "face covering veils" I don't know what the world is coming to. It seems like more of a security thing - like binLaden might be walking around the streets of Paris with one of those veil things on and nobody would know! But, if its against the law, then he can't! Yeah!
Any law that reduces the rights of any individual is a bad law - this is clearly a racist law and should be resisted. All the 'reaons' and words are just feeble justification for attacking Muslim traditions, assimilation works both ways.
Assimilation doesn't work both ways. France is a secular nation. As someone else said, if people go to some Muslim nations they're expected to cover their heads. Assimilation works one way: "When in Rome...."
I can see both sides of it. Yes, this is how France is, but personal freedoms are important too.
So - tit for tat is the way to go ? As far as I am aware Muslim nations are just that, Muslim, and state and church are not separate. Requiring visitors to contain themselves in what they consider to be a modest manner is not the same, they are not multinational, multidenominational places. We like to think we are 'enlightened' and 'they' are ancient savages but the truth is that the whole idea of 'multi' anything is just another denomination. If any 'they' want to wear anything that is customary for them it is not anybody else's business. This is clearly a racist action at base.
their concept of secular translates as laicite which is a strict separation of church and state, but not totally in practice.
Catholic churches are preserved by the state while funding for mosques is not. state employees and teachers observe christian holidays with paid holidays. France is predominately a Catholic country.
secular, yes, but...
Just want to add that the 'burqa'- which is a covering from head to feet, including the face - is NOT enforced anywhere in islam (quran) and is more of a cultural thing than anything else. For e.g. in many muslim countries, it is unheard of for women to wear it at all, whereas in other regions it's worn commonly. Banning it is certainly not the same thing as banning the 'hijab' (head covering only) which would definitely be a much more controversial issue for muslim women.
Good or bad, in any case, muslims living in france or other european counties have little choice but to comply with the laws of the country they've chosen to live in - just as they have strict rules (and expectations) regarding dress for non muslims living in their home countries as well.
The cycle of events in history repeats itself always. When there is no war anywhere, people tend to pay attention to cultural and religious issues. When the argument becomes dispute and dispute becomes a war, these things go to backseat. After the war, the same disputes....
Adolf Hitler's aversion to Jews started when he saw jews staring at German girls at public places. (Mein Kampf). German passion was aroused by him and it became a mass movement against Jews.
I dunno---with all that is going on these days, it seems to me any garment that totally hides one's face/identity makes an excellent hiding spot for a terrorist!
Similarly, many U.S. cities have adopted laws banning loose "hoodies" often worn by gang members to hide their faces while they commit crimes....
I don't see much difference between the two. And before anyone 'jumps' me for making a comparision between law-breaking gangsters and the Muslim culture--don't go there. That's not what I said.
Only that the garment type could be used by criminals masquereding as Muslim women in order to carry out their nefarious plots.
Personally, I see the burqa or jihab or whatever it is as an affront to all women everywhere. It's not so much what it is as what it stands for. About time somebody banned the darn things.
Protestors against the law to ban it are generally women - many women wear it from choice. It stands for things in another culture and it cannot be equated to anything in ours. It is the equivalent of banning people from wearing crucifix, or maybe tee-shirts with zodiac signs, or topless on a European beach - the issue is that it is none of our business and interfering in how others present themselves culturally is based in religious hatred and interference and is inherently racist.
unfortunately the few that feel oppressed by such a rule are over looked in order to provide safety for the many. Having it legal for people to wear masks in public is a dangerous proposition, unfortunately. This is a classic utilitarian law, the greatest good for the greatest many prevails, as it almost always should.
"You can make some people happy some of the time, but you can't make all the people happy all the time." Bob Marley.
by KK Trainor 6 years ago
In some countries face-covering veils are being banned because they can present a security risk and some feel they show a lack of assimilation. Australia is the most recent example. Their proposed law would require a woman to show her face to law enforcement if requested, and if she refused she...
by paarsurrey 2 years ago
Hi friendsIslam spread very peacefully in Europe as can be seen from the following account of the Wikipedia:A major development in the history of Muslim Spain was the dynastic change in 750 in the Arab Caliphate, when an Ummayad Prince escaped the slaughter of his family in Damascus, fled to...
by DannyMaio 7 years ago
Curious if everyone thinks Paris is wrong for banning Muslim Veils? Just seems very odd that you go to another country and refuse to obey their laws? If you do not like it why not go back where you came from? If it was so great why did you leave? looks like another step to enforce Sharia law to me....
by Cheryl 5 years ago
Do you feel that banning guns would make American Communities less dangerous?I feel that it's not the people who have guns legally that are the problem. Taking guns away from registered owners is NOT going to stop crime, it will just make us less able to protect ourselves from the criminals who...
by Denise Handlon 7 years ago
What do you think of the new law in France that will ban the wearing of the Muslim Burqa?
by Kiz 9 years ago
http://www.alternet.org/sex/96366/yet_a … be_ashamedWhat do you folks think of this story? The bias present in it is that it is written based on upholding the Constitution, the right for liberty and the pursuit of happiness, freedom of speech and all those types of things. You...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|