Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There is an ongoing discussion in France over the future of the face veil sometimes worn by Muslim women. The country is a secular one, and in 2009 its parliament adopted a formal motion declaring these veils to be "an affront to the nation's values."
In May of 2010, the Council of Ministers unanimously passed a non-binding resolution calling the full-face veil contrary to the laws of the nation.
"Given the damage it produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place."
Women who wear a face veil in public could be fined €150 and/or required to complete a "citizenship course," while men who force women to wear one might face a fine of €15,000 or a year in prison.
While the law has not yet been passed by the country's Senate (and thus is not yet official), its effects are already being felt by French citizens. In mid-May of 2010, an incident of "burqa rage" occurred in which a woman's veil was torn off her face by another woman during an altercation at a local store. Blows were exchanged and both women were arrested in the incident.
In 1958, France adopted a new Constitution, reaffirming the Declaration adopted in 1789, which states in part:
Quote:
France is an indivisible, secular, democratic, and social Republic. It ensures the equality of all citizens before the law, without distinction as to origin, race, or religion. It respects all beliefs.
Without debating the pros/cons of the face veil, itself, is it appropriate for a secular nation to prohibit its citizens from wearing a religious-based article of clothing, based on it supposedly promoting gender inequality?
Which takes precedence -- gender equality or religious freedom?
Is it possible that this measure isn't intended to address gender inequality at all, but is simply a reaction to the (assumed unwanted) presence of Muslims in the country?
Please be respectful with your comments.
Moderator Note: Since starting this thread, I've learned that the term "burqa" is incorrect in this discussion. The debate remains the same, but at issue is the wearing of a face veil. Thanks to the member who provided the correction!
Last edited by Green Irish Eyes; 07-17-2010 at 10:32 PM..
Reason: Corrected terminology and added note.
The legal implications of French courts demanding the end of public cultural wear for some groups is sure to entice further use of the law to ban other cultural affronts to the French public. Some time back French cultural purists demanded the removal of McDonald's and other eateries that were deemed to be a slap in the face of french cuisine, their language is also considered by them to be at risk of foreign contamination, the Burqua flap is only one of many cultural disputes in france. There is no Implicit Koranic demand of it's wear so it is simply a cultural preference, I suspect we'll hear of many more of these culture conflicts whenever East meets West.
There is an ongoing discussion in France over the future of the burqa, the head-to-toe "veil" sometimes worn by Muslim women. The country is a secular one, and in 2009 its parliament adopted a formal motion declaring burqas to be "an affront to the nation's values."
In May of 2010, the Council of Ministers unanimously passed a non-binding resolution calling the full-face veil contrary to the laws of the nation.
"Given the damage it produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place."
Women who wear a burqa in public could be fined €150 and/or required to complete a "citizenship course," while men who force women to wear one might face a fine of €15,000 or a year in prison.
While the law has not yet been passed by the country's Senate (and thus is not yet official), its effects are already being felt by French citizens. In mid-May of 2010, an incident of "burqa rage" occurred in which a woman's veil was torn off her face by another woman during an altercation at a local store. Blows were exchanged and both women were arrested in the incident.
Without debating the pros/cons of the burqa itself, is it appropriate for a secular nation to prohibit its citizens from wearing a religious-based article of clothing, based on it supposedly promoting gender inequality?
Which takes precedence -- gender equality or religious freedom?
Is it possible that this measure isn't intended to address gender inequality at all, but is simply a reaction to the (assumed unwanted) presence of Muslims in the country?
Please be respectful with your comments.
That's all fine and dandy, but if the French governement feels that the Burqua is in part a due hinderance to their society, then so be it. It's their country. Looks like French society as a whole, looks at this issue with more regards to gender inequality.
I tend to agree with kingdom - that if the people decide, then it's the rule of the people. As an individual, however, I don't see how a burqa is offensive or threatening. When outsiders begin to make rules against any religion's outward expressions (Star of Davids, rosary beads, Hindu or Muslim dress, etc.), the people within the group feel persecuted and cling more to their faith. The Holocaust, the Inquisition, the Crusades, even the persecution of American Indians - faiths were not eradicated; they are taken underground where they often (not always) grow stronger. Obviously, this is not on the same level as genocide or war, but I think the effects will be similar. I think that Muslims across the globe will point to it as a sign. A sign of hatred or the evil of the infidels or a fulfilled prophecy or whatever. I think, it's fine if the French people want to pass this, but there will be repercussions.
