Burqa/Niqab: To Ban or Not To Ban, That is The Question

[LayZie G.]

Ladies and Gentlemen, in the midst of the mayhem brought on by usual suspects on the other thread, I had a thought occur to me that led me to believe that we can actually carry about a Doha like debate and this led me to open up this thread, spoilers may not enter.

 

I warn you, I am no Tim Sebastian but I will do everything in my power to see to it that a successful motion is carried out at the end of the session.

 

 

Rules of the debate:

 

This is an open forum but at the same time we have rules that we must abide by. The instructions are simple, give an opening statement, followed by an outline of your argument and if your name is not on the list of those who already declared their intent for the motion or against the motion, please do state with your opening statement if you are for the motion of banning Burqa or you are against the motion.

 

Once you present your argument I will follow up with a series of questions and each one of you will have ample time to respond. Once we have exhausted all avenues of the motion, we will move on to carry the motion, where by the members of the forum will be welcome to cast a vote on one of our polling features on the site.

 

The following people are for the motion of Banning Burqa:-

 

Myself,

Johnny B

Marx

Sulfa on the banning:

if it is related to banning/stopping wearing the niqab in the Public French schools & universities or working places like departments and ministeries, I would keep quite and not argue about it and will call it "Internal Issue", and as a result, the muslim who can't tolerate this banning can leave the country or remove it, coz Niqab is not compulsory in Islam afterall.

Ngonge: agrees w/ Zulfa

 

Stoic:

Where I'm from they do funny business with Burqa

Qalbi Madax Adeyg:

understand banning burqa's, niqaabs, basically anything that conceals one's face especially at schools and government institutions for security reasons

Against the motion are:-

 

Resistance"

no, hence why he has no say on how Muslim dress, only Allah decrees on how one of his flocks dresses or not.

Ms DD:

It is encouraging to me and I do pray for them whenever I see a sister wearing niqab..for most of us dont have to bottle

Strawberry & Cream:

the veil represents a visual assault to western virtues, plain and simple

Torres aka North:

the Burqa, REGARDLESS whether or not you like it or agree with it, is a voluntary (some say obligatory) act of religious observance.

Imtithal:

How can someone be forced to dress in a way they dnt want to? specially in France? ...of course the answer is they chose to.... you ppl just dnt want to admit.

My opening statement:

 

In article one of the French constitution, it clearly states that "France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic". Therefore, there should be no reason why any of you should be surprised of the latest news coming out of the republic regarding of the possible ban of the Burqa, Taliban's most priced possession. With that said, I can't help but address the garment for its worth. What is the purpose of the veil? Who dictates what a women should wear, certainly not the mullah next door but then who? Your brother, husband, your imaam? Who exactly?

 

Furthermore, men for centuries have told woman what to do and what to say, is it so bad that the French are now doing their part to see that their secular state remains in its current state, secular, separate from religious dogma. Is it really so bad?

 

This brings me to the subject of the motion about the Burqa ban in public places. Do you support the ban or are you against the motion. The floor is all yours.

[Goodir]

^So you think Hijab is religious dogma?

 

Someone once said, jahanama shaqo la'aan lama muteysto. Lots of work.

[Ibtisam]

SalamAliekum,

 

I am going to throw my two cents in the mix. Firstly I am against the idea of banning the niqab, hijab and/ or burqa.

 

There are several reasons why I am against this; which in short include;

 

1)In dictating who can wear what and where, a society loses its diversity, basic freedom. More over this is a calculated principle which targets the Muslim community, a minority in itself, and more importantly niqab’s which make up an even smaller minority within the Muslim community.

 

2)There is not valid reason, up till this date, there are no data which suggest that niqabs in France or else where have harmed themselves or others in the process of covering.

 

3)This issue is not about forced covering, women in a society “free society” have chosen to cover, it is insulting to their freedom of choice and intelligence as human beings to undermined them and state that they are not even fit enough mentally or otherwise to dresses themselves or pick what to wear.

 

4)Where does the dictating stop?? In a few years will it be compulsory for women to wear skirts above their ankles or knee, or must their cleavage be hanging out? Should high heels be allowed?? Where do we draw the line in these orders? Can a Jew grow his side burns? Can a Sikh grow his hair and wear a turban? How about a cross? How far does the state go in interfering with peoples values and believes before it becomes too much.

