French MPs vote to ban Islamic full veil in public

[dipsydoodle]

Source: BBC News

France's lower house of parliament has overwhelmingly approved a bill that would ban wearing the Islamic full veil in public.

There were 335 votes for the bill and only one against in the National Assembly.

It must now be ratified by the Senate in September to become law.

The ban has strong public support but critics point out that only a tiny minority of French Muslims wear the full veil.

Read more: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10611398.stm

[MellowDem]

1. Between this and the ban on minarets in Switzerland...

Europe looks a hell of a lot more bigoted than here. Lord knows what would happen if they had anything approaching the diversity of the US. I guess their liberalism doesn't include much tolerance.

[tritsofme]

6. Why shouldn't we be sensitive and respect France's secular culture?

France is a secular nation, something to consider before deciding to live there. I am sure our fundies would not be very happy there either.

[MellowDem]

7. Because they don't respect other cultures....

What is secular culture anyways? I don't think it exists. It's just culture. It's French culture. Secularism doesn't say anything about wearing a head covering. France has a secular government. That's different from having secularism as the "state religion". France is a multicultural (and religious) nation. This law doesn't reflect that.

[jberryhill]

16. French Carmelite Nuns - Behold:

[spanza]

18. Hahah... exactly! nt

[humblebum]

65. Do you remember IT on the Addams family? He/she would've

had to get a haircut.

[dflprincess]

98. The Carmelites are cloistered order and do not go out in public.

Not that I agree with the law just passed, but it does say the ban applies to wearing the veil in public.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

19. secular means not having to do with religion. condemning religion is not necessarily secular

i may not agree with the views of the pope, but i cant make a law demanding catholics never wear a picture of him on their t-shirts. that would not be secular

[krabigirl]

72. You can wear crosses and nun's habits wherever you please there.

[JackRiddler]

108. Secular doesn't come with a dress code, and if you visit Europe and listen for a while...

you'll know this and other proposals are as much due to a Christian reaction to the presence of Muslims as it is the "secular" one it clothes itself as. Which is not to make light of the problems of those women who are indeed subjugated forced to dress and behave a certain way against their will. This ban just ain't the enlightenment at work as claimed.

[and-justice-for-all]

109. I agree...nt

[Tumbulu]

15. So allowing men to boss women into wearing uncomfortable

and ridiculous clothing in public is OK with you?

[jberryhill]

17. Does it apply to these women:

[amandabeech]

25. Their faces are visible, so it is okay.

What the law refers to is the face covering that only allows a slit for the eyes or else a screen for them, as in a burka.

[jberryhill]

29. There are Christian nuns which wear a full face veil

And there are ordinary women who go out in cold weather:



So is this what you call a "screen"?

[uppityperson]

31. From Le Monde (translated), so far, yes. No ski masks.

The text of the keeper, Michele Alliot-Marie , largely inspired by a bill the patron of UMP deputies, Jean-Francois Cope , do not specifically target the full veil but prohibits "concealment of the face."

"During the meeting of the Law Committee, Mr. Glavany said that politicians from left and right, "all agreed on the ban" the full veil, but that there was "a variation on the ways and fields of the ban. "Censorship by the Constitutional Council or the European Court of Human Rights would be a priceless gift is the fundamentalists," said the member of the Hautes-Pyrenees. So in the street. "We can not limit the ban, which can only be general," replied the UMP rapporteur of the bill, Jean-Paul Garraud , who appealed to the left: "It is important to find a general agreement on this fundamental issue after the parliamentary resolution passed unanimously. The general prohibition in the bill is "legally solid," said Garraud.

So yes, it looks like people can't go around wearing ski masks either. I wonder if the wording they finalize will exclude sporting events or such.

[jberryhill]

33. Sporting events? What about just plain cold weather

A woman in a wool cap with an ordinary scarf over her face is showing no more than she would if wearing a niqab.

They are going to ban that in Paris? Fashion law? Really?

There is no way around the fact that it is impossible to do this in other than a specific religious-motivated way.

[uppityperson]

35. We shall see.

[amandabeech]

39. The law may have to be cleaned up for cold weather gear.

However, the bride in your picture is not in public. Under the law, one may cover his or her face in private.

