   Headscarf ban in France.
  I start a new thread about it. The previous one became too long and too often off topic. It was also full of misconceptions, and I don't even mention typical anti-french biases. I have not seen a single french poster. Well I think I know more about it than most of you. We've heard about it everyday during the last two months. It's symbolic but also a nearly ontological and existensial question for France. And those who'd like to see french politics as simplistic and governed by doctrinal viewpoints really don't understand that 200 years of a Republic thought by philosophers make it probably the most political country in the world. None get elected here with just two words : too much taxes, too much taxes, here is TerminaSweeper III.Did you know that ?- Turkey, which has a moderate islamist government (yes this possibly exists) keeps and applies even much more strict laws at school and in the administration. So I feel this solely proves the anti-religious, anti-muslim or racist accusations funnilly lack of background on this issue.- France has some common points with Turkey. It has a secularv constitution. It's not a nation that should be devided into communities of race or religion. It is a one nation. We dislike communotarism. But today massive muslim or chinese immigration makes it become more and more a danger. So there is an immunatary reaction of this old Republic constituted as one and indivisible.- Headscarf today is very often a political mean of expresssion for the fundamentalist doctrines than a choice motivated by faith. It's never a religious obligation in the Koran. In fact it's more serious issue for other less known communities, for instance some indians.- In many slums, women that don't wear hijab are considered as whores and only good for gang bangs. Call it religious freedom if you want, I let you imagine why many young girls wear hijabs. Do they have the choice ? But I am ready to take my individual responsibility if I witness an aggression. I am ready to throw my 190 lbs in one precise direction. That's being actually anti-racist and respectful of individual rights to express opinion and personnal religiousity.- The problem is not that these headscarved girls are pointed. The problem is their fundamentalist islam interdicts sport or biology.Why not interdict Voltaire (I hate your ideas but I would die ...  )tomorow ? So what does the republican school mean in these conditions ?- Religion is not banned from school. Most probably directives will be set so that history of most religions will be studied as a part of philosophy or history. This will probably let girls see that headscarves is nowhere a strict obligation in the Koran. It's all about too visible signs of religion. None has to sin to respect these rules. One can still wear a small cross or fatima pendant.- A secular state does not fight religions, it protects them from each other so that no religion influences laws and prevents any "religion", atheism or agnostism included.- The main drawback   is thus really not about freedom. It's that those (few) girls who have been totally endoctrined in their familly or community will rather flee than accept integration. Islamist schools exist in everywhere in Europe or in the USA. I really don't like to think what is taugth there. But I think whatever is said France chose the least harmful decision. And this can contribute to solve part of the fundamentalist problem with a worldwide.- A second drwaback   is that some indian (non muslim) communities wear headscarves as a true element of their religion unlike islam. For them not wearing them is like being totally naked and this also has deeper meanings one can respect. But it concerns only a few individuals.Now anglo saxons had better consider the issue more seriously. What happens here will be ten times wilder in the future Iraq. France knew Bush lied about WMDs, about Saddma/AlQaida. Most of us knew that bringing stability in the middle east would be one thousand times more difficult than exploding the vestiges of a dead iraqian army. Mission accomplished. ROFL.The real question is how to reverse the doctrinal machinery of the fundamentalists worldwide. Let islam, not islamist enter the 21st century. Ever heard of christian terrorists ? (K maybe those who kill surgeons in the States). Koran merges two opposite visions. Fundamentalists heavilly weight on the sentences written by the gender and use them as a trojan horse in the islamist psyche. Mohamed was much more decent with women, more liberal one could say.Off topic : I hope I can change Sander's mind a bit about it. Before knowing how to thin about it I add to sum all the elements.[edited by - Charles B on February 12, 2004 6:28:08 AM]