 

5)His whole argument is based on the fact that these women being too eager to obey ( I guess he means their men) and there to reduce the significance and moral worth of these women. I am sure he is not worried about the position of these women in their society and their significance or status, rather it is attention grabbing and an attempt to marginalize the Muslim community in France. IF he was so worried, he will not be trying to victimize them further and insulting them by trying to rule what they could wear. Apparently he as a none-Muslim man, thinks he is in apposition to firstly speak for us as Muslim women, and secondly tell us about how we feel or the position we hold in our society. Apparently he also thinks that we are Muslim women, even in the west cannot or would not have a mouth or the skills to get our point across, instead we need rescuing from him of all people. Apparently we are too ****** to really know what we want, and when push comes to shove, what we want to wear or do is irrelevant, he knows best and it is about time he forces his ways and views on us.

 

 

The number of niqabs in France has grown in the last few years as direct result of the hijab banned, like many others before him, he is starting to find out, that when you push someone far enough into a corner, they will not suddenly be drawn to you and trying to become like you, they instead react strongly back and cling to there ways, leading to a radicalization of some sort. It is the same impact the anti terror laws have had.

 

Banning won’t work, nor is it the ways to go, France can either become a nanny state and dictate to EVERYONE a dress code, put it cannot continue picking on a segment of the society (Niqabs) who make up a small percentage of the national population.

 

Lastly can I say that the real shame is on Muslims who let this get so far, how come none-Muslims feel that they have a say over our religion and can dictate to our women what to wear. HOW they be telling US what the niqab means or stands for, clearly we have failed to educate them and ourselves, and as result we are now seeing the continuous nit pick of our deen.

 

Hardly any Muslims stood up in defence of the headscarf when France banned it, now we have supports of the banned of the veil within the Muslims. As Muslims we refuse to speak or get involve din Politics, and this makes a walk in the park for laws targeting muslims to be passed by people who neither have any knowledge about us, nor make an effort to find out what the Muslims are saying. You do not see the same laws forbidding Jewish or Christian practices so why Muslims? Why is no one ranting about nuns' habits being "degrading"? It is because its easy to kick the Muslims because anaga yaa iss duuleney.

 

Andre Gerin, Communist Party legislator who joined 57 others on Wednesday in signing a motion for a parliamentary committee to study possible legislation to ban the wearing of the traditional costume in public said (Timesonline)

Today ... we are confronted by certain Muslim women wearing the burqa, which covers and fully envelops the body and the head like a moving prison,"….There are more and more of them, not only in big cities, but in rural settings as well ... We have to break the silence of this country's political leaders on the matter."…….

So YES LAzygirl, it is about US and THEM, the veil is being vilified and Muslim women insulted and bullied, all in the name of freeing them.

 

My conclusion is that policy-makers cannot randomly legislate aspects of Muslim observance and life, without doing the same to Catholics, Protestants or Jews, however France 6 million Muslims (as the second largest religion group in France) by failing to breach the gap that creates fear and resentment have allowed themselves to become a walking target.

 

I hope you understand my points, sorry bit rushed.

 

Salamah

[LayZie G.]

Shakina, thank you very much indeed. You said that the "number of niqabs in France have grown in the last few years as a direct result of the hijab ban", do you have any proof to back your claim?

 

Also, you appear to be speaking for the motion instead of against it, because you voiced your concern over the growing number of muslim communities without representation, no legislative body that has their interest at heart. Could this admission on your part hold true for the rest of the crowd because of the wide resistance to assimilation? Would you say this is a fair assessment on your part?

 

In other words, is this self inflicted and not really a west Vs the Muslim as some would have us believing, including you?

[N.O.R.F]

I choose to come from the legal/factual angle. France is breaking her own laws and is going against the very values it has been championing. Secularism and secular states afford it's subjects the luxury of practicing religion. The wearing of the Burqa/Hijab is someone practicing her religion (whether or not you agree with it is really irrelevant here).

 

LG and Co. have so far failed to reconcile Sarkozy's comments with the very same secular values they are advocating in light of my above comments (also posted on the other thread).

 

Surprise me folks

[NASSIR]

I think Muslim women should have the freedom of choice and it shouldn't be banned. The issue, however, is bigger than religion since Islam does not specify the type of cloth or wardrobe women should wear. She is at best to don in a way that squaress off her physical temptations and it can be done in the Somali way, in other cultural way, and as far as her type of Hijab does not come into conflict with religious precepts.

