On Tuesday (Jan. 26), a parliamentary commission delivered a long-awaited report recommending that women be barred from wearing the full veil in public institutions and on public transportation.
The bipartisan panel also recommended that foreigners who wear the full veil be denied French citizenship and residency. But in an indication of the issue’s sensitivity, the panel did not call for banning the garment from private buildings or public spaces such as streets.
“Scandalous practices are being hidden behind the full veil that go against our history,” said French Communist deputy Andre Gerin, the commission’s head, in broadcasted remarks. “… To say no to the full veil, we have decided to wage a political battle.”
I think this is a reasonable decision. I only wish they would go farther and ban the face covering in public altogether. The face covering is not called for in the Koran or the sunna. It is culturally insensitive in Western societies go outside with the face hidden from view. It may be dangerous, too, as no one can tell who is behind that veil.
This is [b]not[/b] a reasonable decision. This same logic could be used to ban a cross necklace — which, incidentally is [i]not[/i] called for in the Bible.
In limited circumstances (testifying in court, ID photos, etc.) this might be warranted but this ruling is far too broad.
No, I don’t think the two are the same, St. Cuervo, and my opposition has nothing to do with what the Koran says about it. That was merely pointing out that this isn’t a requirement of traditional Islam. Whether it’s a requirement or not, in the West we do not go around in public with our faces covered. People wishing to live in the Western or westernized countries should conform to the local culture and uncover their faces in public. Women may wear abayas or hijabs if they choose, so long as they are willing to submit to search for security reasons.
Why did you mention the Koran if not to buttress your claim that these coverings are unnecessary and would be of little consequence to ban? I’m not Muslim, I don’t know what the Koran or the sunna require. (I don’t even know if that matters because there may be other sources of binding tradition for Muslims.) The point is that there are a lot of people who think their religion requires these coverings and I’m not going to second guess them — I’ll take them at their word.
I don’t know about the duty to conform to local culture (presumably this means you think Western women should cover themselves in certain Muslim countries, yes?) but another “western” notion is the right to free exercise of religion (it’s even in our Constitution). The French decision goes way beyond “submitting to a search for security reasons” (which I would support) and tramples on the right of religious people to practice what they believe.
And really, given how slutty Western local culture is now, in many places “conforming to the local culture” means women shouldn’t wear long skirts or teen-age girls shouldn’t cover their upper torso — surely you wouldn’t support banning those things?