Sarkozy: Burqas Are 'Not Welcome' In France

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - Sarkozy: Burqas Are 'Not Welcome' In France stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

JAMEY KEATEN | 06/22/09 05:32 PM | AP

What's Your Reaction?
Two women, one wearing the niqab, a veil worn by the most conservative Muslims that exposes only a woman's eyes, right, walk side by side, in the Belsunce district of downtown Marseille, central France, Friday June 19, 2009. The French government's spokesman says he favors the creation of a parliamentary commission to study the small but growing trend of burqa wear in France. Luc Chatel says the commission could possibly propose legislation aimed at banning the burqa and other fully covering garments worn by some Muslim women. (AP Photo/Claude Paris)

PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy declared Monday that the Islamic burqa is not welcome in France, branding the face-covering, body-length gown as a symbol of subservience that suppresses women's identities and turns them into "prisoners behind a screen."

But there was a mixed message in the tough words: an admission that the country's long-held principle of ethnic assimilation _ which insists that newcomers shed their traditions and adapt to French culture _ is failing because it doesn't give immigrants and their French-born children a fair chance.

In a high-profile speech to lawmakers in the historic chateau at Versailles, Sarkozy said the head-to-toe Muslim body coverings were in disaccord with French values _ some of the strongest language against burqas from a European leader at a time when some Western officials have been seeking to ease tensions with the Muslim world.

"In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity," Sarkozy said to extended applause of the lawmakers gathered where French kings once held court.

"The burqa is not a religious sign, it's a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement _ I want to say it solemnly," he said. "It will not be welcome on the territory of the French Republic."

Some Muslim leaders interpret the Quran to require that women wear a headscarf, niqab or burqa in the presence of a man who is not their husband or close relative.

France is home to Western Europe's largest population of Muslims, estimated at about 5 million. A small but growing group of French women wear burqas and niqabs, which either cloak the entire body or cover everything but the eyes.

Critics fear the issue of full-body coverings, which only involves a tiny minority of French Muslims, could increase discrimination against all Muslims who display their faith in any way.

Story continues below
advertisement

Dalil Boubakeur, director of the largest Paris mosque, said Sarkozy's push to keep out the burqa is typical of French culture, but worried that he might inflame tensions with Muslims.

The president wanted to show that "the rules of life in France _ and that you can just bring in unjustified traditions," Boubakeur said.

"But you have to hope _ inshallah (God willing) _ that there won't be any ill-feeling, controversies or incidents in this confrontation between an Eastern idea and Western life," Boubakeur told the AP in a telephone interview. "Or then eastern Muslims will have to return to the Orient ... completely unable to assimilate and uncomfortable in a Western system."

But Sarkozy also said immigrants face economic challenges in France, and the government needs to do more to help them.

"Who doesn't see that our integration model isn't working any more?" Sarkozy said. "Instead of producing equality, it produces inequality. Instead of producing cohesion, it creates resentment."

The unemployment rate for immigrants and their French-born children is higher than the national average. Many children of immigrants complain of discrimination, saying they get passed over for jobs because they have "foreign-sounding" names. Frustration of many children of north African and black immigrants boiled over in France's three-week wave of riots in 2005.

The burqa comments made up only a few lines of Sarkozy's speech, which focused on the global economic crisis and a Cabinet shake-up expected to be announced Wednesday. The address was the first by a French president to parliament in 136 years; the last was in 1873 _ before lawmakers banned the practice to protect the separation of powers and keep the president in check. That ban was scrapped last year.

In France, the terms "burqa" and "niqab" often are used interchangeably. A burqa is a full-body covering worn largely in Afghanistan _ with only a mesh screen over the eyes. A niqab is a full-body veil, often black, with slits for the eyes.

Muslim groups and government officials say it's hard to know how many women wear burqas and niqabs in France _ though estimated to be at least in the hundreds. They are far less prevalent than simpler Muslim head scarves.

A 2004 law banned wearing the Muslim head scarf at public schools, along with Jewish skullcaps and large Christian crosses. That law sparked fierce debate both at home and abroad.

In a visit to Normandy earlier this month, President Barack Obama addressed France's headscarf ban, saying countries handle such issues with their national sensitivities and histories in mind, before adding: "I will tell you that in the United States our basic attitude is, is that we're not going to tell people what to wear."

The French government has been divided on a burqa ban. Immigration Minister Eric Besson said a ban would only "create tensions," while junior minister for human rights Rama Yade said she was open to a ban if it was aimed at protecting women forced to wear the burqa.