As I'm sure you know, at the end of the wedding ceremony, the groom lifts the veil and kisses the bride in western custom. After that, the veil is turned back and lies over the back.

[jberryhill]

40. And as you know, weddings are often held in public

I have seen weddings in parks in Paris regularly.

Some weeks it is like Vegas - brides and photographers running amok everywhere.

The bridal veil is the direct lineal relation to the niqab.

Time was when all "good" Catholic women covered their heads, to varying degrees, and many still do.

They already banned the hijab in schools, and that is just the next target.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

20. what makes you think some women dont pick their clothing?

[jberryhill]

23. Apparently, Women Need Laws To Tell Them What Not To Wear

...in order to avoid a system that dictates, uh, what they should wear.

The French women's ski team is screwed, however.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

24. i can understand in saudi arabia where women dont have rights, but in france they do

if they wear chador/purdah or whatever, the state doesnt have the right to tell them what not to wear

[uppityperson]

26. These are the 2 that are banned.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

27. banning specific items of clothing by a specific religion is bigotry

i dont see how reposting what is banned makes your argument. i know what a niqab & a burka looks like

[uppityperson]

28. Excuse me. I couldn't tell from your post that you did.

I was trying to give information. Excuse me for not knowing that you knew.

Edited to add this from the article (then off to read french newspapers) "It envisages fines of 150 euros (£119) for women who break the law and 30,000 euros and a one-year jail term for men who force their wives to wear the burka."

[Tumbulu]

87. so what is making a woman wear a burka- sweet? nice? is it your idea

of how a civilized society treats the adult women.

Do you advocate allowing people of one religion to denigrate women because a religious right trumps an individual women's right to be free of awkward and restricting and even dangerous clothing?

So are you anti choice as well? Where does your women bashing end?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

92. umm how is the state of france banning the burka allowing adult women to pick their

clothing?

[Tumbulu]

104. So, you think that the French should allow men to force

women to be covered in a huge sack head to toe when they go out in public?

What is your issue- that to be an open society and since in their own country men can force women to dress this way that they should be allowed to do so in France?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

105. i think neither the state nor men should force women to wear or not wear things

no one is objecting to the second part of the law, where men are penalized for forcing women to wear a certain article of clothing, the objection is the first part when women are not allowed to weat burkas and are penalized for wearing one in public

[MellowDem]

49. Not at all...

but I don't think outlawing head coverings will change the attitude of some men in that culture at all, nor help the women. And as for the women who do it out of their own choice, they are being discriminated against.

[harun]

2. What if someone is disfigured and wants to cover?

[uppityperson]

12. There are ways to cover yourself that aren't burqa or niqab

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

3. Tyranny of the majority

Here, we just gleefully jack up the tax on cigarette smokers. Because we can, and because they are somehow subhuman.

Vive la France.

:hi:

Oh, and Happy Bastille Day Eve.

[MellowDem]

4. I think that analogy doesn't work...

Smokers impose a real cost on society through healthcare costs. Things that impose a cost on society as a whole should be taxed to help pay for that cost. Big Tobacco wishes it could profit off of selling death to people at cheap rates, believe me. Unless you want them to be more like the fast-food industry that is.

The ban on the head covering is nothing more than bald-faced bigotry. And the fact that it is supported so overwhelmingly just goes to show how bigoted of a place France is. It's a culture war thing.

[SunnySong]

46. Once again smokers save medicare money compared to non-smokers...

facts are fun.

[MellowDem]

51. How so? Do you have the source?

It would be interesting to know how they save medicare money. By dying sooner I suppose? And just because they save medicare money doesn't mean they don't impose huge costs on other aspects of the healthcare industry. I have a hard time seeing how smokers are good for the economy or society at large in any way. They're good for Big Tobacco, and that's about it.

[SunnySong]

53. for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.

Vanderbilt University economist Kip Viscusi studied the net costs of smoking-related spending and savings and found that for every pack of cigarettes smoked, the country reaps a net cost savings of 32 cents.

