Joined: Feb. 2008
|Quote (Schroedinger's Dog @ July 17 2010,01:45)|
| Also worth noting that most muslim countries around the mediterranean already have a ban on niqabs and burqas in public places, such as administrations, schools, universities...|
Most of these countries don't have exemplary histories of defending their citizens rights to free expression. Many of them do have trouble with radical Islamic movements, and it's not clearly whether this kind of restriction strengthens them or weakens them.
And honnestly, what bothers most of the French is not the religious aspect of these garments, but rather the passive-aggressive proselytism, the pseudo-appartheid it creates in everyday-life
"pseudo apartheid" because people dress a certain way ? Isn't this just another way of saying you find "those people" offensive or threatening ? Are men in drag engaging in "passive aggressive proselytism" for transexuality ? Goths proselytizing for vampirism ?
and not to forget the security issues.
Actualy, that last point alone should be enough for the ban to be justified. Anyone can hide under a niqab. I consider it the minimum to be able to identify someone in public places.
In this age of pervasive, undetectable surveillance, do we really want to accept the idea that you are legally required to be identifiable in public ? The old "You have nothing to fear if you aren't a criminal" .... ?
Even if we do accept that this is desirable, banning particular forms of dress is a rotten way to go about it. Would a burqa be acceptable if each one had a unique barcode ? Would hoodies and dark sunglasses also be banned ? Fursuits ?
If the goal is to have all persons in public places identifiable, then that's what the law should say. There may be some difficulty in cold winters, but hey, a little frost bite is a small price to pay for safety, right ? Perhaps we could require an ID card be visible at all times ? Or cut to the chase and get everyone an RFID chip ?
If the last two are ridiculous and offensive (and I hope they are) how do you justify what amounts to pursuing the same goal in a halfassed, ineffective way ?
I have no doubt that the burqa is largely a tool of oppression, and I agree that breaking down oppressive traditions is worthy goal. What I don't see is any way law can distinguish between a person who is being oppressed by this and one who is engaging in free expression. Banning particular forms of expression because some segment of the society dislikes it is a very dangerous road to go down.