The burqa has come under criticism in some parts of Europe. In 2003, Sweden's National Agency for Education gave schools the right to ban pupils from wearing burqas if it interferes with the teaching or safety regulations.

The Dutch government last year described the burqa and other clothing that covers the face, as "undesirable," but the ruling coalition stopped short of attempting a ban amid concerns of possible religious discrimination. But the government did say it would work toward banning burqas in schools and among public servants, saying that they stand in the way of good communication.

Later Monday, Sarkozy hosted a state dinner with Sheik Hamad Bin Jassem Al Thani of Qatar _ a Persian Gulf state where women often wear niqabs. The emir was joined by one of his wives, Sheika Mozah, whose head was covered in an elegant turban.

PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy declared Monday that the Islamic burqa is not welcome in France, branding the face-covering, body-length gown as a symbol of subservience that suppresses women'...
PARIS — President Nicolas Sarkozy declared Monday that the Islamic burqa is not welcome in France, branding the face-covering, body-length gown as a symbol of subservience that suppresses women'...
Featured Comments:
riff4u
Banning the burqa will make more women wear it to protest this ridiculous law. If you leave it alone it will die a natural death. Government does not need to get into it.

 Favorite Reply
Have something to say?

Report Corrections
 
Comments
2835
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (34 pages total)

This is really silly. I don't see why it is necessary for any government to step in and legislate what people can or cannot wear. If wearing one of these things happens to be obstructive in some context then the responsible administrators or authorities in that context should be the ones to make the call. The only thing governments should be legislating is the reasonable right of choice of the individual e.g. choice of religion. If women find that wearing a burqa or nijab as required by Islam is demeaning or oppressive, then they should have a choice to leave that religion and that choice should be protected under the law. Equally, the choice of women to follow their chosen religion and wear a burqa should be protected. I think it is arrogant and close-minded for people like Sarkozy to presume to dictate or interpret the wearing of a Burqa as being necessarily a symbol of oppression against women. One man's meat is another man's poison, as they say. Let people have their choice.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 PM on 07/01/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

Private establishments can refuse service to patrons based on appearance, so there are already possible limitations on how the burka is treated just like any other personal decision about appearance that a business owner cares to make. But this proposed commission and the law coming from it extends to a form of dress that would be outlawed anywhere and at any time. Also, the caption beneath that photo above with the article states in part: "Luc Chatel says the commission could possibly propose legislation aimed at banning the burqa and other fully covering garments worn by some Muslim women." In other words, the law will be the thin end of a wedge -- not only would the wearer of a burka face fines and/or imprisonment, but anyone wearing something vaguely considered "other fully covering garments" would also possibly face doing time in the slammer.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 08:56 AM on 06/26/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

Continued:

Sarkozy is pursuing both a wider and a narrower political agenda: wider, because he's the political heir of someone -- Charles de Gaulle -- who saw Arab territories (Algeria) as just a part of an extended greater France. De Gaulle famously said something like: "France extends from Algiers to Cherbourg". Instead, his heir Sarkozy is furious because he's left with a mess where not only does France *not* extend anywhere that wide but France also faces the outcome of colonial mindset and policies to -- namely, populations of Arab descent on French territory. Arab peoples never had to be counted or reckoned with by the French in their colonial arrogance, until independence movements began after the War, but now they are forced to count them and they don't know how to deal with the outcome, except to find ways to incite the indigenous population against another population perceived as "immigrant" and "intruder". Sarkozy goes on appealing to this type of reactionary mentality by looking for symbols of the "outside" nature of the population that reminds about failed colonialism -- and this whips up a popular hatred and vote building. Much like what Putin does with his own native Russian population towards the west, former parts of their "empire" like Georgia and Ukraine, and of course in Chechnya. If Sarkozy could get away with doing toward the Arab populations what Putin does to the muslim Chechnyans, I'm sure he'd try it. But burkas are a good place to start in

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:17 AM on 06/26/2009

Very astute observations concerning Sarkozy's wider intentions.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:33 AM on 07/02/2009
- ForeverXL I'm a Fan of ForeverXL 35 fans permalink
photo

Another question:
Turkey, a secular democratic state with an overwhelming Muslim majority has banned the veil from public institutions when the legendary Ataturk founded the republic. How does that correspondent, xenophobia of ones own culture? Fascist?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:20 PM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

I have noticed that people do not wish to respond to the fact that Turkey and Belgium through laws have banned face covering.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:30 PM on 06/24/2009
photo