There are Muslims who argue that the Burqa was derived from ancient Byzantine and Sassanid practices. Therefore, it sort of sends an ambiguous message that women is secluded from the view of public life into an unknown private realm.

For those who wear this out-of-mainstream hijab that is now permeating in our society at a faster rate do so out of social pressure. Since we are community oriented, there is a growing perception among the Muslim men that women who wear Niqab, it seems, gain unrestricted access into the self-respecting class of our society and thus she becomes marriagiable. It's not religious precepts that dictates on the kind of Hijaab a woman should wear but a palpable social pressure, which is causing its popularity.

[Fabregas]

I will be strongly opposing this motion on behalf of milksheikh productionz. Be back, inshallah.

[LayZie G.]

North, thank you very much indeed. You are approaching the issue of banning the burqa as you said from legal stand point, which means that you need to be reminded that the French government is protected by their own constitution to keep state and religion separate, hence why they went forward with the bill that banned religious symbols in state operated and state supported schools. In article 2 of the French constitution, it states that "the State should ensure the equality of all its citizens before the law and respect all beliefs". In other words, the law has not been broken by the previous ban and the law should not be broken once this ban is made to law. For this reason, the same faith will be dealt the Burqa from being worn in government buildings and government property, parks, roads, etc and it will not become a violation of its own constitution.(after all they will do their homework and get legal advise to see to it that they dont violate individual freedom, through the expression of religion with the ban)

 

However, if the French do not do anything to combat this growing burqa phenomena from its territory, the majority of its citizens would perhaps view the state to be undermining their secular values and thats dangerous when the beliefs of few should be valued more than the view and values of the majority.

 

North, this ban, once its made to law will ensure that individual liberty and religious freedom are protected for as long as its done in the privacy of one's home. After all is done and said, do you still believe this to be in violation of France's constitution ya north?

 

 

Nassir, THank you very much indeed. Are you not refuting the claim some have made, (north for one) that the garment is viewed by some as being obligatory? Is there any right or wrong answer to the garment in question of whether or not it is a religious duty for a woman to wear the Burqa?

 

Perhaps you could explain to us how this social pressure has come to be viewed by some as a form of voluntarism. Pressure is pressure, wouldn't you agree ?

[N.O.R.F]

LG,

 

Not one to quote a line at a time but needs to be done here.

 

the French government is protected by their own constitution to keep state and religion separate

Agreed

 

why they went forward with the bill that banned religious symbols in state operated and state supported schools

Disagree. Separation of government and church was solely for the 'running' of government and bore no effect on the populace and how they observed their religion. As of today, the freedom to practice one's religion is part of the French constitution with no qualifications on when and where it is deemed acceptable/unaccepta ble.

 

In article 2 of the French constitution, it states that "the State should ensure the equality of all its citizens before the law and respect all beliefs".

The ban on the Hijab and now the Burqa is contrary to the above as it disrespects Islam and Muslims are no longer 'free' to practice their religion.

 

In other words, the law has not been broken by the previous ban and the law should not be broken once this ban is made to law. For this reason, the same faith will be dealt the Burqa from being worn in government buildings and government property, parks, roads, etc and it will not become a violation of its own constitution.(after all they will do their homework and get legal advise to see to it that they dont violate individual freedom, through the expression of religion with the ban)

The constitution should be changed then. A qulification should inserted stating the latest bans. If this doesn't happen the new laws are going against the constitution.

 

However, if the French do not do anything to combat this growing burqa phenomena from its territory, the majority of its citizens would perhaps view the state to be undermining their secular values and thats dangerous when the beliefs of few should be valued more than the view and values of the majority.

Regardless, it will still be viewed as going against what are considered secular values.

 

North, this ban, once its made to law will ensure that individual liberty and religious freedom are protected for as long as its done in the privacy of one's home. After all is done and said, do you still believe this to be in violation of France's constitution ya north?

