France backs school head scarf ban

[dplax]

Edit: If mods consider this a religious discussion then please feel free to delete


Source: cnn.com


PARIS, France (CNN) -- The French National Assembly has overwhelmingly approved a proposed controversial ban on Muslim headscarves and other "conspicuous" religious symbols in French schools.

The vote was 494 in favor and 36 opposed, giving President Jacques Chirac a victory. The measure now has to go to the Senate.

While there is a great deal of countrywide support for the government-backed ban, many others oppose it, saying it could lead to more problems than it will solve.

Public opinion polls indicate about 70 percent of the French are in favor of the measure. And even in the French Muslim community, Muslim women favor a ban 49 percent to 43 percent.

Chirac's ruling party controls about two-thirds of the seats in the National Assembly. There has been prolonged debate about the legislation, and over the last few days a number of compromises were worked out with the opposition Socialists.

One compromise agreed to is a review of the law after a year.

There have been many complaints outside France, and not only from Muslims, who say the ban is discriminatory.

Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin is on his way later this week to India, where he could hear concern about how the law would apply to Sikh head turbans.

Opponents say the ban is discriminatory and likely to stigmatize France's 5 million Muslims -- the largest population in Western Europe.

[ 02-10-2004, 12:06 PM: Message edited by: dplax ]

[Timber Loftis]

Well, at least France addressed the issue nationally. As you may have seen from other posts about expelled kids in US schools, each little school district is run like a fiefdom and sets its own rules over here.

I'm wondering whether you should ban the head scarfs or those who would "pick on" kids wearing them.

Regardless, one thing is certain: it will be much more difficult to pass on this cultural tradition to children who are forbidden from wearing the scarfs 8+ hours per day while in the company of males -- the exact situation in which the religion considers the scarf necessary.

[dplax]

Actually this law is not only for head scarves but as I heard from our civilization teacher it also extends to any visible symbol, which could mean crosses, jewish headwear (can't remember suddenly what they are called) and certain political symbols also, so I would say that it is not certainly a discrimination against muslims, although certainly they were the prime target to the law.

Also you could note that had this law not been made it would have stayed as difficult as it had been before for people from different cultures / religions to mix with each other, therefore them being equal.

Also technically in France everyone should be equal, which coincides with one of the fundamental theories of muslim peoples religion, that men are superior to women. So basically for France it was a human rights against religion debate where both sides were right in their own way.

[Stratos]

My personal beliefs about religious symbols and clothing is to allow them as long as they don't interfer with the job or position you're in. Rules regarding, say, hygiene have priority over any religious rules.

I don't think that it's so easy to say that men are superior to women in Islam, there merely have different roles assigned to them. That has been the case here in the West as well and still are to some extent.

As for the Christian crosses, what I've heard about it in the Swedish media they're allowed as long as they're not too big.

[Barry the Sprout]

By my knowledge its the Muslim hajib, Jewish hats (forget the proper name...), and particularly ostentatious crosses. It comes from the French secular tradition and is in fact only one of several recommendations by a recent report on repression of youngsters in various faiths. I'm told by more knowledgeable friends its one of the worst points in the report and the rest of it, which isn't to be acted on, is actually quite good.

Personally I'm not in favour of banning the hajib but I certainly feel something should be done about kids being made to wear it. I know that thats not happening in every case but it does happen. I think that quite a lot of the opposition to the ban, over here at least, has got caught up defending the hajib when it should instead be sticking up the people who have to wear it and their right to choose either way. But thats just my opinion.

[Timber Loftis]

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout: Personally I'm not in favour of banning the hajib but I certainly feel something should be done about kids being made to wear it.

Not at all. Until a child reaches the age of majority, it is not it's decision whether or not to wear religious garb, go to church, etc. Combine the right to bear and rear children with the right of privacy with the right of freedom of exercise of religion, and you will stay far FAR away from telling any parent how to impose (or not) religious traditions on their children.

Now, if it's child abuse, like being made to wear torture devices, that's different of course. But, other than being a little too warm in summer, I don't think there's a "torture/abuse" case to be made against the hajib. Just because it isn't YOUR religious belief doesn't mean you get to meddle.

If the state starts regulating religious garb, I know a lot of 10-year-old boys who are going to line up to complain to the state about this suit and tie they wear to church on Sundays.

Before you go off on women's rights and Muslinism, let me remind you that the STATE can't meddle in religious affairs, and that it is NOT impermissible for a religion to differentiate between genders in any respect, be it daily duties, degree of power, rights to marry or divorce, etc. For Muslims in a free country, the women have CHOSEN to accept subjigated roles, and are free to do so (or leave the religion if they prefer).

[ 02-10-2004, 04:46 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]

[Barry the Sprout]

As I said Timber, I'm against the ban and therefore I am against the state doing anything to intrude upon peoples religious lives. However if I meet people who make their kids wear the hajib then I'll argue with them about it personally. Just because I think something is wrong does not necessarily mean I want to call for the government to heavy handidly step in and pass laws to sort it all out. I'm a communist, we're generally not in favour of big government, especially not when that government is a capitalist and imperialist one. (as always I am aware my opinions may be disagreed with, but I think I can take the rejection just about... [img]tongue.gif[/img] )

[Larry_OHF]

By dplax: If mods consider this a religious discussion then please feel free to delete

I see this thread as a discussion about a law that should or should not be implemented, due to the idea that it may be a rights violation. It is not really a religious topic, and unless it becomes one, the thread is fine. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[Timber Loftis]

Fair enough, Sproutling.

[Yorick]

I am not in fovour of the banning. Nor with the sentiment that making people look the same equals equality.

It's like race. Acknowledge and celebrate difference and diversity, rather than being colorblind, or enforcing conformity. Will they make Sikhs cut their hair? Why should a hippy be allowed to keep their long hair (not an overt religious gesture) yet a Sikh, whose hair is religious, be made to cut it? And if they are allowed to keep it, what difference is it, having long hair, to having a little skull cap or scarf. All adorn the head.

Live and let live. Enforcing conformity is frightening.