Why not ban full veil, says French government spokesman

  • Thread starter Thread starter Uthman
  • Start date Start date
  • Replies Replies 234
  • Views Views 19K
Status
Not open for further replies.
Not in America, that would be a classic 1st amendment violation. An employer can make the woman tuck in her hijab so it want get caught on anything and mandate that it match the uniform, other than that they cant fire her legally.
What about the niqab?
 
No such ban is necessary. All religious symbols are already banned in schools and probably other public places as well and private businesses have the right to dismiss women for wearing the regular veil.

Exactly.
 
Why not ban full veil, says French government spokesman
because women, especially not Muslim women, aren't fresh prices of meat in the butchers shop for some disgusting and nauseating dog to come and drool his disgusting and nauseating drool all over?

The Communist MP who led the call this week for an inquiry, André Gerin, denounced the garments as walking prisons. In his request, backed by 57 other MPs, mostly from Nicolas Sarkozy's centre-right UMP party,
says the one whose intolerant...
 
Theres actually a difference between 2 countries - Saudi arabia isnt found on the principles of liberty, Fratenity and Freedom - its actually found on the Saud Family - France is being hypocritical by its own values.

So if a country is founded on injustice, it's OK for them to be unjust because they're being consistent?

secodanly the way a muslim defines freedom (to practice his/her own religion freely) and the way the French define freedom are 2 very different things.

How do you define freedom? Do you have one definition in France and another one in SA?

It sounds a whole lot like you agree that France has to accommodate Muslims in a way that non-Muslims need not be accommodated in Saudi Arabia, and we have to accept that it is just simply because they have different rules. Have you no opinion of which is right?

Thats way the French should change there principles if they want to impose there own views on other people - its simple.

They could, I guess. But if they changed their constitution to define religious freedom as the freedom to worship only in your homes, would this make such a practice suddenly just?
 
What about the niqab?



I would assume the same would apply for niqab, unless for example in the medical feild or food prep it might be a question of infection control and sanitation, but wearing a surgical mask I think would be an acceptable alternative. I have already had one incident myself in January at the mall when some teenage witch came up from behind and tried to take my hijab off my head. I dare anybody to try it again, next time I wont be so nice.
 
Last edited:
Veiled threats: row over Islamic dress opens bitter divisions in France

In the northern Paris suburb of Saint-Denis, with its busy market, fast-food joints and bargain clothes shops, Angelica Winterstein only goes out once a week – and only if she really has to.

"I feel like I'm being judged walking down the street. People tut or spit. In a smart area west of Paris, one man stopped his car and shouted: 'Why don't you go back to where you came from?' But I'm French, I couldn't be more French," said the 23-year-old, who was born and raised in bourgeois Versailles.

Once a fervent Catholic, Winterstein converted to Islam at 18. Six months ago she began wearing a loose, floor-length black jilbab, showing only her expertly made-up face from eyebrows to chin. She now wants to add the final piece, and wear full niqab, covering her face and leaving just her eyes visible.

"But this week, after Sarkozy announced that full veils weren't welcome in France, things have got really difficult," she said. "As it is, people sometimes shout 'Ninja' at me. It's impossible to find a job – I'm a qualified childminder and get plenty of interviews because of my CV, but when people see me in person, they don't call back. It's difficult in this country, there's a certain mood in the air. I don't feel comfortable walking around."

This week, France plunged into another bitterly divisive national debate on Muslim women's clothing, reopening questions on how the country with western Europe's biggest Muslim community integrates Islam into its secular republic. A parliamentary inquiry is to examine how many women in France wear full Islamic veils or niqab before a decision is made over possibly banning such garments in the street. More than 50 MPs from across the political spectrum have called for restrictions on full veils, called "degrading", "submissive" and "coffins" by politicians. Yet the actual numbers of niqab wearers in France appears to be so small that TV news crews have struggled to find individuals to film. Muslim groups estimate that there are perhaps only a few hundred women fully covering themselves out of a Muslim population of over 5 million – often young French women, many of them converts.

That such a marginal issue can suddenly take centre stage in a country otherwise struggling with major issues of mass unemployment and protest over public sector reform shows how powerful the symbol of the headscarf and veil remains in France.

Human rights groups warned this week that the row over niqabs risks exacerbating the growing problem of discrimination against women wearing standard Muslim headscarves. Five years on from the heated national debate over France's 2004 law banning headscarves and all conspicuous religious symbols from state schools, there has been an increase in general discrimination against adult women who cover their heads.