Like I said, unless the constitution is revised stating France's latest definition of religious freedom it IS a valuation of the same constitution. What the French are doing is dictate 'how' one should observe his/her religion therefore making it 'free' no more

 

Definition of liberty from wordnet.princeton.ed u/perl/webwn:-

 

# autonomy: immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence

# freedom of choice; "liberty of opinion"; "liberty of worship"; "liberty--perfect liberty--to think or feel or do just as one pleases"; "at liberty to choose whatever occupation one wishes"

# personal freedom from servitude or confinement or oppression

# shore leave: leave granted to a sailor or naval officer

# familiarity: an act of undue intimacy

 

Additional reading:

 

The French Hijab Ban

Most reasonable people believe that the rule of law should be concerned with the

administration of justice rather than the implementation of tyranny. The French

government will be breaking its own law if it bans the hijab since :

 

1.

The European Convention on Human Rights has been signed and ratified

by France. ECHR rights including Article 9(i) rights to freedom of religion

and freedom to manifest religion in worship, teaching, practice and

observance, have been incorporated into French domestic law since 1974.

Article 55 of the French Constitution confirms that any new French law

should be in harmony with the ECHR.

 

2.

Wearing the hijab is a voluntary act of religious observance and therefore a

valid expression of Article 9(i) rights. The hijab is not worn as “a religious

symbol” – it is an integral part of the prophetic way of life which has been

embodied by all the true followers of all the true prophets, including

Moses, Jesus and Muhammad, blessings and peace be on them.

 

3.

Wearing the hijab is not a threat to anyone and does not violate anyone

else’s rights and freedoms. In accordance with the ECHR Article 9 rights,

anyone who believes in accordance with their beliefs that wearing the hijab

is not necessary is free not to wear the hijab - and anyone who believes in

accordance with their beliefs that wearing the hijab is necessary for

religious reasons is free to wear the hijab.

 

4.

This means that the proviso in Article 9(ii) is not applicable since banning

the hijab can hardly be viewed as necessary in a democratic society in the

interests of public safety, for the protection of public order, health or

morals, or for the protection of the rights and freedoms of others.

 

5.

Therefore any French legislation banning the hijab constitutes direct

religious discrimination by the organs of state in direct violation of the

ECHR. This is a denial of a fundamental human right which the French

state is in fact under a duty to protect and secure by virtue of Articles 1, 13

and 14 of the ECHR.

 

6.

The same reasoning applies to all members of the European Union who

have signed and ratified the European Convention on Human Rights.

Ahmad Thomson

Barrister

Deputy-Chairman, the Association of Muslim Lawyers (UK)

10th February 2004

 

19th Dhu’l-Hijja 1424

Source

[Salma]

Lazie, u r so smart,, u know how to misquote others and manipulate their statements,,, LOOL girl u should work as a Lawyer or something....

 

This is my complete wording:

 

If Monsieur Sarkozy doesn't like the niqab, well it's up 2 him, no one can fix the way he perceives the niqab. Anyway, if it is related to banning/stopping wearing the niqab in the Public French schools & universities or working places like departments and ministeries, I would keep quite and not argue about it and will call it "Internal Issue", and as a result, the muslim who can't tolerate this banning can leave the country or remove it, coz Niqab is not compulsory in Islam afterall. However, if Sarkozy is referring to banning niqab in whole France (from F to E), including preventing muslim women who are not studying in French schools/ universities and don't work in official departments from wearing the niqab, then I guess he is mad....

 

 

Ya Lazie, wear ur eyeglasses, open ur eyez widely and focus:

 

 

1. I am not supporting banning the Niqab, I am totally against it coz the muslim females who want to wear it are completely free to do so. I said, if France forced the muslim females who are either working in government departments or studying in schools/universities , then there is no option but to remove it in order to live peacefully in France . If, the muslim females can't tolerate/accept such unfair governmental decision and want to remain with niqab, then Ardulallahe wasica ,,, and they can leave France to another place were they can simply wear it.

 

2. BUT, AWAY from universities/schools when it comes to places like parks/ beaches/ restaurants/ the market ..etc, muslim females has the right to wear it.

 

 

P.S> Zulfa is with Z not S. Never misquote my name, d'accord, mademoiselle ??!!

[MAXIMUS POWERS]

How many Muslim women actually love to wear the Burqa? Its aesthetically deplorable. Sarkozy is a stylish man who wants all French women to look like Carla Bruni.

 

I am not anti-Hijab. I just think its not really necessary to wear a Burqa in the West. People who want to wear it should if they chose to but there is no need to force women to wear it. Iman is in the heart not the length of beard or the depth of your burqa.