  You have no right to interpret someones religion for them. ;  Maybe. But that''s only your opinion and it''s very abstract. The good thing is the text are clear and history proves modern fundamentalism tweaks religious truth.Democracy is bound by a contract of balance between the rights of each other not to step on the others rights. Each citizen has the duty to be educated, to know the laws and the rights else one can not survive in a developped country. Having ppl rejecting neutral education for religious reasons is possible to some extent. Religious schools are highly tolerated, as long as they don''t take a pakistanese madrassa taste. It''s absurd to think any form of national community can be totally non intrusive on individual freedom. Can I raise a nazi flag or a Bin Laden T-shirt in the States ? NOSecularism worked in a perfect coexistence with the state and christianism or judaism since decades. Only the current and new fundamentalist form of islam causes a serious problem. If headscarves now flourish is it because muslims were not muslims before ? NO. Is it because non mulsims changed their opinion ? NO Is it because fundamentalists plan to subvert the french republic or any other westen country where many mulsims live ? ?So this kind of argument is to me totally hypocritical in the current context where many girls are forced to wear hijabs. Well try the hijab way and you''ll see if non muslims will still have the rights to express their religious faith when sharia rules. And I don''t speak of freedom to wear this or that. I speak of freedom to think this or that. We''re in France not Saudia.  ;  There are several thing why I do not like the ban. First off, the reason why the ban is being implemented is just wrong. According to Dutch news, the ban is being implemented to prevent upspring and growth of religious fundamentalists groups at schools. But wait, fundamentalists would never go to public schools. They would go to private muslim schools.Next is a problem Charles already mentioned. There are several groups of people to whom wearing a scarf is neccesary. They feel naked without it and they would feel like bad muslims. These girls are no fundamentalists what-so-ever. For them it''s just an accepted part of religion. What do you think these girls will do? I bet many will switch to private schools with a much stronger muslim doctrine. They may not all desire to do so, but their parents might.So the ban works.... for public schools only. The problem is not alleviated in any way becuase there will simply be more muslim schools because more people will want to go to such a school. The problem is worsened instead of alleviated. Instead of integrating the different cultures that live in france peacefully together, they will become more separated. A lack of knowledge about other cultures makes fertile ground for fundamentalism.In short: Scarfs have nothing to do with fundamentalism or with lack of intergration. The french government is attacking the wrong problem. To me, it''s a bit like fighting AIDS by making all sex illegal.   Sander Maréchal[Lone Wolves][Game Developers Emporium][E-mail][Hosting $7,95/mo][Forum FAQ][Google] ;  Just to clear things up, because there seems to be a common misconception.  The hijab is almost exclusively worn by women who feel it is made obligatory by the religion...so you''re not in any place to say that its "not a true element of the religion".  I''ve never heard of women who choose not to wear it considered whores, but 99% of the time, women who do are practising their religion. ;quote:Original post by Charles B   Can I raise a nazi flag or a Bin Laden T-shirt in the States ? NOI'm pretty sure you can do both of these things in the states, although you probably won't make too many friends by doing so.quote:- Turkey, which has a moderate islamist government (yes this possibly exists) keeps and applies even much more strict laws at school and in the administration. So I feel this solely proves the anti-religious, anti-muslim or racist accusations funnilly lack of background on this issue.I'm not sure the Turkish government should really be considered a role model for France. quote:- France has some common points with Turkey. It has a secularv constitution. It's not a nation that should be devided into communities of race or religion. It is a one nation. We dislike communotarism. But today massive muslim or chinese immigration makes it become more and more a danger. So there is an immunatary reaction of this old Republic constituted as one and indivisible.I'm unconvinced that banning freedom of expression of religion in public places will 'bring communities together'. More likely push them apart. So while this may be a valid problem, I don't see how this legislation is a solution to it.quote:- Headscarf today is very often a political mean of expresssion for the fundamentalist doctrines than a choice motivated by faith. It's never a religious obligation in the Koran. In fact it's more serious issue for other less known communities, for instance some indians.OK, so the Muslims might be able to do without their headscarves. But what about the Sikhs?quote:- In many slums, women that don't wear hijab are considered as whores and only good for gang bangs. Call it religious freedom if you want, I let you imagine why many young girls wear hijabs. Do they have the choice ? But I am ready to take my individual responsibility if I witness an aggression. I am ready to throw my 190 lbs in one precise direction. That's being actually anti-racist and respectful of individual rights to express opinion and personnal religiousity.I read this article a while ago, about a man in France who got off a rape charge - not because he didn't do it, but because he claimed the woman was 'asking for it' by wearing clothes which would have been considered 'provocative' in his own culture. It makes