"Women in standard headscarves have been refused access to voting booths, driving lessons, barred from their own wedding ceremonies at town halls, ejected from university classes and in one case, a woman in a bank was not allowed to withdraw cash from her own account at the counter. This is clear discrimination by people who wrongly use the school law to claim that France is a secular state that doesn't allow headscarves in public places. It's utterly illegal and the courts rule in our favour," said Renee Le Mignot, co-president of the Movement Against Racism and for Friendship Between Peoples. "Our fear is that the current niqab debate is going to make this general discrimination worse."

Samy Debah, a history teacher who heads France's Collective against Islamophobia, said 80% of discrimination cases reported to his group involved women wearing standard headscarves.

He had rarely seen any instances of women wearing niqabs, even in the ethnically mixed north Paris suburb where he lives. "From our figures, the biggest discriminator against Muslim women is the state and state officials," he said. "What people have to understand is that the concept of French secularism is not anti-religion per se, it is supposed to be about respecting all religions."

The current initiative against full Islamic veils began in Venissieux, a leftwing area on the industrial outskirts of Lyon. Its communist mayor, André Gerin, led proposals for a clampdown, saying he saw increasing numbers of full veils in his constituency.

"I call them walking prisons, phantoms that go past us, it's that visual aspect that's an issue," Gerin said. "There's a malaise in the general population faced with the proliferation of these garments. I sense that on the part of Muslims, too."

Gerin said women in niqab posed "concrete problems" in daily life. "We had an issue in a school where a headteacher at the end of the school day didn't want to hand back two children to a phantom," he said. Gerin has refused to conduct the town-hall wedding of a woman wearing niqab. Another woman wearing a full veil was refused social housing by a landlord in the area. The mayor said that when women haven't removed their face covering, it has resulted in conflict with public officials who often felt insulted or under attack. But he denied stigmatising the wider Muslim population.

"The current situation [where women wear niqabs] is stigmatising Muslims," he said. His aim was to "establish a debate with the Muslim community, integrate Islam properly into French life" and expose fundamentalist practices.

Two previous calls for a law restricting full veils have been left to gather dust. This time, the debate is gathering force. There are divisions in the government itself – the feminist Muslim junior minister, Fadela Amara, supports a niqab ban while the immigration minister, Eric Besson, warns it would create unnecessary tension.

Horia Demiati, 30, a French financier who wears a standard headscarf with her business suits, said: "I really fear an increase in hatred." She recently won a discrimination case after she and her family, including a six-month baby, were refused access to a rural holiday apartment they had booked in the Vosges. The woman who refused them argued that she was a secular feminist and didn't want to see the headscarf, "an instrument of women's submission and oppression", in her establishment.

Demiati said: "This niqab debate is such a marginal issue, yet it risks detracting from the real issues in France."

Source:The Guardian

 
If this happens in France I have a feeling there will be a few more that follow suit and I wouldn't rule out the UK in doing so either...
 
Blackpool said:
If this happens in France I have a feeling there will be a few more that follow suit and I wouldn't rule out the UK in doing so either...
Nah, we already have the expenses scandal, the Iranian government and Michael Jackson's passing so close to his planned performances in London to distract us from the economy.
 
Last edited:
If this happens in France I have a feeling there will be a few more that follow suit and I wouldn't rule out the UK in doing so either...
I'm not so sure. The UK government has a more tolerant attitude towards the Islam than France does. France has already outlawed the Hijab in public places...
 
Burka & women’s liberation

Denying women the option to veil themselves may provide France with a vision of a progressive Islam, but it will compromise the reality of Muslims in Europe.

From Fata to France, the question of what differentiates moderate from extremist Islam is being settled on the bodies of women. Using women as a litmus test for whether a certain interpretation of religion is ‘acceptable’ is one of the worst things that can happen to women’s rights.

This is especially true if the indicator is women’s clothing, as nothing can be a more superficial gauge of either emancipation or religiosity. Indeed, there can be no doubt that the struggle for women’s liberation and religious moderation is a long-term effort that will require systemic social change. What, then, is all the fuss about?

Last week, French President Nicolas Sarkozy ruffled many a headscarf when he lashed out against burkas. He framed his remarks as an issue of women’s rights, rather than religious tolerance. By describing burkas as a sign of ‘subjugation’ and ‘submission’ that deprive women of their identity and hinder social participation, he cast the garments as a cultural tool of male oppression (rather than a religious expression). Seeing is believing, his simple logic suggested: if a woman looks liberated, she must be liberated.

Now, a national commission backed by 58 members of parliament, many of whom are from Sarkozy’s rightwing UMP party, are conducting a ‘burka probe’. If investigations suggest that women are being coerced into covering themselves, burkas will be banned in France to protect women and ensure their equality.

The problem is, Sarkozy’s women’s lib argument holds no water. The 2004 ruling that banned ‘ostentatious’ religious symbols — including headscarves — from French classrooms forced many Muslim girls to leave the public secular school system and enroll in Islamic schools where they could continue wearing hijabs. A ban on burkas will similarly confine women who veil themselves to their homes. Rather than boost social participation, integration and equality, French legislation on Muslim women’s clothing will further marginalise them. In a secular state such as France, where human rights are privileged, this outcome should be seen as counter-productive.

