France's move towards banning the burqa in public places have stirred up a huge controversy. Many Islamic communities condemn the decision as being against the human rights and freedom, a core value based on which the country itself was founded. On the other hand, secular & non-Muslim societies applaud the decision and a similar move has since spread to its neighbouring countries, such as Belgium and Holland while UK's ruling government has ruled out putting it on the discussion table.
France is actually home to the biggest Muslim community in Western Europe, estimated to be somewhere between 6 - 10% of the whole population. Whilst there are a number of converts, the majority of French Muslims are descendants of immigrants originated from its former colonies, such as Morocco, Tunisia, Algeria, and Senegal. In addition to the citizens, a significant influx of tourists flow inbound yearly from Islamic, including the oil-rich Gulf, countries. As a matter of fact, though, only an insignificant number of French Muslims will be affected by the burqa ban, since wearing burqa is not something commonly practiced in Africa, where most French Muslims originate.
Those fighting in favour of the ban argue that burqa is a form of oppression towards women and therefore is not in line with the core value of the French constitution. French Urban Regeneration Minister, Fadela Amara (herself is of Algerian descendant), claims that burqa represents a political manipulation of a religion (against women). Apparently, there are many women forced to wear burqa by either their husbands or the male members of their families. The Koran itself does not dictate women to cover their faces per se, but a number of Muslim women believe that the wives of Mohammad wore burqa and they are encouraged to follow their examples. There are also Islamic scholars who believe that (based on their interpretation of Koran) the face (of a woman) draws a lot of temptation hence it too has to be covered (in addition to the head, neck, and body).
On the other hand, those who oppose the ban accuse the government of being Islamophobic and disregard the fact that the ban itself is an epitome of violation against human rights and freedom of religious expression. They question the government harsh decision towards the burqa while allowing skimpy clothes and even full nudity in some public areas.
I too believe that banning the burqa does not show a good example of freedom of expression and that every (Muslim) woman should be given the right to choose whether or not to wear a burqa, thus I do not agree on banning burqa on the base of human rights. I do, however, back up the ban on the ground of national security, which many people in the grassroots believe was the real reason behind the ban. This of course would not make the decision politically correct hence would not go out of the government's spokespersons' mouths.
 |
Contrary to what many believe, France is essentially a secular, not Christian, country, although most of its population are traditionally (not necessarily practising) Catholic. Wearing religious attributes such as Christian cross pendants or Sikh turbans is also strictly prohibited in public schools, for example. If France views Islam as a public enemy, then surely they would not have the biggest Muslim population in the Western Europe? They could have prohibited building places of worship, spreading or even converting to the faith, just like what many Islamic countries do to non-Muslim minorities up to this very day. Therefore, although France as a country might not fully support their Muslim citizens (as is their treatment towards other religious communities), the accusation of being Islamophobic is totally baseless.
Back to the concerns about national security, burqas conceal most parts or even the entire face of the wearers, thus is the perfect way to hide one's identity. You cannot even tell whether the wearer is really a woman or a man in disguise! That is why covering your face with anything (including ski mask and helmets) is strictly prohibited in public places, especially banks and the likes. And indeed, there have been cases where criminals hid their identities by donning a burqa, such as what happened in the UK (click here for details). A similar incident also happened in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) where burqa-wearing thieves snatched bags and jewelleries in shopping malls (click here for details).
Now if thieves hide themselves in helmets or ski masks, they would have already induced suspicion before they could even do their works, but wearing burqa is generally considered as a sign of religious piety and therefore, discourages interaction with others, especially men. In addition to that, unlike normal clothes, it is difficult to differentiate one burqa from another due to the similar styles and colours (in line with the Koranic teaching to "dress modestly"). Up to now, those opposing the ban cannot come up with an argument convincing enough to assure the rest of the stakeholders that national security would not be compromised if the ban is overturned.
But then again, banning a clothing that belongs to a specific community, especially a minority, on the grounds of national security would not be politically correct and thus the politicians are steering away from this and have put forward another reason, i.e.: equality between genders and human rights.