"It looks unpleasant or ghoulish to look at the cost savings as well as the cost increases and it's not a good thing that smoking kills people," Viscusi said in an interview. "But if you're going to follow this health-cost train all the way, you have to take into account all the effects, not just the ones you like in terms of getting your bill passed."


http://skepticalob.blogspot.com/2009/04/keep-smoking-die-early-save-money.html

[MellowDem]

54. The only source there...

linked to an MSNBC article that said that smokers MAY not cost society as a whole, but it didn't provide any solid evidence, it was just a theory based on the fact that smokers die sooner than other people. I suppose I could also make an argument that many smokers die in their working years and that their smoking can hurt their productivity if they develop illnesses from it during their working years. The blog also was talking about how preventative medicine isn't really all that great and seemed to be a rant against universal healthcare. Yet somehow the cost of healthcare in the US, where we have among the least amount of preventative care, is double that of other industrialized nations. The whole blog reads like a right-wing idea of healthcare.

Since there is no solid evidence, I would have to say that IMHO smoking does cost society as a whole, and therefore the taxes on cigarettes are justified.

[SunnySong]

55. I think the sin taxes are fine...

Still the idea that smokers cost xra money is a bit silly if you look at it... everybody dies,

[harun]

13. Good thing some people still know what Liberty means here in the U.S. Guess it

isn't such a big deal in France. Well, at least as long as it is infringing on the Liberty of religious people.

Note: I am a Muslim and don't feel either practices are in the tenants of Islam (covering that much) but I am against infringing on the liberties of those who do wish to wear what they want.

[Heywood J]

83. Can I ask for clarification on the "subhuman" remark?

Are you likening voluntary consumers of a product to marginalized ethnic, racial, national, or other persecuted groups? Thanks!

[OneTenthofOnePercent]

5. I don't know why... but I love when groups of people instigate shit.

Maybe it's because I was the passive-agressive "middle-child". :shrug:
I mean the french must know what they're doing is wrong on a basic level and that muslims will be pissed.
For the record, pissing off muslims requires some darwin-caliber reasoning.

[maxsolomon]

36. pissing off muslims involves the skills required

to shoot fish in a barrel.

[Broke In Jersey]

8. well...since I don't live in France....

I won't be judgemental on a country since I don't know what its like to live there...
But a pretty overwelming vote IMHO.

[Freddie Stubbs]

9. How long until the bombings begin?

[uppityperson]

10. Good.There are picts @ link of different veilings. Only FULL veil (face covered) is banned.

Only the full veil (burka or niqab) are banned. I guess they want to be able to see people's faces which is fine with me.

"The ban has strong public support but critics point out that only a tiny minority of French Muslims wear the full veil."

"The bill would make it illegal to wear garments such as the niqab or burka, which incorporate a full-face veil, anywhere in public."

I can't get theBBC pict links right, edited to take it out. Go to the link and they are there.

Niqab and Burka


Niqab


Burka (burqa)

[jberryhill]

21. What about ordinary cold weather gear?

Have you ever been skiing at Chamonix or Val d'Issere?

[Mosby]

56. The Chador usually covers the face

[jberryhill]

62. As does the Balaclava

My daughter wears one when it is cold.

[uppityperson]

71. Chador can include a face veil.

wiki:
"Historically in urban settings the face would be covered with a long rectangular white veil (ruband, see also niqab) starting below the eyes. (The modern chador does not require this veil.) "

And, The Onion for a not very funny look at it
http://www.theonion.com/articles/woman-in-burqa-condemns-woman-in-chador,169/


The burqa-wearing Salah, who is outraged by Asaad's (far right) immodest dress.

[LiberalFighter]

11. IMO they need to change the language of the law as it may conflict with seasons and medical.

During the winter will it also apply to those that cover their face to reduce the impact of the cold weather?
Those that have an issue with their face condition will they be impacted?

[Tumbulu]

14. Good beginning

then on my wish list is to ban patriarchy in general. But this a bit of a beginning.

[jberryhill]

22. Well, that'll cut down the crowds on the slopes at Val d'Issere

[totodeinhere]

30. Good. It's victory against fundamentalist superstition.

We need to take the lead from the French and knock the fundamentalists down a peg or two in this country as well. This is not about discriminating against Islam. It's about fighting the evils of religious fundamentalism regardless of which religion the fundies adhere to.