I believe these actions by the French Government have nothing to do with gender equality or religious freedom. It is an underhanded way of dealing with their immigrations issues. Instead of taking bold action to deny immigration to France based on ideology. Segments of the French government are trying to take an incremental approach to stymie the flood of Muslim extremists by creating a cultural backlash against Muslims more extreme cultural idiosyncrasies. The French are still trying to play both sides of the coin like they have done for the last 150 years. It's the same play that got them into trouble with the Germans. Britain and France are again heading down the same road that led them to being attacked and invaded by Germany. Instead this time the invaders have already infiltrated their countries.
The issues you raise have everything to do with the tide of anti-Islamic fever starting to take hold in European countries. Islamic observers are now the second largest religious group behind Catholics in France. The establishment started getting nervous in the 1980'-1990's about the Islamic wave hitting their shores. Now they are starting to run scarred of the Islamic tsunami building in their own borders.
Again the French and British have waited possibly to long to address issues that will probably lead internal and possibly external armed conflict.
This article gives some explanation as to what the French and other countries are nervous about:
One secular argument against the legal wearing of a burqa in public would be that any person, male or female, could use it as a disguise in the commission of armed robbery. Weapons could be hidden under the long garment, and of course one's face would be masked. Whether this argument has been used in the current French debate I do not know, and whether it is sufficient justification for infringing on religious freedom I also do not know, but I do not think it is a totally trivial argument. I'll bet if you wore a total head and face covering such as a ski mask and walked down a public street, you would be stopped and questioned by police. Whether such public wearing of a ski mask would be actually illegal per se I do not know, and perhaps a poster will enlighten us on that point. On Halloween the exception is widely allowed, although in some public schools masks are not allowed as part of Halloween costums precisely because of security concerns.
I believe these actions by the French Government have nothing to do with gender equality or religious freedom. It is an underhanded way of dealing with their immigrations issues.
I believe you've hit the nail on the head. It's just a continuing legacy from their colonial past. When France lost Algeria, the one thing they certainly never envisioned was a migration of Algerians to France. They just don't like the reality of the situation--they haven't since 1962, and nothing has changed in the intervening 48 years.
Without debating the pros/cons of the burqa itself, is it appropriate for a secular nation to prohibit its citizens from wearing a religious-based article of clothing, based on it supposedly promoting gender inequality?
Which takes precedence -- gender equality or religious freedom?
Is it possible that this measure isn't intended to address gender inequality at all, but is simply a reaction to the (assumed unwanted) presence of Muslims in the country?
Please be respectful with your comments.
No. I believe that there is no sound basis for restricting the use of the burqa, that the claims of "promoting gender inequality" are dubious, and that this issue is a reflection of some level of French nationalism, xenophobia, and racism.
The other argument I have heard is along the lines of "the Muslims should be made to assimilate," as if wearing the burqa is a defiant act of being "not French." I find this to be oppressive as well, that a white Frenchman is free to determine what is "French" by his actions, but an ethnic Muslim Frenchman is not granted those same freedoms.
This is a game that people are getting sucked into. In the same way that we see issues debated in the US. You know it isn't going to fly constitionally but play the card anyway. Play to the lowest form of people while professing the high road. They borrow from the feminists, whom they don't really want to cater to, in order to uphold an extreme hardcore right agenda.
There are only about 2,000 women in France that wear the Burqa. There are approximately 5 million Muslims in France. Many muslim women do not wear it. Most of them are in the lowest income bracket and obviously won't be heard. It is one more show of a bunch of people that sit around and talk about the rights of women but do not want to actually listen to the women themselves. Then want to criminilize "freedom".
I'm no expert on French law and custom, but I would never support this type of action in the United States.
I read an interview with Larry Flynt once, who made good sense. He said, that if you truly love freedom, then the things to protect aren't the things you support, but to support the things you hate.
So, if you don't want your freedom of speech trampled on, then you must support freedom of speech in all forms, even if its the type you don't like.
I want the freedom to not practice any religion, so I fight for the rights of everyone to practice whatever religion they'd like.
That said, if a woman actually doesn't want to wear the burka, there should be some way of her expressing that, without fear of retribution from her husband and family.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