One is also discomfited by Sarkozy’s throwback to colonial posturing. His brash attempt to ‘save’ Muslim women from their barbaric, overbearing husbands and fathers is paternalistic, eerily recalling the we-meant-best rhetoric that stemmed from the ‘white man’s burden’.

Many have also pointed out that Sarkozy’s absolutist rhetoric resembles the very extremism it aims to counter. In Saudi Arabia, Iran and Afghanistan, women have been forced to wear burkas — a practice that has been widely denounced. But how can its flipside — forcing women not to wear burkas — be any better? The argument that the state cannot tell a woman how to dress is equally valid in the Muslim world and the West.

As such, everything about Sarkozy’s burka-bashing seems ridiculous. Given that only about 100,000 women out of France’s total population of five million Muslims wear burkas, it also seems unnecessary. Can such a minority merit the attention of the French parliament when the country as a whole is still wrangling with the problem of how to integrate Muslims into mainstream French society? Is it possible that the feisty Frenchman’s burka fervour is really directed at something else?

Soon after Sarkozy condemned burkas, Mohammed Moussaoui, the president of France’s Representative Muslim Council, expressed support for the president’s stance and declared that his group was investing in promoting a moderate version of Islam. Moussaoui’s comments indicated that Sarkozy’s decision to raise this point had less to do with the social politics of the burka per se, and more to do with which western power decides what interpretation of Islam will be acceptable to the West.

It is no coincidence that Sarkozy spoke out against burkas soon after US President Barack Obama delivered his historic address in Cairo. In that speech, Obama hit out at European countries that are dictating how Muslim women should dress and warned against disguising “hostility towards any religion behind the pretence of liberalism”. Sarkozy’s critique of the burka, then, is a way to push back against Obama, making it clear that France will deal with Islam on its own terms, not America’s.

Indeed, the burka issue gets at the heart of a longstanding tussle between the US and France. Writing in The Christian Science Monitor, Howard LaFranchi points out that the difference between the two countries’ approaches to notions of freedom 'comes down to one of ‘freedom to’ versus 'freedom from'. While the US defends a woman’s right to dress as she likes, France wants to ensure women’s freedom from coercion and subjugation. In the former approach, individual liberty is elevated; in the latter, the state as protector bears the burden of responsibility.
This arm-wrestling between the US and France over concepts of freedom is centuries old, and is now taking place on the backs of Muslim women because the greatest challenge the West currently faces is its engagement with Islam.

Whichever nation sets the boundaries for what constitutes ‘moderate’ Islam will emerge victorious, at least for now.Of course, this could also be a case of petty personal politics. Sarkozy and Obama are both charismatic, ‘rule’-breaking, superstars with a penchant for the limelight. At the G20, Nato and EU summits earlier this year, Sarkozy was publicly perturbed at being overshadowed by Obama — he even went so far as to declare that the US president was inexperienced and thus not 'up to standard'. Post-Cairo, France’s favourite troubleshooter probably wants to ensure that he is not eclipsed by Obama.

It would be best if western powers left Muslim women’s clothes out of their lovers’ spats. Denying women the option to veil themselves may provide France with a vision of a progressive Islam, but it will compromise the reality of Muslims in Europe. After all, banning burkas does not address the real issues that continue to hinder the progress of Muslim women the world over — access to education, political representation, job opportunities, vulnerability to domestic violence and more. In the near future, when military operations in Pakistan’s tribal and northwestern areas end, it will be time to invest in social and economic development. International donors have already implied that bolstering women’s rights while respecting tribal mores will be of utmost importance.

One hopes that the Pakistani government can learn a lesson from the fallacies of the French and instead take a page from Obama’s Cairo address. Let the chador be. Instead, emphasise female literacy, fiscal independence through micro-finance, equitable healthcare and freedom of movement. Looking the part is the least important aspect of being liberated.

[email protected]


Source
 
To see if you believe in freedom, or just Islam.

I believe that women should be free to choose hijab or not, whether in France or Saudi Arabia. But I'm guessing that you, like a lot of Muslims, pull out the word "freedom" when it suits you, but you don't actually believe in it.


So preventing women from traveling freely and forcibly segregating men and women reduces the number of rapes that occur. So what? If the frequency of rape is how you measure the success of social policy, then I have an idea: there will be even fewer rapes if all women are imprisoned.

Is this a joke? Freedom or Islam? This is exactly the type of ridiculous rhetoric that has most of the "Muslim world" infuriated with the arrogant attitude of the west.