[Socal31]

88. Our constitution gets in the way of what you are suggesting.

"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances"


<--- Athiest


France is about as Xenophobic as it gets. I don't agree with men forcing women to be covered due to some magic sky man, but there is no way to prove that they are being forced to do it.

[totodeinhere]

91. The courts have held time and time again that the 1st Amendment has it's limitations.

For instance, polygamy is illegal in every state. Yet some people want to practice polygamy as a part of their religion. The courts have held that the 1st Amendment does not prohibit outlawing polygamy. I can cite several other examples if you want me to.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

32. if france really wanted to emancipate muslim women, this is not the path

they would have picked. how many muslim women were involved in this decision? did they form a committee to advise the politicians. without the input of impacted community i dont for a second believe this was done to improve their lives. it was done to perpetuate islamophobia.

[jberryhill]

34. Every bit as much as the Swiss minaret ban

It's remarkable that a continent which has "hate speech" laws has forgotten how much farther actions go.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

37. i agree. its convenient hate mongering in france, to ignore real economic issues

these nations often are appalled by racism in america, but to date have had little diversity to deal with in their own nations. now that they do, we can see their racism emerge.

[uppityperson]

38. A lot of people/politicians in France are racist against north Africans who have

come to France. It is a big problem.

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

47. this has nothing to do with sharia/taliban or tyranny. nt

[uppityperson]

48. I do not understand how freeing women from full veils is bad.

Please, tell me. I am serious here, do snark elsewhere but I am torn on this issue. I do not like the racism that is so prevalent in France against North Africans, and I also do not like the misogynism that is inherent in forcing women to cover themselves.

So I ask, how is this Islamaphobia, and how is banning full face veils bad?

[jberryhill]

57. Well you seem to have nailed it

What you want is a ban on "forcing women to cover themselves". I doubt you would get any argument on that.

What you seem not to be able to believe is that women DO choose to express their OWN religious identity in various ways.

I would not want to "force women to wear nun's habits" or, really, to "force" women to wear anything in particular.

But what we have here is a law which will fine women for wearing what they CHOOSE to wear.

And yes, by and large they CHOOSE to wear these things. They are not living in a country which would not support them in an effort to divorce their husbands or leave their communities. France is not Saudi Arabia, or similar countries in which the government is going to force them to engage in religious practices or social situations in which they do not want to be.

This is a democratic government telling people, on the subject of a practice tied to their religion, "We know what's better for you."

That is wrong.

But, of course, if your premise is that every woman is "forced" to wear these things, you are not going to see what's wrong with the ban. However, even buying into the idea that they are being forced to wear these things, you are now going to have the government fine them for doing what you believe they were forced to do? Now isn't that just being caught between the Devil and the deep blue sea, eh?

Again, if the law banned the "forced" wearing of any garment, that would be perfectly fine.

Are Jewish men, in your view, "forced" to wear yarmulkes? Have you ever been in the wrong neighborhood in Jerusalem on a Friday evening?

By and large, we accept that Jewish men in the US choose to wear yarmulkes. I have no doubt there are probably families which raise their boys to wear them.

Islamic women interpret the concept of modesty differently, and if they choose to wear these things, why should anyone fine them 150 euro for that?

This law makes absolutely no allowance for a woman's right to wear whatever the hell she wants to wear. We do not, in Western countries, legislate from the assumption that women need to be controlled in this way.

Here are two women, wearing what they choose to wear, in public in the United States:



Now, clearly, whatever one thinks of veils, would you support a law which makes it illegal for a woman to be degraded and subjugated by wearing a collar and a leash? After all, that is certainly degrading, right?

[uppityperson]

58. Well, you know France is a secular socialist country and all. Yup, full face veils=yarmulkes

Did you read that a man who forces his wife to wear full face veil will get more heavily fined?

"by and large they CHOOSE to wear these things. They are not living in a country which would not support them in an effort to divorce their husbands or leave their communities. France is not Saudi Arabia, or similar countries in which the government is going to force them to engage in religious practices or social situations in which they do not want to be."

Of course some women chose to wear a burqa while out in public, even in France. But how many fully veiled women living in France have you talked to? I sincerely doubt it is "by and large" unless they do so to keep the peace at home.