As Turkey goes so goes the world! I have heard it many times!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:59 PM on 06/25/2009
- Noland I'm a Fan of Noland 11 fans permalink
photo

Well, call me biased if you wish but who cares. If these people are so wanton of keeping their traditions and such, why relocate to a Western society where such attire is frowned on? They should assimilate to our culture and not us to theirs. Period. Why not allow members of the KKK to walk around in their garb? I don't see the difference.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:09 PM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

Anytime someone brings up this point we are labeled as xenophobic and closet racists.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:31 PM on 06/24/2009

Even without the burqa, Muslim women can dress very modestly. They would still be able to cover most of their body-- they would just need to have their faces showing. In a society with everyone else's faces showing, there's no reason for some to be completely covered. God didn't intend for human beings to be completely covered up for their entire lives. In a modern society where everyone else is visible, it is not unreasonable for the government to ask all people to show their faces in public.
Interesting article here: http://www.mindreign.com/en/mindshare/World-Politics-and-Current-Events/Sarkozy-3a-e2-80-9cMuslim-Burqas-are-Unwelcome-e2-80-9d/sl34045952bp295cpp5pn1.html

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:29 PM on 06/24/2009

If this finally comes down to "God tells us to wear it" versus "God didn't intend for you to wear it", well, it would serve everyone right, I suppose.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:41 PM on 06/24/2009
- truji999 I'm a Fan of truji999 6 fans permalink

Should we then completely ignore women who wear the burqas when they speak to us? Should we not ask them what they want to eat if we are waiting on them at a restaurant? Should we men beat them publicly if they dare look at us or if we see them walking around without a man? Should we not let you attend school? Because from what I know, women in countries where burqa is mandatory have to go through this. I think it is silly for them to be completely covered and shopping around for gucci bags and drinking starbucks. If you really want to wear your burqa with all the rights and responsibilities then don't be hanging out and doing "western" things. Maybe I am just too anti-religion (all of them) to understand why they need to wear this burqa to express their religious freedom.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 06/24/2009

Why is there a need for you as an individual to understand or "get" what other people are doing with their own lives? The most important thing is that people have a right to do whatever they want as long as they do not take away anyone else's right to do what they want. I think one of the greatest problems humanity has is the penchant for individuals to poke their judgmental noses into other people's business and crow about what they should or should not do or what makes sense or not. It is this kind of bigotry that provokes hostility and wars between different groups of people. Understand that there are plenty of people who are different in culture and outlook from you and that the best thing you can do is to realize that you do not understand everything about everyone.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:05 AM on 07/02/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

Sarkozy obviously learned all his lessons in belief in "feminine equality" during all those weeks he chose to spend on vacation with Bush up in New England. It shows. How funny that all the French bigots in this thread that support his proposed ban on the burqa have nothing to say about the reality of the ideology behind all this. Obama at least is consistent in opposing arbitrary bans on attire, and talking about the need for "assimilation" as an excuse for criminalizing the burqa is just a dead giveaway for the reality that some people will eventually want the whole society to wear one uniform of their own choosing. Democracy has nothing to do with the "ethnic purity" of your culture being harmed. Ethnic purity is talk that belongs back in pre-war Germany.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:59 PM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

Ethnic purity is talk that is prevalent in Saudi Arabia and Afghanistan and is encouraged, granted they do not live in a democracy. Neither do we, the US is a republic.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:05 PM on 06/24/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

Ah yes, the usual non sequitur nonsense of an American conservative..."we live in a republic", etc. etc. and blah.

No dear, we're talking about all the supposed "democratic" motives of the French president. The man who is after all president of a country that is nominally 60 percent Catholic still and couldn't even get married in a religious ceremony. Yes, the topic is the proposed criminalization of a form of dress, and the motive of the man and head of government who is proposing it. If you were to be even half-way consistent with your nonsense about the fact that we don't live in a democracy, then you would have to apply it to Sarkozy, who is acting out of nothing but (a) hatred toward the Muslim population inside France, and pandering toward his ideological constituency with whom that type of bigotry plays very well, (b) claiming he is standing up for a woman's rights inside a "democracy", which by your reasoning would be impossible since this is also a "republic". Of course he actually gets to express contempt for religious beliefs in general and massage his wounded ego at the same time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:20 PM on 06/24/2009
- ForeverXL I'm a Fan of ForeverXL 35 fans permalink
photo

palmseast2 wrote:
Save your faux outrage, typical of rightwing nutjobs. It wouldn't surprise me in the least if your family were collaborationists during the Occupation, you certainly have inherited the right kind of mindset.
Posted 12:04 PM on 06/24/2009
------
This is absolutely outrageous.