absolutely no sense to me that the French legal system can be all 'culturally sensitive' in such a serious case, and then starts getting it's panties in a bunch over a bit of cloth worn on the head.Again, I fail to see how banning hijabs is going to make any difference to these attitudes. If the legal system is incapable and/or unwilling to enforce the law in these places, banning the headscarves will only result in increased truancy or abuse in these areas. And without getting a proper education, the people in these areas will never be able to improve them.quote:- The problem is not that these headscarved girls are pointed. The problem is their fundamentalist islam interdicts sport or biology.Why not interdict Voltaire (I hate your ideas but I would die ... )tomorow ? So what does the republican school mean in these conditions ?As already said, we aren't talking about fundies, we're talking about moderates. The fundies probably don't go to your public schools anyway, they'd either get homeschooled or taught in an islamic school. And I don't think islam forbids (interdit means forbid/forbidden, not interdict ) either sport or biology.quote:- Religion is not banned from school. Most probably directives will be set so that history of most religions will be studied as a part of philosophy or history. This will probably let girls see that headscarves is nowhere a strict obligation in the Koran. It's all about too visible signs of religion. None has to sin to respect these rules. One can still wear a small cross or fatima pendant.Again, what about the Sikhs? ISTR their dress is a pretty important part of their religion.quote:- A secular state does not fight religions, it protects them from each other so that no religion influences laws and prevents any "religion", atheism or agnostism included.Exactly. So why is the French state fighting against the expression of religion with these rules?As an aside, I can understand that you cannot always protect the freedom of religious expression. 'Religion' is such a nebulous term which can cover a billion different belief systems, all of which are entirely subjective. Some common sense rules need to be applied, with workarounds as necessary (for example - the UK police force designed a special helmet which enables Sikhs to follow the laws of their religion with regards to headwear, whilst still meeting the required safety standards). That said, I cannot see how banning headscarves in schools qualifies as one of these cases.   [edited by - Sandman on February 12, 2004 8:04:48 AM];quote:Original post by firahs  Just to clear things up, because there seems to be a common misconception.  The hijab   is almost exclusively worn by women who feel it is made obligatory by the religion...so you''re not in any place to say that its "not a true element of the religion".  I''ve never heard of women who choose not to wear it considered whores, but 99% of the time, women who do are practising their religion.   Okay, you got me confused  Was that directed at me or at Charles? Sander Maréchal[Lone Wolves][Game Developers Emporium][E-mail][Hosting $7,95/mo][Forum FAQ][Google] ;quote:Original post by Charles B  Maybe. But that''s only your opinion and it''s very abstract. The good thing is the text are clear and history proves modern fundamentalism tweaks religious truth.Democracy is bound by a contract of balance between the rights of each other not to step on the others rights. Each citizen has the duty to be educated, to know the laws and the rights else one can not survive in a developped country. Having ppl rejecting neutral education for religious reasons is possible to some extent. Religious schools are highly tolerated, as long as they don''t take a pakistanese madrassa taste. It''s absurd to think any form of national community can be totally non intrusive on individual freedom. Can I raise a nazi flag or a Bin Laden T-shirt in the States ? NOSecularism worked in a perfect coexistence with the state and christianism or judaism since decades. Only the current and new fundamentalist form of islam causes a serious problem. If headscarves now flourish is it because muslims were not muslims before ? NO. Is it because non mulsims changed their opinion ? NO Is it because fundamentalists plan to subvert the french republic or any other westen country where many mulsims live ? ?So this kind of argument is to me totally hypocritical in the current context where many girls are forced to wear hijabs. Well try the hijab way and you''ll see if non muslims will still have the rights to express their religious faith when sharia rules. And I don''t speak of freedom to wear this or that. I speak of freedom to think this or that. We''re in France not Saudia.    Im beginning to think that maybe you''re a nationalistic fundamentalist.  Countries become great because of tolerance.  Since your knowledge of Islam is deficient, or skewed even, your interpretation of the religion only serves to back up your nationalistic views.  Women who wear hijab do so because its in the Sunnah, which is as important in the shaping of the religion as the Quran.  Women who dont are ok too, they have a different interpretation of the Sunnah.  To somehow suggest that women do so because of "Islamist" pressures is ridiculous.  