Do you seriously believe that by living in France, women are not forced to stay in marriages or communities or situations that they don't want to? Seriously? Not by the government, true, but by their family or communities.

No, the French government isn't "going to force them to engage in religious practices or social situations in which they do not want to be." Instead the opposite. This is meant to free them, to allow them to not engage in religious practices they don't want to.

[jberryhill]

60. I support the part which fines others for forcing them to wear things

But we are specifically addressing the part which fines them for wearing something.

Let's be really clear about this -

When we are talking about a law which fines women for wearing a veil, we are defining an offense which ONLY women can commit, and for which ONLY women will be punished.

"to allow them to not engage in religious practices they don't want to"

They have that freedom. Whether they break free of social pressures is the problem of women in abusive relationships the world over, and this thing about veils does nothing to change that.

Yes, if we banned ALL religious practices, it would allow women not to engage in religious practices they don't want to. Believe me, I spent time in rural Utah - there are plenty of women in that boat. But we don't ban religious practices across the board based on that kind of calculation.

Again, will it be legal for me, a man, to wear a veil in France if I want to? Yep.

Will it be legal for a woman? Nope.

This is a law that controls what women can do, and fines them for something which harms nobody.

It is simply the larger community saying, "No, you folks in your community can't control women, only WE can!"

Replacing a community imperative that women must behave a certain way, with a state imperative that women must behave a certain way, is simply re-arranging the furniture.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

61. yes, its simply stating white men in france can control what muslim women wear

not muslim men. its hardly saying, women can wear whatever it is they want to wear

i think a lot of white feminists assume women in other cultures think and feel like they do. they dont. its not your place to make these rules for them. had this law come about after muslim women protested the veil and their was input from the affected community, it would be a whole different story.

[jberryhill]

63. Perfect

I always admire your ability to reduce something to a few words that takes me many to express.

[uppityperson]

69. do not specifically target the full veil but prohibits "concealment of the face." Men too.

Translated from Le Monde earlier today.
The text of the keeper, Michele Alliot-Marie , largely inspired by a bill the patron of UMP deputies, Jean-Francois Cope , do not specifically target the full veil but prohibits "concealment of the face."

You wrongly say
"When we are talking about a law which fines women for wearing a veil, we are defining an offense which ONLY women can commit, and for which ONLY women will be punished."
"Again, will it be legal for me, a man, to wear a veil in France if I want to? Yep."

Wrong. Prohibiting full concealment of the face.

[Turborama]

76. A VERY IMPORTANT POINT!

Thanks for the translation.

Confirms the concerns I expressed here: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4463064&mesg_id=4463842

[Violet_Crumble]

80. Did you know that France has a right-wing government that's catering to the extreme RW?

Sorry, but forcing women not to wear something is every bit as bad as forcing them to wear something. You don't know if a woman is being forced to do something or not, and I find it incredibly patriarchal when I see people claiming that they're 'freeing' women from a practice they don't want.

[uppityperson]

86. Sarko is rw, better than Le Pen would have been.

As I have written, I am torn on this. Talking with family in France, the racism in France against North African immigrants is disgusting, as is the oppression of women by extreme fundamentalist Muslims including forcing some who don't want to to be burqa'd.

And no, I am not calling all Muslims extreme fundamentalists, any more than I call all Catholics extreme fundamentalists. Fundies of all sorts seem to thrive on oppressing women, that is all I am saying.

[Gormy Cuss]

64. Do you really think this will free any woman?

Both those who are coerced into full veils and those who believe that they wear full veils as a free choice will become more isolated because they can't be out and about.

I agree with La Lioness. This isn't about women's rights, it's Islamophobia.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

94. thats my fear, that what it will end up doing is further restrict the ability of these women

to be in public

[jberryhill]

66. Another question - do you think any woman in the US was ever coerced to have an abortion?

There'd be a real showstopper of a solution for that, you know.

[uppityperson]

70. Of course. Tell me the showstopper.

[Violet_Crumble]

78. How would you feel if someone said the term 'antisemism' is a bit overused?

Me, I'd suspect there's something as stinky about their motivation as if someone said the same thing about bigotry against Muslims. Being opposed to religious laws (though I notice many anti-Muslim bigots don't speak out about the religious laws of other religions) and the Taliban does NOT mean that one can then turn around and pretend that bigotry and intolerance towards Muslims doesn't exist. In case you hadn't noticed, there's a high level of bigotry against Muslims both in Europe and the US, and anyone who claims to be liberal should be speaking out against it. Do you support the decision by the right-wing French govt? And as a matter of curiosity, do you support the Swiss ban on minarets?

[Name removed]

85. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[mix]

68. exactly nt

[flamingdem]

41. I wonder if the younger full veil wearers are glad

I would be.. maybe they have some leverage to not follow tradition now.

[jberryhill]

43. And they can finally lock up women like this....

http://image.shutterstock.com/display_pic_with_logo/89419/89419,1255179891,3/stock-photo-studio-shot-of-nice-girl-with-yellow-cap-covering-her-face-with-a-scarf-38583304.jpg

[uppityperson]

44. The only one of those that would fall under the rule is the one with a sword

Being out in public with face covered and brandishing a sword might get one into trouble.

[EFerrari]

52. The social support, exactly. Even if the formutalters of this law

are conservative assholes, the law itself will help women.

[jberryhill]

59. It simply "wins the argument" about who gets to dictate what women can and cannot do

I have no problem with a law banning anyone from forcing a woman to wear anything.

I have a problem with a law that fines women for wearing whatever they want to wear.

Those are distinguishable.

Saying this "helps women" is like supporting a law which fines them 10 dollars each time they get punched.

[woo me with science]

74. Bingo. nt

[proteus_lives]

42. Ah, kicking off this year's riot season.

[Violet_Crumble]

79. Huh? What's that supposed to mean? n/t

[EFerrari]

50. Good. I hope it passes the other house, too.

[Alameda]

67. It should be interesting....

I guess this is not legal anymore



or this....

[Turborama]

73. I see this as a security issue. Hooded tops have been banned in the UK since 03

and you can't go into a bank with a motorcycle helmet on.

What about the security concerns if a criminal wearing a burka to hide their identity goes into sensitive areas such as banks or terrorists wearing them to hide their identity in areas where large groups of people congregate such as shopping malls, train stations, cinemas, airports etc etc? What about when they go through immigration, how does that work?

[Violet_Crumble]

81. Hoodies have not been banned in public in the UK...

If they have, I'd like to see that bit of law coz when I was there in 06 there were shitloads of people walking round wearing hoodies. The French law in the OP covers all public areas...

Banks and government buildings where there is a security issue are completely different, but the focus is and always should be on ALL face converings, not just on one particular one...

[Turborama]

84. There have been hoodie bans in the UK

Here you go: http://www.google.com/search?num=50&hl=en&safe=off&rls=com.microsoft:en-US&q=hoodie+ban+uk+&aq=f&aqi=&aql=&oq=&gs_rfai=

This is the 2003 one I was referring to: http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-ban-hooded-tops-from-high-street-539017.html

My concerns that I expressed in the OP still stand. I agree that the focus should be on all face coverings, which the French law is all about - see http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=102&topic_id=4463064&mesg_id=4463810">post #69.

[NuttyFluffers]

75. i wonder how much consideration was given to what French muslim women think.

i have my own guesses...

i feel i can already hear the justification from these would-be legislative heroes, "We have to tell these women what to wear in order to save them and keep them free from their men -- those men telling these women what to wear in order to save them and keep them free from us. Monstrous. We know what's best for them." Good intentions, path to hell, and all that jazz...

[Posteritatis]

77. In practice it'll probably sentence god knows how many of them to house arrest. (nt)

[flamingdem]

82. .. and I think that this points to the problem

sorry but that's just TOO screwed up!

Liberation now I say.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

93. yup. which is a concern they would have heard had they consulted with muslim women

[uppityperson]

95. Where does it say they hadn't consulted with muslim women?

Why do you keep saying this? Do you seriously think they didn't?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

97. where does it say they have? where does it say, that french lawmakers

in conversations with muslim activists created this law?

yes, given the rising tide of islamaphobia, i dont think they have. not to mention, the law penalizes women choosing to wear the burqa which really doesnt in the least bit sound like muslim women were consulted while creating this law.