My grandfather fought for the underground resistance against the Na-.zis, my father is strongly anti-F.-ascism and a leftist pur sang. I am also appalled by the atrocities commited by and ideology of the N.-azis.

This [your uglyness of insinuating n.-azism and f.-ascism] has NOTHING TO DO with my stance and reasoning against the burqa and you are very close minded for labeling everyone in Europe that supports the ban as a r.-acist, x.-enophobe, f.-ascist and whatever negative superlative you can think of. As discussed a trillion times there are reasons why people are against it and you can disagree, but this is just crossing the line.

BTW: Why did you become a fan/follower of me, while you clearly cannot stand me?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:12 PM on 06/24/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

If in fact your grandfather ever faught for the resistance or your father was leftist pur sang, then you have betrayed their ideals and spirit with your type of racism and xenophobia. That is what is absolutely outrageous. You are in solidarity with fascism and xenophobia, pure and simple.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 05:34 PM on 06/25/2009
- ForeverXL I'm a Fan of ForeverXL 35 fans permalink
photo

Why did you become a fan/follower of me? You clearly cannot stand me and equate me with f--ascists and n--azis, while my grandfather fought in the underground resistance against them.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:22 PM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

Palmseast2 must have become a fan/follower based on the avatar of Alain Delon that you use! :)

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:11 AM on 06/25/2009
- palmseast2 I'm a Fan of palmseast2 4 fans permalink

No one is a fan/follower of you. Quelle connerie. You posted at me first above. Save your faux outrage for the next Front National rally you're attending.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:08 PM on 06/25/2009
- EarthToZoey I'm a Fan of EarthToZoey 226 fans permalink
photo

Hypothetical:

If there were a religion where the men expected women to literally be kept on a leash in public, would anyone argue that is acceptable?

I'm honestly not settled on this issue. I see valid points on both side, but my personal objection to the burqa/niqab may be clouding my reasoning skills.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:54 PM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

Amusing analogy. I would totally be for it if women were allowed to keep men on a leash in public. As long as all parties had freely chosen it. Actually that is allowed in the US. At lots of concerts you'll see the bondage people with the slaves on their leashes and on all fours at all time.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:08 PM on 06/24/2009

Maybe you can't see it, but some might find in this abundant evidence that America is in no position to pontificate about culture, behavior or dress to the rest of the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:37 PM on 06/24/2009

Interesting scenario and I'm sure there exist religions that are not too far from what you describe. :) My take is that this would be acceptable provided that all parties to this religion had a choice as to whether to follow this religion or not. As I write in another post, a government should only be protecting and ensuring a citizen's right to choose, as long as a choice the does infringe on another person's rights. If the said women choose to follow this "leash"-based religion, then it should be presumed that they willingly subject themselves to this practice of leashing. It's their choice and it's not harming anyone else's choice. So the government should have no further say about it.

On a not-so-hypothetical note, your example reminded me of the sub-culture of people who are into BDSM, where, I believe, putting people into leashes is one possible activity. Would these people appreciate having anyone else tell them they cannot practice their personal fetishes because of the perception that what they are doing is demeaning?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:19 AM on 07/02/2009
- gugibufugi I'm a Fan of gugibufugi 2 fans permalink
photo

It's absurd! Why don't we ban sunglasses because they cover the eyes! Why don't we outlaw winter scarves and ski masks on the slopes? It's just clothing. What could she be doing under there that's illegal? Think about how insane it is to tell someone it's illegal to wear clothes. Simply absurd. I don't care what it means or what the purpose is. The reasoning behind it may be flawed. But it's an article of clothing. And it's a law. It doesn't compute.

The world is turning backwards on itself. I want to get off.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:18 PM on 06/24/2009

After 2800 comments are you ever a breath of fresh air! Reading this reminded me of the denizens of Dante's Inferno, raising their heads from the swamps of excrement in which they would eternally dwell, amazed to see a living, breathing human among them. Now flee, flee toward the light.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:32 PM on 06/24/2009
- DonCosenza I'm a Fan of DonCosenza 27 fans permalink
photo

There are some women in the Seattle area who wear niqab or similar attire. As long as they're not coerced, and it's not posing a danger to anyone, who cares? The state should only intervene if it has a compelling interest, and not agreeing with someone's cultural traditions is not a compelling interest per se.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:57 PM on 06/24/2009
- EarthToZoey I'm a Fan of EarthToZoey 226 fans permalink
photo

My problem with burqa is the inability to identify the person if need be. I'm all for freedom of expression and religion, but there ARE legitimate limits.