[Naxar Nugaaleed]

I am totally against this monstrous tora bora tradition that relegates muslim woman to a subservient role of an unpaid house keeper and baby factory. How can you be a functioning member of any society dragging this thing around? How do you get a driving license, work or anything else for that matter. Its one thing to encourage islamic modesty (avoiding tight or see through stuff and cover your head) but another to push upon woman this tool of subjugation, even for ones who suffer from a stockholm syndrome. A lot analysis has been made of why it is that Muslim societies fell behind others and in my opinion the best one is that one that suggest we don't utilize the talent of half of our societies: Woman. Its like asking a one eyed man to compete with one that has both or one ear or one arm or leg or whatever makes sense to you.

[Sophist]

Gaalo iyo Gaalo raac! Walee markii qarbiga la imanaayey tan iyo wax kadan waan filaayey iney imaanayaan!

 

New Ayaan in the making anyone? I hope not

 

S.

[rudy-Diiriye]

waa dawacaad keedi ka tagtey tee nabigana gaadeweeyde!!

 

horaa loo sheegey.

[Geel_jire]

I'm glad you decided to take my advice and try again.

 

you certainly have used more words than your first failed attempt but have you made any more sense ? ... let dissect your second attempt.

 

Originally posted by

LayZie G.:

 

In article one of the French constitution, it clearly states that "France shall be an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic".

 

Therefore, there should be no reason why any of you should be surprised of the latest news coming out of the republic regarding of the possible ban of the Burqa, Taliban's most priced possession.

 

First of all Article I of the french constitution states

Article 1. The Republic and those peoples of the Overseas territories who, by an act of free determination, adopt the present Constitution set up a Community. The Community is founded upon the equality and solidarity of the peoples composing it.

you are probably referring to Article 2 which you redacted (a bit dishonest) but not surprising considering the entire Article not only does not support your argument but blows it out of the water completely

 

Article 2. France is an indivisible, secular, democratic and social Republic. It ensures the equality before the law of all citizens, without distinction of origin, race or

religion. It respects all beliefs.

The national emblem is the tricolour flag, blue, white and red. The national anthem is the 'Marseillaise'. The motto of the Republic is 'Liberty, Equality, Fraternity'. Its principle is government of the people, by the people, for the people.

 

to me that means that they cannot ban the Burkha,Habit, cross, star of david etc.

 

I'm curios how your reading of Article 2. resulted in this

 

Originally posted by

LayZie G.:

 

Therefore, there should be no reason why any of you should be surprised of the latest news coming out of the republic regarding of the possible ban of the Burqa

Originally posted by

LayZie G.:

 

With that said, I can't help but address the garment for its worth. What is the purpose of the veil? Who dictates what a women should wear, certainly not the mullah next door but then who? Your brother, husband, your imaam? Who exactly?

 

What are you trying to say exactly ? the Burkha is forced onto women by their brothers, husbands and imaams ... care to back this claim up ?

 

 

Originally posted by

LayZie G.:

Furthermore, men for centuries have told woman what to do and what to say, is it so bad that the French are now doing their part to see that their

secular state remains in its current state, secular, separate from religious dogma.

Is it really so bad?

 

Like North I'm beginning to think you have no clue what a 'secular state' actually means.

 

This is the dictionary definition:

 

"A secular state is a concept of secularism, whereby a state or country is officially neutral in matters of religion, neither supporting nor opposing any particular religious beliefs or practices. A secular state also treats all its citizens equally regardless of religion, and does not give preferential treatment for a citizen from a particular religion over other religions. Most often it has no state religion or equivalent."

 

If im not mistaken by this "banning of the Burkha" crusade Sorkazy is actually involving the government in private individual religious affairs, which is directly anti-thetical to the whole 'secular state' thing no ?

 

 

Originally posted by

LayZie G.:

 

This brings me to the subject of the motion about the Burqa ban in public places. Do you support the ban or are you against the motion. The floor is all yours.

I'm completely against it, because it is a impinging on personal liberty and freedom of the individual by dictating what they can or cannot wear.

 

abti you have managed to use more words and make even less sense than your first try.

 

now are you ready to address my points .. or are going to take your ball go home ? like you did in the other thread