the burqa ban in france

[ph00tbag]

Also, whether the burqa demeans women is not relevant, because to the best of my understanding the reason for the ban is security. The theoretical demeaning of women is a theological issue, but the government, and socieities in general aren't concerned with theological dilemmas, they're concerned with social dilemmas. A government doesn't have an issue with Biblical extremists because they take the Bible literally, it's because (some of them) intend to burn down mosques and the like, which is a social/security issue.

But the security argument itself raises questions. First of all, you now have to ask what is out of bounds as far as maintaining security. What freedoms must we give up in order to be secure? The two concepts are at odds by their nature, and making a security argument for suspending any one freedom starts you down a slippery slope.

The other question is, why just burqas? What about baggy pants? You can hide weapons in baggy pants, and also it's really easy to trip and fall if you're wearing baggy pants. Ultimately, both strike me as cases of profiling, more than anything. And profiling is frankly unproductive, even from a security standpoint. You won't be able to single out a security threat based on what a person looks like, or even technically what they wear. It's actions that define security threats, and being able to identify and act on those actions is infinitely more important than simply quashing out some arbitrary quality based on profiling.

 

[Dre89]

I don't see how baggy pants conceal identity though.

I always interpreted the Burqas as a security risk in that if the woman commits a crime, her identity is concealed. If any other person concealed their face through non religious means, they would get heat, I don't see why the religious should get immunity.

 

[ph00tbag]

I don't see how baggy pants conceal identity though.

I always interpreted the Burqas as a security risk in that if the woman commits a crime, her identity is concealed. If any other person concealed their face through non religious means, they would get heat, I don't see why the religious should get immunity.

Because, "[France] shall respect all beliefs." This from Article One of the the Constitution of 1958, the current constitution of France.

 

[Dre89]

They're banning Burqas to respect all beliefs?

 

[Crooked Crow]

They're banning Burqas to respect all beliefs?

You can't please everyone.

This entire debate boils down to subjective opinion, but if France states all religious beliefs must be respected in the constitution:

Because, "[France] shall respect all beliefs." This from Article One of the the Constitution of 1958, the current constitution of France.

Then it would be an essential contradiction. However, exceptions must be made and constitutions are modified and changed over time.

Can't really delve that more into this matter, as it's all an opinion and has probably already been stated.

 

[ph00tbag]

Then it would be an essential contradiction. However, exceptions must be made and constitutions are modified and changed over time.

Exceptions would only be necessary if following one section of the constitution required violating another.

To my knowledge, no part of the constitution places a higher importance on security than on respecting religious views that don't inherently harm people.

It's definitely a gray area. But I can't help but get a sense that the burqa is targeted because of its association with Islam in a time when Islam seems to be making westerners jittery just as much as because it may pose a security risk.

 

[Crooked Crow]

It's definitely a gray area. But I can't help but get a sense that the burqa is targeted because of its association with Islam in a time when Islam seems to be making westerners jittery just as much as because it may pose a security risk.

It's definitely because of Islam. If there wasn't a lot of stigmatized controversy, there wouldn't be an issue in the first place.

At the same time, they can provide scapegoat reasoning. It happens.

 

[[FBC] Papa Mink]

I think the burqa ban in france was a good step, on the 1st page someone mentioned of how it was banned in Canada because it was a security problem, which is very true. Hiding your entire face is very suspicious. It isn't related to relgiions, it's a cultural thing.

If i remember correctly, women wear burqas because it's disrespectfult o be revealing too much skin. The males in the culture are supposed to pick the woman before ever seeing what she truly looks like. I don't know if thats something that is still done, but i remember that being true.

I don't know if this has been brought up but

On 29 April 2010, the lower house of parliament in Belgium passed a bill banning any clothing that would obscure the identity of the wearer in places like parks and in the street. The proposal was passed nem con and now goes to the Senate. BBC News estimates that "Only around 30 women wear this kind of veil in Belgium, out of a Muslim population of around half a million."

In Italy, by an anti-terrorism Law passed in 1975, it is forbidden to wear any dress that hides the face of a person. In May 2010, it was reported that a Tunisian woman was fined €500 for this offence

France was the first one to ban it completely, but other actions have been taken.

But I can't help but get a sense that the burqa is targeted because of its association with Islam in a time when Islam seems to be making westerners jittery just as much as because it may pose a security risk.

@phoot, obviously the ban was initially derived from the association with Islam, though i believe that there is also just cause. With all the attacks within the last 2 decades i'm surprised they weren't banned earlier. Alot ofp eople may take this as racist, but if i was getting on a plane and alot of people were on the plane wearing burqa's i would defintely have a feeling of a lack of security.

I think this is a step in the right direction, though it may be going against culture in other countries, In this time, i think it's a safe idea.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

There are still several Mosques in France

Don't see why they would choose to ban only one "part" of islam simply because it's islam. It's probably not strictly "anti-islam".

 

[Crooked Crow]

The burqa is not banned in Canada. Where did you get that assumption from?

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

It is, at least in quebec

http://www2.macleans.ca/2010/04/07/about-face/

Introduced last week, Bill 94 is the first legislation in North America to place a de facto ban on any religious face coverings in any government building—including within the walls of every government-subsidized high school, CEGEP and university in Quebec.

 

[Crooked Crow]

Quebec is essentially separate from the rest of Canada.

 

[#HBC | Dark Horse]

....and?

Mink said it was banned in canada because it's a security risk

It's banned in quebec because it's a security risk

What difference does it make?

 

[Crooked Crow]

You should be treating Quebec as a completely secluded state.

They have entirely different ideologies, school systems, and mentalities regarding conservatism.

 

[eschemat]

Quebec is also pretty much the most liberal province in Canada....

And yet again, it's thoughts on ethnicity are the same as the US. Big melting pot.