Curious: What do you feel about the flip side -- if a woman or man were to walk in public wearing nothing in the name of religion?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:22 PM on 06/24/2009
- DonCosenza I'm a Fan of DonCosenza 27 fans permalink
photo

When there is a compelling interest to identify someone, then yeah, they should be compelled to identify themselves and show their face if need be. But that's no different than if someone is dressed as a clown, or in a chicken suit. In circumstances where such clothing is an obstacle to safety (like driving, etc.), then of course, it shouldn't be allowed.

As for someone walking around nude, I suppose it would depend on if it was a woman, and if she was hot. ;-)

But seriously, I don't think the analogy is valid. Most of us recognize the right of the state to limit people's ability to walk around nude in public (for any reason). That doesn't mean the state should have complete control over what we wear because some politicians deem certain attire to be culturally repugnant.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:40 PM on 06/24/2009
- truji999 I'm a Fan of truji999 6 fans permalink

To me it is quite simple, when you go to an Islamic country as a western woman, you are required to cover up aren't you? Why is it that we can't demand they remove the cover here without it being some sort of violation of human rights or whatever BS????? By the way, I am not a woman, just a guy with common sense.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:49 PM on 06/24/2009
- DonCosenza I'm a Fan of DonCosenza 27 fans permalink
photo

Depends on the Islamic country. I don't think those countries should be telling people what to wear (within reason) either.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:59 PM on 06/24/2009
- truji999 I'm a Fan of truji999 6 fans permalink

But they do at very significant costs to those who disobey. That is what makes it a very dehumanizing attire if you ask me. Yes you can argue they are not coerced, but if they have been wearing it since they are 4 years old of course this becomes normal to them. I don't like to be alrmist but I would not discard the fact that someday we will see some dude dressing up in one of these and opening fire in a public space. Then you will be singing another tune. Granted, they do that anyway without the robes but I am sure this will happen someday.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:09 PM on 06/24/2009

wow im shocked at the ignorance on this page! I personally know many women and girls who choose to wear the burka, and/or the niqaab. I don't understand how they are having a problem with a woman who chooses to cover her body for herself, and not a problem if a woman wants to walk around the street naked. Religion is a right on all people, Muslim, Christan, jew, etc, and no one should have that right to take it away. To be quite honest, its pure ignorance, and i'm really disgusted.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 PM on 06/24/2009



eecentrix,

You defend people who choose to go around in public endangering everyone they meet because they hold the religious view that they must be totally separated from the world to remain chaste, good, pure, whatever, and if so much as part their face is revealed to some passing man who likely couldn't care less about interacting with them much less ravishing them, then they will be somehow spoiled and sullied and insulted? And you think this is a right ? Not to mention how utterly insulting that is to the rest of us...a.k.a., "infidels"?

(And where, pray tell does a woman or a man for that matter, have the right to walk around the street naked, anyway? Nowhere in Louisiana, that's for sure...)

So, we're ignorant, and you're disgusted?

If your attitude is typical of those in the devout Muslim world, which I sincerely hope it's not, then I have very little hope for peace in the world!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:39 AM on 06/25/2009

Far as I can tell, women wear burkas:

1) in adherence to religious and cultural requirements and "ethnic pride"

2) for protection from criminals

3) to hide their physical attributes or lack thereof---a kind of human and social currency traded by and enjoyed men, at the expense of women and girls.

4) for protection from harsh weather and climates.

Only the religious and cultural ones seem remotely valid for modern Western civilization. However, there's also a long Western Civilization tradition of holding individual adults legally and socially accountable for his or her actions. Women hidden under burkas cannot be held to those standards because they are completely hidden and anonymous.

They can drive down the street, rob a store, bomb an airplane, or abuse a child with full confidence no victims or witnesses will be see their faces and bring them to justice. They have a cloth barrier separating them from the community. It's like their own private portable prison cell. It's treating women as if they weren't full citizens, with the rights AND responsibilities of all citizens, and it's damaging to the community at large.

Wearing a burka in the West shows that one values ethnic pride and religious belief over the good of the larger community.