If a woman who previously did not wear hijab decides to start wearing hijab its because she changed her interpretation of the part of the Sunnah regarding hijab.  Is it that hard to understand?I dont see how hijab is hurting france.  Europe has had a problem with Islam since the Crusades, and its unfortunate to see that the feelings remain after 1000 years.  If a woman wants to cover her hair, or dress a certain way out of wanting to be modest...then why should she be stopped?Besides, as a muslim, I can tell you that the "fundamentalist threat" is much smaller, to Muslims anyways, than its being perceived in the media.  The only reason why it has any ground at all is because of European colonization in the early 20th century (yay France!!) and the current issues with US support for Israel and other despotic regimes in the middle east.  The main selling line for whom you call fundamentalist is that they need to fight to free Muslims from despotic regimes set up and supported by western governments.  So, write your representatives if you live in a democracy...I dont.  IMO, nationalists are a much larger threat.Meanwhile, we encourage women to dress provocatively.  This hurts society more than hijab ever will.  Are woman just to look at?  To stand next to a car in an advertisement?  To sell perfume?  Men who grow up in these types of societies will probably have a hard time respecting women when they get older.;quote:Original post by Sander  quote:Original post by firahs   Just to clear things up, because there seems to be a common misconception.  The hijabis almost exclusively worn by women who feel it is made obligatory by the religion...so you''re not in any place to say that its "not a true element of the religion".  I''ve never heard of women who choose not to wear it considered whores, but 99% of the time, women who do are practising their religion.   Okay, you got me confused  Was that directed at me or at Charles? Sander Maréchal  [Lone Wolves][Game Developers Emporium][E-mail][Hosting $7,95/mo][Forum FAQ][Google]   To no one in particular, just as information.  It was provoked by Charles claim that hijab is just part of culture or not important in religion.  To people who wear it, it is important...otherwise they wouldnt wear it.;  Gah.  Here we go again.quote:- Turkey, which has a moderate islamist government (yes this possibly exists) keeps and applies even much more strict laws at school and in the administration. So I feel this solely proves the anti-religious, anti-muslim or racist accusations funnilly lack of background on this issue.The Turkish headscarf ban has nothing to do with separation of church and state.  It was instated in the early 1900s to "westernize" the country.  I, for one, very much do NOT want my government inflicting a dress code on me, even for dress that DOESN''T have religious implications.quote:- France has some common points with Turkey. It has a secularv constitution. It''s not a nation that should be devided into communities of race or religion. It is a one nation. We dislike communotarism. But today massive muslim or chinese immigration makes it become more and more a danger. So there is an immunatary reaction of this old Republic constituted as one and indivisible.Danger of there being different people in your country?  Heaven and saints preserve us, the foreigners are coming, the foreigners are coming!  A headscarf will undermine the entire French society and government!  They''re um, contagious!  Run away! Ban them!  Bleh.  I guess here in the US, what with being entirely made up of random cultures and peoples who came here, we''re used to the fact that different cultures enhance our society, not threaten it.  Frankly we find internal xenophobia to be rather distasteful, for the majority.quote:- Headscarf today is very often a political mean of expresssion for the fundamentalist doctrines than a choice motivated by faith. It''s never a religious obligation in the Koran. In fact it''s more serious issue for other less known communities, for instance some indians.Um, yes, many Muslim women DO insist that it''s a religious obligation in the Koran, and from what they''ve shown me they''re quite correct.  The women I''ve talked to were fellow students at an engineering college so it''s not like they were stupid or backwards... they were just people of faith and I very much respect that.  I would note that choosing to follow "fundamentalist doctrines", when those doctrines are religious in nature, *IS* a choice "motivated by faith". quote:- In many slums, women that don''t wear hijab are considered as whores and only good for gang bangs. Call it religious freedom if you want, I let you imagine why many young girls wear hijabs. Do they have the choice ? But I am ready to take my individual responsibility if I witness an aggression. I am ready to throw my 190 lbs in one precise direction. That''s being actually anti-racist and respectful of individual rights to express opinion and personnal religiousity.Perhaps you should work on your law enforcement then, as it does not appear that banning headscarves will suddenly change this supposed "slum" mentality.  You can''t simultaneously be "respectful of individual rights to express opinion and personnal (sic) religiousity (sic)" and ban the individual''s expression of opinion and personal religious beliefs.  