Perhaps, then, what many object is not the government's concern on human rights and national security concerns. Perhaps they are (and rightly so) just offended by the singling out of burqas, where there is no specific ban on wearing ski masks or any other face-concealing cloth. This objection is indeed reasonable. As a matter of fact, many of those who oppose the ban are actually not wearing burqas themselves. Some are even non-Muslim westerners.
I feel sorry for those who wear burqa genuinely as a devotion towards their belief. Faith is indeed something that cannot be forced upon. Both sides of scholars who support and are against burqas refer to the same source (Koran & hadith) and yet come up with different interpretations of the same subject. Individual freedom has its own limitation. There is no such thing as ultimate freedom in this world or else the world is nothing but a big chaos. People around you also have the right to feel secure.
I would not go as far as telling people, "if you don't like this place, leave". I might just say, "When in Rome, do what Romans do". When you visit Saudi Arabia or Iran, for example, every woman (irrespective of her religion) has to don the local black cloak (abaya) and veil and every man (again regardless of his religion) has to wear trousers (no shorts). I bet most foreigners would prefer dressing as they please, but they obey the local rules anyway, because they know that they are guests. If you feel oppressed, maybe you can take a look around and compare the level of freedom you have in a secular country and the freedom non-Muslims have in Islamic countries.
Anyway, it is not like they ask you to remove your whole cloth and roam around in bikinis or tight shorts, right?
Peace peace peace.
Back to the concerns about national security, burqas conceal most parts or even the entire face of the wearers, thus is the perfect way to hide one's identity. You cannot even tell whether the wearer is really a woman or a man in disguise! That is why covering your face with anything (including ski mask and helmets) is strictly prohibited in public places, especially banks and the likes. And indeed, there have been cases where criminals hid their identities by donning a burqa, such as what happened in the UK (click here for details). A similar incident also happened in the United Arab Emirates (UAE) where burqa-wearing thieves snatched bags and jewelleries in shopping malls (click here for details).
Now if thieves hide themselves in helmets or ski masks, they would have already induced suspicion before they could even do their works, but wearing burqa is generally considered as a sign of religious piety and therefore, discourages interaction with others, especially men. In addition to that, unlike normal clothes, it is difficult to differentiate one burqa from another due to the similar styles and colours (in line with the Koranic teaching to "dress modestly"). Up to now, those opposing the ban cannot come up with an argument convincing enough to assure the rest of the stakeholders that national security would not be compromised if the ban is overturned.
But then again, banning a clothing that belongs to a specific community, especially a minority, on the grounds of national security would not be politically correct and thus the politicians are steering away from this and have put forward another reason, i.e.: equality between genders and human rights.
Perhaps, then, what many object is not the government's concern on human rights and national security concerns. Perhaps they are (and rightly so) just offended by the singling out of burqas, where there is no specific ban on wearing ski masks or any other face-concealing cloth. This objection is indeed reasonable. As a matter of fact, many of those who oppose the ban are actually not wearing burqas themselves. Some are even non-Muslim westerners.
I feel sorry for those who wear burqa genuinely as a devotion towards their belief. Faith is indeed something that cannot be forced upon. Both sides of scholars who support and are against burqas refer to the same source (Koran & hadith) and yet come up with different interpretations of the same subject. Individual freedom has its own limitation. There is no such thing as ultimate freedom in this world or else the world is nothing but a big chaos. People around you also have the right to feel secure.
I would not go as far as telling people, "if you don't like this place, leave". I might just say, "When in Rome, do what Romans do". When you visit Saudi Arabia or Iran, for example, every woman (irrespective of her religion) has to don the local black cloak (abaya) and veil and every man (again regardless of his religion) has to wear trousers (no shorts). I bet most foreigners would prefer dressing as they please, but they obey the local rules anyway, because they know that they are guests. If you feel oppressed, maybe you can take a look around and compare the level of freedom you have in a secular country and the freedom non-Muslims have in Islamic countries.
Anyway, it is not like they ask you to remove your whole cloth and roam around in bikinis or tight shorts, right?
Peace peace peace.
0 comments:
Post a Comment