Let me tell you about freedom. Freedom is not being stared at by guys and being reduced to an object. Freedom is not having to worry about how much makeup you have to put on to look good in publin infront of people you dont even know.

That is freedom. Women are trapped in a prison in the "free west" and their status on the media outlets as sex objects demonstrates it perfectly.

Segregating the sexes leads to better respect between them and less of a chance for people to have extramarital relations. The guys at my Muslim Student Association show more respect for women than you ilk ever will.

So the next time you pull out utter crap like this, turn on the television or pic up a magazine and see that the only thing you guys have "liberated" women from is the need to cover more than 1% of their body.
 
Last edited:
Is this a joke? Freedom or Islam? This is exactly the type of ridiculous rhetoric that has most of the "Muslim world" infuriated with the arrogant attitude of the west.

Let me tell you about freedom. Freedom is not being stared at by guys and being reduced to an object. Freedom is not having to worry about how much makeup you have to put on to look good in publin infront of people you dont even know.

That is freedom. Women are trapped in a prison in the "free west" and their status on the media outlets as sex objects demonstrates it perfectly.

Segregating the sexes leads to better respect between them and less of a chance for people to have extramarital relations. The guys at my Muslim Student Association show more respect for women than you ilk ever will.

So the next time you pull out utter crap like this, turn on the television or pic up a magazine and see that the only thing you guys have "liberated" women from is the need to cover more than 1% of their body.

Also some girls in school, are even pressured to have sex, from what I learnt in Sociology. Apparently it is seen as cool.

How sad...
 
Technically I'm not in favor of limiting rights or imposing dresscodes but certain limits should be set, you can't walk around naked and imho you shulnd't be allowed to walk around in a burka, its two sides of the same coin, extremes, extreme religiosity is not good and the state should limit it, even by limiting niqab. sure a ban would confine a couple of women into their houses but it may also detter other from wearing it, creating the room for a more moderate Islam as the article states. It could have an adverse effect though, Muslims may view it as another form of repression.
 
Technically I'm not in favor of limiting rights or imposing dresscodes but certain limits should be set, you can't walk around naked and imho you shulnd't be allowed to walk around in a burka, its two sides of the same coin, extremes, extreme religiosity is not good and the state should limit it, even by limiting niqab. sure a ban would confine a couple of women into their houses but it may also detter other from wearing it, creating the room for a more moderate Islam as the article states. It could have an adverse effect though, Muslims may view it as another form of repression.

What twisted logic! A burka is extreme religiosity? If it is not prophibited by Islam and it doesn't violate it, how is it any mor eextreme than othe rpermissible things?

Moreover, what the hell does "extreme religiousity" mean? My grandpa is "extremely" religious. What bands would you put on him?

Moreover, the idea that the other extreme of some thing dangerous is also dangerous is ridiculous.

Extreme----------------------Extreme

Naked (ban!!!)------------------------Burka (ban!!!)
Hitting someone with a bat (ban!!!)----------Hitting with a pillow (ban!!!!)

WTH???
 
To be honest, this shows to me another sign of the incompatibility between Islam (in it's practised form) and the West. They're just too different and when they're put together, conflict is inevitable.
 
It's extreme, at least from the western point of view, the same as refusing to shake hands with the opposite sex for instance, if your grandpa is like that, he's extreme. The former UK communities minister Blears refused to attend an islam meeting because one of the participants wouldn't shake her hand. I think she did the right thing.
We don't need extreme Muslims here (Europe). Go to Yemen or the US.
 
Uthmān;1178299 said:
To be honest, this shows to me another sign of the incompatibility between Islam (in it's practised form) and the West. They're just too different and when they're put together, conflict is inevitable.
Exactly. People should face the fact that multiculturalism does not mean allowing other cultures to fully practice their culture just as if they were home.
 
Uthmān;1178299 said:
To be honest, this shows to me another sign of the incompatibility between Islam (in it's practised form) and the West. They're just too different and when they're put together, conflict is inevitable.
Hey, Mr Mod.:D
 
Technically I'm not in favor of limiting rights or imposing dresscodes but certain limits should be set, you can't walk around naked and imho you shulnd't be allowed to walk around in a burka, its two sides of the same coin, extremes, extreme religiosity is not good and the state should limit it, even by limiting niqab. sure a ban would confine a couple of women into their houses but it may also detter other from wearing it, creating the room for a more moderate Islam as the article states. It could have an adverse effect though, Muslims may view it as another form of repression.

no such thing...you mean a modern edited to suit the west islam.
 
no such thing...you mean a modern edited to suit the west islam.
Yes.
I don't want a new branch of Islam to be created in europe, just less practicing Muslims, more secular Muslims etc. I want the same for christians, Jews, Hinuds or any other religion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar Threads

Back
Top