France Bans The Burqa

Post Reply New Topic

Why, the law, of course. That's a reason that documents like Déclaration des droits de l'Homme et du Citoyen and fora like the European Court of Human Rights exist.

At its most fundamental, liberty is the freedom of the subject to act without interference from the state. Now, of course that freedom is subject to limits, but governments ability to limit that freedom ought properly to be constrained. Constitutions, human rights codes and courts all serve a role in finding the balance between the interests of the state and the citizen.



Of course not--but it does give your wife the right to decide for herself whether or not to go out in public and under what conditions.



When have I ever suggested otherwise? I oppose this law--but I have always advocated that the proper ways to dispose of an illegal or unjust statute is through the courts and through the ballot box.

The will of the majority cannot ever be used as a justification to tread on the civil liberties of the individual, unless the infringements of those civil liberties can be demonstrably justified in a free and democratic society.



Saying that it is dangerous does not make it so.

A peace officer is free to exercise jurisdiction over any individual within the limits of public law. No one (except you) has ever suggested that a woman wearing a burqa cannot be required to identify herself to a peace officer.

Your suggestion is a canard. There is nothing in people wearing whatever clothing they choose--including face coverings--that impedes the police in any way.



At what point did "higher status" ever enter the picture? As far as I am concerned, wearing the burqa or the chador is nothing more that exercising exactly the same right that I have, or that any other person has to freedom of expression and self-identity.



Yet another canard. The possibility of criminality does not justify the restriction of freedoms. Terrorists use car bombs--do we ban automobiles? Firearms are used in the commission of offences--do we ban firearms? If the goal of legislation is to combat terrorism or to combat crime, then the legislation should address those issues. But this legislation does not--it targets religious face coverings alone.

If a police officer demands the opportunity to identify a woman in a burqa, then she is in no position to refuse--because at that point the exercise of her liberties runs contrary to a legitimate exercise of the state's interest.

(As for driving, assuming that a woman who wore a face covering were to avail herself of the privilege of obtaining a driving license, she would be in no position to exercise that privilege outside the rules of the road. An impediment to her field of vision would be properly prohibited in that scenario.)



I think you are overreaching here. The French state is most certainly secular with as rigid a separation between religion and the state as has ever been provided for. But nothing in French Law to date has ever prohibited wearing religious garb in the public sphere. If the burqa is banned, why not the turban? Why not the cassock?

This is no more about secularism than it is about public safety.

The burqa is not religious garb though, and neither is the niqab or the veil. The hijab on the other hand is a religious requirement. So I would not stand behind banning the hijab.

I skipped most of the posts in this thread.

However, I can say that I do not agree with the burqa / niqab... whatever you want to call it... I mean face covering garments.

In Western society, we show our faces. That is the way it is. And I forget who pointed out the wearing a ski mask into a bank... it's a valid point. Why can't we wear ski masks when we go into a bank? Why can someone wear a burqa / niqab?

It's not necessarily an "opressed woman" wearing the garment - it could be a woman who wants to wear it, or it could be some random person dressing up that way so that they can go about doing things without anyone being able to identify them (not necessarily a female person).

The fact of the matter is that showing our faces is an intrinsic part of our society and culture. And so it is natural to mistrust people who are covering their faces (think ski masks, bandanas, etc.) And am I the only one who finds masks (think masquerades) to be creepy?

I wouldn't presume I could move to a highly conservative country and go to the beach wearing a bikini; I don't presume I'll be allowed into churches if I'm wearing a tank top. Why should someone move to a society where all people show their faces, and expect that they do not have to do the same? This goes for both men and women (although I do not know of any garment that is meant to cover a man's face - does such a thing exist?)

(PS - I did not read the article that was linked to in the OP, I am simply stating my view. I have no problems with the hijab, because it doesn't cover a person's face. In fact, I don't care about any other type of clothing, I only care about clothing that covers a person's face.)

Yes. the Islam dress code shares the same name as the hijab. Its states for females to cover there heads & there arms. If am right in saying that the hijab (head dress) only covers the head and neck.

Male Sikhs wear turbans(Dastar/Pagri) for faith reasons they also carry a dagger(Kirpan)..

Nope. It's an intrinsic part of CERTAIN societies and cultures.

I guess I lack this "natural" instinct for mistrust, then.

Maybe they expected tolerance and basic freedoms. Silly, I suppose.

Again, with the "if they don't like it they can leave" bit. That does not address the ethical or political justifications or lack thereof, of the ban.


I don't like it when people wear short shorts. Guess we should ban those.
Oh god, and Crocks! So ugly. Ban 'em.

Good for France.

People who immigrate to another nation/culture should adapt to their new home not force their ways on their host culture.

I agree, the problem is a lot bigger than the burqa, and yes it is exactly what you say, and this can also be found in conservative Christianity in America too, also in Judaism.

However, for every woman who wants to wear the burqa, there are many who dont and dont have that choice. Women who choose to wear it will pressure their young daughters into wearing it and these poor girls will be walking around in black when they should be enjoying their teens. I would be happy to make a few women uncomfortable by removing the right to wear the burqa, just to set these young girls free.

Or it could be a spoilt, young second-generation South Asian (and therefore British) immigrant who wears it because of the power she feels it gives her over the non-Muslim population, and who gets a kick out of seeing people scared/intimidated when talking to someone in a niqab because they consider it alien and frightening? The sort of woman who would never want to wear that stuff 'back home' but does so here as a measure of the freedom and tolerance of our society as a sort of coat-trailing exercise?

So, in essence, a woman with a similar (if not considerably worse) superiority complex to many non-niqab wearing Western women, just hidden under a black shroud.

Last edited by Tequila on 13 Apr 2011, 1:43 am, edited 2 times in total.

An awful lot of people here don't like hoodies (and they don't even totally obscure the face but merely obscure the head!) because of the association of them with chavs, street violence and thuggishness.

What is liberty? Can it really be defined by how one dresses?

Sometimes, freedom starts with democracy - when no one is forced on anything on his or her will.

Thats exactly why we shouldn't ban the burqa. Everyone should be allowed to wear what they choose. If anything i'd mandate that every person be forced to look unique in someway. Might liven this borepit we call earth up a bit.

This can still happen without keeping the Burqa legal.

I personally think the Burqa is a ret*d thing for any woman to wear.

Check this out:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yhjnAVnY5ns[/youtube]

A burqa, or a chador, as it's more often said here, is a robot's dress, not a human one (at least in my opinion).

Very true, tho you need to factor in the views of a social groups style of dress both view form the inside the group(s) & from outside it. One example of this is of observation & comments my mother made a few years back about the similar styles of dress of some scally groups in her neighbourhood comparing there dress style to that of the "Hitler Youth" movement. I can understand her line of augment. Tho is a question of making judgements about people & groups bated by there dress style.

If you want to criminalise coercion, criminalise coercion, not the thing somebody might be coerced into.