If you''re banning their expression you''re not respecting it.  It''s very simple.quote:- The problem is not that these headscarved girls are pointed. The problem is their fundamentalist islam interdicts sport or biology.Why not interdict Voltaire (I hate your ideas but I would die ... )tomorow ? So what does the republican school mean in these conditions ?Um, I''m not sure what you even mean here.  The Muslim girls I went to college with did not have the least problem playing sports with their headscarves on, they were in my PE classes.  I''m also not sure why a headscarf would cause problems with *blink* biology.  If you want to invoke Voltaire, why not invoke him on behalf of the girls who want to wear their headscarves?quote:- Religion is not banned from school. Most probably directives will be set so that history of most religions will be studied as a part of philosophy or history. This will probably let girls see that headscarves is nowhere a strict obligation in the Koran. It''s all about too visible signs of religion. None has to sin to respect these rules. One can still wear a small cross or fatima pendant.One needs to really ask here if you''ve bothered reading the Koran, or if you''re just pulling this assumption out of some undisclosed location on your body.  That being said, if a Muslim woman feels it is her responsibility to wear a headscarf to be properly modest according to her religion, I see no harm in her doing so and I respect her interpretation, just as I respect the Mennonite interpretation of the Bible (the women there also cover their heads during prayer) and see the justification for that way of thinking while not considering it personally necessary.  Then again I''m really big on having religious freedom.Here''s an applicable Koran verse.The Light:24.31 "And say to the believing women that they cast down their looks and guard their private parts and do not display their ornaments except what appears thereof, and let them wear their head-coverings over their bosoms..."Ooh, head covering should be on believing women.  Whaddayaknow.A pendant and a headscarf are not the same thing.quote:- A secular state does not fight religions, it protects them from each other so that no religion influences laws and prevents any "religion", atheism or agnostism included.When there''s a law specifically banning religious expression, it''s pretty easy to argue that the religion is influencing the law, isn''t it.  quote:- The main drawback is thus really not about freedom. It''s that those (few) girls who have been totally endoctrined in their familly or community will rather flee than accept integration. Islamist schools exist in everywhere in Europe or in the USA. I really don''t like to think what is taugth there. But I think whatever is said France chose the least harmful decision. And this can contribute to solve part of the fundamentalist problem with a worldwide.You think that making girls leave school is less harmful than letting them wear a small piece of cloth on their head.  You''d rather they be forced into one of the Islamist schools you don''t like, with the idea that they''ve been discriminated against in public school fueling the fire.  You have a really odd metric going there.quote:- A second drwaback is that some indian (non muslim) communities wear headscarves as a true element of their religion unlike islam. For them not wearing them is like being totally naked and this also has deeper meanings one can respect. But it concerns only a few individuals.It''s the same way for most Muslim women.  Have you bothered talking to any?  I''m starting to get the impression that you just don''t like Muslims.quote:Now anglo saxons had better consider the issue more seriously. What happens here will be ten times wilder in the future Iraq. France knew Bush lied about WMDs, about Saddma/AlQaida. Most of us knew that bringing stability in the middle east would be one thousand times more difficult than exploding the vestiges of a dead iraqian army. Mission accomplished. ROFL.French President Jacques Chirac, in February 2003, spoke about "the probable possession of weapons of mass destruction by an uncontrollable country, Iraq," noting "the international community is right . . . in having decided that Iraq should be disarmed." Knew all about there being no weapons, did you?  Maybe because Israel had blown up the Osirac nuclear reactor that France sold them so you thought they were gone?  Regardless, somebody should have told your President.quote:The real question is how to reverse the doctrinal machinery of the fundamentalists worldwide. Let islam, not islamist enter the 21st century. Ever heard of christian terrorists ? (K maybe those who kill surgeons in the States). Koran merges two opposite visions. Fundamentalists heavilly weight on the sentences written by the gender and use them as a trojan horse in the islamist psyche. Mohamed was much more decent with women, more liberal one could say.We have our share, sadly.  Just type "Christian Terrorist" into Google.  But, fortunately most of us tend to not think that''s an appropriate way of getting things done.One really must ask you, though, is intolerance such as banning their headscarves and forcing them to violate their religious beliefs really the way to teach them to, well, be tolerant?  -fel 