[uppityperson]

99. Here are interesting takes on it from Guardian, including French Muslims...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/14/tycoon-fund-to-fight-french-niqab-ban

Tycoon plans €1m fund to fight French niqab ban

Businessman Rachid Nekkaz hopes to render new law useless by paying fines for women caught wearing veil in street.
------------------
I like this op-ed article also:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/13/france-burqa-ban-veil
A week ago the parliamentary assembly of the Council of Europe also issued a unanimous resolution condemning a general law, although it stated that legal restrictions may be justified "for security purposes, or where the public or professional functions of individuals require their religious neutrality, or that their face can be seen". It also recognised that "no woman should be compelled to wear religious apparel by her community or family" and that European governments should educate Muslim women on their rights and freedoms.
(clip)
As we know, very few Muslim women wear the burqa or the niqab; many Muslims are in fact opposed to these covering practices; and certain security issues brought up in support of the burqa ban are not totally unfounded (Yassin Omar, the 21/7 bomber allegedly fled London dressed in a burqa; several suicide bombers in Iraq – including a female Belgian convert – were covered; Italy has had a law banning covering your face since Red Brigades and the "years of lead"). The problem with the laws currently being discussed across Europe has a lot to do with the tone used and with the contradictory approach adopted in our countries in matters pertaining to freedom and diversity.
----------------------
Aha, here...
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/13/french-ban-face-veils
The main body representing French Muslims says face-covering veils are not required by Islam and not suitable in France, but it has expressed concern that the law will stigmatise Muslims in general.
-------------------
Finally, "gee, look at the shiny thing" take on it, another op-ed piece.

French burqa debate is a smokescreen
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2010/jul/08/france-burqa-ban-sarkozy-political-distraction
--------------------------------

Again, personally, I can see both sides of the issue. Banning full veils or face coverings including balaclavas, in places where security is an issue is fine with me. The Koran does not demand full face veils, but some cultures do. There is a lot of anti-north African sentiment and bigotry in France (how DARE the people in our colonies dare to come here?). Smokescreen? I can see that also.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

100. have you read what legitimate human rights organizations feel about this?

like say amnesty or the human rights watch?

[uppityperson]

101. No. Have you? If you give me links, I'll be happy to

Did you read those articles and op-ed pieces?

[La Lioness Priyanka]

102. yes, i have. read several of their objections to this law.

[uppityperson]

103. links? I would like to read them. Thanks.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

110. here you go

http://www.amnesty.org/en/news-and-updates/france-votes-ban-full-face-veils-2010-07-13

http://www.hrw.org/english/docs/2004/02/26/france7666.htm

http://www.hrw.org/en/news/2009/11/20/human-rights-watch-submission-national-assembly-information-committee-full-muslim-ve

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/belief/2010/jul/14/forced-into-freedom-france

[uppityperson]

111. Thanks, will go read them.

[western mass]

89. Intolerent religious fanatics crying foul

when they're on the wrong end of intolerence.

Just sayin'.

[JCMach1]

90. Nothing in the Islamic religion that calls for total cover...

The 'burqa' movement essentially was an offshoot of the work of the Islamic Brotherhood (the radical part that was the origins of bin Laden).

Sorry the religious argument does not hold.

So, is it cultural then... well yes. But, when cultural affectations offer legitimate safety concerns a government is free to do what they deem necessary... Of course they are...

I live in a Muslim country and I can tell you that there is almost 0 tolerance for some aspects of clothing that are culturally acceptable in my country...

Jewelry for men, shorts, short sleeves on women and the list goes on... The religious tolerance argument is virtually a non-starter. Other religions are BARELY tolerated here and only under very controlled circumstances.

So yeah, sometimes that openness thing should work both ways.

So why have this:


When this is perfectly acceptable:

[uppityperson]

96. Thank you for your post and pictures.

[woo me with science]

106. Thank you. nt

[Brooklyns_Finest]

107. Great News

France and the french people will have to make some very tough decisions about the direction of their country in the future. This vote was a unanimous one that is supported by the vast majority of their people. This decision should garner the respect of many Arab muslim leaders, considering that in their home country, Western women cannot dress according to their own culture. As an American, I would not presume to tell the french people how to govern their country.