We don't need more citizens like that. They need to decide where their allegiance lies.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:53 AM on 06/24/2009

and what about a person's induvidual right? Shouldn't a woman have the right to cover herself, just as a woman would want a right not to? And as for "They can drive down the street, rob a store, bomb an airplane, or abuse a child with full confidence no victims or witnesses will be see their faces and bring them to justice," I'm pretty sure that with our advancements, if any person were to do that, they would still be found, if you've seen the news enough, robbers wear masks over there face all the time, and they still have gotten caught. If you actually look at all the people's comments on this topic, they seem to be the ones who are so objective to a Burka, maybe its not that a Muslim woman is the one who secludes herself from society, it is society that does that to her.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:52 PM on 06/24/2009
- EarthToZoey I'm a Fan of EarthToZoey 226 fans permalink
photo

Individual rights aren't always so black and white.

My inability to walk down the street naked is an "infringement" upon my individual right, yet there isn't much of an uproar over that.

But your point is not an invalid one, just pointing out that it is more nuanced that it may seem.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:27 PM on 06/24/2009

Individual rights stop where they infringe upon the rights of others. I don't have the right to endanger my fellow citizens by my choice of clothing, eccentrix.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:15 AM on 06/25/2009
- DonCosenza I'm a Fan of DonCosenza 27 fans permalink
photo

When women in burkas or niqabs start robbing stores, bombing airplanes (really? how are they going to get away?) or abusing children in public and getting away with it, then you might have a point. Then again, a woman wearing such clothing shouldn't be too hard to spot, no?

And why the implication that accountability is unique to Western civilization? If anything, those conservative Muslim countries from which these traditions originate hold women *too* accountable!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:02 PM on 06/24/2009

DonC

Do you ever hear the news? Hello! Have you never heard of a suicide bomber?

That burka has the capability to hide a helluva lot more than feminine attributes and charms.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:13 AM on 06/25/2009
- YewNeekId I'm a Fan of YewNeekId 26 fans permalink

I fully support the French position. Forcing women to dress in burlap sacks is a symbol of the oppression of women by muslims

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:47 AM on 06/24/2009
- abdallac I'm a Fan of abdallac 7 fans permalink

What this lady is wearing is not even a burqa - which is a typle of dress specific only to Afghanistan. She is wearing a niqab - which is a face veil.
A hijab is simply a scarf covering the hair and often neck.
A jilbab/galabaya is any loose flowing dress.

The ignorance on this thread is astonishing. I have many AMERICAN Muslim friends (whose families are observant Muslims) , black and white, who WANTED to wear niqab (face veil) despite the objections of their brothers, fathers, sisters and mothers as being unnecessary. Their families understood that these women chose to do this as a way to experience and express their faith process. They did it for a spell and moved on to simply a hijab.

By the way in some instances niqab can be very elegant and beautiful depending on the wearer, the fabric , the culture and the style - unfortunately, though overwhelmingly it's really probably the most unattractive public dress in the Muslim world - it is very much a cultural thing specific only to certain parts of the world.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:05 AM on 06/24/2009
- cavegal I'm a Fan of cavegal 181 fans permalink
photo

You have made a very interesting point here that some American Muslim women you know tried it "for a spell and moved on to simply a hijab". Why is the hijab less than adequate for certain Muslim women in France? My understanding is that the galabaya and the chador are acceptable in France as well, it is only the Burqa. Why are Muslims in Belgium not outraged or feeling that they are being targeted since it is illegal to cover the face there?

I was in Paris in November of 2005 when the riots were going on and agree that there are definitely some problems, especially when it comes to employment, however with the worldwide economic contraction that is only going to get worse. Everywhere for young people and not just Muslims.

Now as far as Sarkozy, although I agree with his position, I feel the manner in which it was expressed was less than appropriate. He reminds me of a French version of George Bush. Not exactly a compliment coming from me.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:58 PM on 06/24/2009

I agree, abdallac, that some of the Muslim-worn head coverings are very beautiful and elegant (though isn't the whole purpose to eliminate female attractiveness and allure from the equation?). Example---the 1980's National Geographic cover photo of the head-scarved green-eyed Afghan girl.

And, ladies here once commonly wore netted, see-thru face-veils as recently as the 1940's, many Catholic women and girls once wore head coverings on a daily basis, and some Jewish sects require men to cover their heads with a kind of cap. I wear a cap myself whenever I'm in the sun, and a mask when hunting. So, it's not that I object to head-coverings per se.

It's that I object to practices which not only directly endanger the public in the same way any face mask worn in public outside a holiday does, but which can be evidence of abuse and coercion, are not in the best interest of the public at large.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 09:54 AM on 06/25/2009
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Next › Last » (34 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect