This picture is just wrong on so many levels.

[Lochloosa]

Kenza Drider, center, wearing a niqab, stumbles as she is detained by undercover police officers after addressing the media in front of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris on Monday.

Arrests made as French face veil ban takes effect


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42528909/ns/world_news-europe/?gt1=43001

[closeupready]

1. Liberte for me, not for thee.

I guess. Disgraceful. :mad:

[notesdev]

5. Veiling women is not liberty, it's the opposite

The practice of putting veils on women stems from the fact that they are considered to be property in those cultures, rather than people. If she is demanding her "freedom" to be subjugated, she has a screw loose.

[Skidmore]

12. You know, at some point, that is her choice and not yours.

There are in fact many women in the Islamic world who would choose to wear the veil just like there are women in Christian groups here who will not cut their hair or wear certain styles of clothing. The law in France is a bad law and if we espouse here that women should have control of their bodies, it means the choices they make as to what to clothe that body in as well. Here in the West, it appears that the expectation to become some guy's property right now is to remove as many clothing as possible. Check out our popular culture which treats women as sexual property. Check out the number of violent crimes against women in the interest of the male asserting his territorial rights.

[notesdev]

17. It's not merely a choice

when combined with the males of the tribe who hold an ethic of raping "uncovered meat" it's submitting to a threat of violence.

What you're defending is a wedge designed to increase the influence of Islamism - the women-as-chattel, homosexuals-must-be-executed version, not any fair and kind version you may have heard about (which has no need of such publicity stunts as this one). There's no liberty-valuing nation on earth that ever adopted anything like the Islamic veil, and for good reason - hiding one's identity is not a liberty, it's deceit.

[Skidmore]

20. In some countries it is not. However, in France it was until

this law was passed. A nation may not adopt the dress as practice, however, individuals may choose to do so. I know women who have in the absence of any constraints.

I do think that people in Western cultures neglect all the ways in which women veil themselves. Sometimes a veil is not a piece of cloth.

[Arugula Latte]

51. I would say it's more likely it's her father or husband's choice for her. nt

[sabrina 1]

139. And I would say that you don't know that. One of my friends

who is from the UAE wears western clothes when she feels like it, her husband doesn't much care what she wears. And she also likes to wear the veil, it's her choice. They are both professional people, they have several children, she travels a lot, and she chooses to wear traditional clothing sometimes. I wish we would just mind our own business and let other people sort out theirs. We are not the be all and the end of all of the world, and we know very little about other people's cultures.

When Karen Hughes was sent by Bush to 'talk' to ME women, she went with the attitude that Western Women are superior. She had no idea of how educated and cultured and intelligent the women she was to meet with were. Obviously ignorant and assuming all eastern women were oppressed. She got quite a shock at her reception, the women for one thing were way smarter than the Bush women, and were highly insulted by her arrogant assumptions and taught HER a few lessons that day.

[CatWoman]

142. BRAVO

:applause:

[Xenotime]

61. Thank you.

[MedleyMisty]

14. She gets to choose if she wants to wear it or not

That's what freedom is. People might make choices you don't like. Deal.

Now, of course it's as wrong to force people to wear it as it is to force people to not wear it. But that's the thing - both are wrong.

[riderinthestorm]

19. Nope. Women do not have the freedom to wear whatever they want, or not.

That woman would have been wrestled to the ground, arrested and charged with a fine in the exact same manner if she'd been naked.

We as a society have always regulated what can and cannot be worn in public. The burka is the most misogynistic garment designed to erase women from public. Why do people feel the need to argue for the freedom to wear this garment? Nobody seems to be having the same vociferous argument for women to be allowed to go to the grocery store topless (which would actually empower women as breasts as very powerful imho).

[Raster]

26. No one insists that men wear a burka.

I am sick and tired of those that would rally to support "the right" for women to wear this misogynistic garments. Why not rally to support a woman's right to never have to wear the garment again? Why not rally to discard a tired, old, decrepit religious system that would call for such misogynistic practices?

And does anyone really think that women -- on their own-- would be fighting to wear these garments, without the male clerics behind them urging this on?

[ZombieHorde]

103. Not just the right of women, the right for anyone to wear whatever they please.

Or even the right to wear nothing at all.

[ZombieHorde]

102. I think people should be allowed to walk around naked.

Though I would suggest wearing a really good sunscreen.

[riderinthestorm]

106. Now THAT is a statement I can agree with 110%. LOL! nt

[Liquorice]

134. Exactly. nt

[closeupready]

45. France is a free country, as are those who live there.

nt

[Dr. Strange]

52. Yeah, she looks really free...

being grabbed by undercover police and all.

[closeupready]

54. I know, right? Really doing that, "Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite" thingie justice, eh?

:mad:

[Dr. Strange]

60. Good thing you used French there.

http://www.dglf.culture.gouv.fr/droit/loi-gb.htm

:o

[closeupready]

84. But left out the circunflex.

Or is it accent grave? I forget, oops. :D

[ZombieHorde]

101. Don't most of us demand others to subjugate our freedom?

Arrest me if I walk around the streets nude. Arrest me if I shoot up heroin. Arrest me if I refuse to pay taxes. Arrest me if I drive my car on the sidewalk.

Maybe we all have a screw loose. Maybe we should all be anarchists.

[malaise]

135. Many women want to wear these veils

The nuns who taught me wore veils and very little of their faces was visible.
People either have religious freedom or they don't.

[riderinthestorm]

143. Do you have a link that says that most of those women want to wear the burqa?

I'd be very interested in that.

And people don't have complete religious freedom, not here nor in France. For example Native Americans cannot take peyote or mushrooms per their religious practices, in public. Those people who believe FGM is religiously dictated cannot do so in any western country. When a society decides that some religious practices interfere with the common accepted status quo, then they are banned.

This isn't new or radical. It's a common societal norm.

FWIW, nuns have never obscured their faces. Your analogy of a nuns habit and burka are completely unrelated. I will say though that the misogynistic intent behind both costumes is the same ...to keep women powerless in society, keep them "separate".

[SheilaT]

2. What bothers me about these people who

are defending wearing of face coverings in a secular state, is those same people have absolutely no problem requiring secular women wear those face coverings in the religious state.

I feel that if you choose to live in a secular country, such as France or the United States, you need to understand and follow the laws as well as certain customs.

[ZombieHorde]

7. I think women should be able to wear whatever they want no matter where they live.

Some possible exceptions for some occupations; e.g., jobs requiring gloves, hairnets, hazmat suits, etc.

[Taverner]

94. So can I wear a burqua? How about taking the license plates off my car

I belong to an order of monks where we believe self-identification is an affront to the great insect Dab

If we self-identify - then there's no way we can be reborn as bugs (hallowed be their exoskeletons)

Oh, and I also like to rob banks. My religion, ya know...

[ZombieHorde]

104. Has Dab ever been wrong? I think you should do what Dab tells you to do. nt

[SheilaT]

111. And so western women in Saudi Arabia

for instance, should be able to wear short-shorts out in public. Women in Iran not wear a chador.

[Skidmore]

13. What do you have to say to Amish, Mennonite, or Mormon women here who

don't dress using the conventions of the popular culture? How about Islamic women here who wear hejab? Why should there be a law at all about how to clothe a woman's body when we are continually fighting for a woman to have control over her own body?

[riderinthestorm]

30. Amish, Mormon, Mennonite, and Islamic women covering their hair

is far different than the burka. Besides, there actually ARE religious guidelines for covering the hair. There is not a religious dictate for the burka.

And we already have laws that tell women what they can and cannot wear in public. Why does the burka get a pass from public and/or even legal discussion? In some places it's illegal to wear a KKK hood. I'm perfectly okay with that. We as a society have decided that the meaning of that hood is wrong.

[ZombieHorde]

107. "And we already have laws that tell women what they can and cannot wear in public."

I want these laws to go away, not grow stronger.

[riderinthestorm]

110. You at least are consistent. nt

[SheilaT]

114. There is a large difference between

covering hair and wearing a burka.

It's a symbol of rejection of the secular society that they have presumably chosen to live in. If they want to live in a repressive culture, then move to one of those countries. Meanwhile, understand that by living in a western secular country, there is an implicit agreement to adhere to the societal standards of those western secular cultures, and that precludes wearing overtly oppressive clothing, like a burka.

[NutmegYankee]

53. Most secular laws only forbid covering ones face.

You are free to cover your hair and head as you please.

[gateley]

27. Excellent points. That's always been my complaint of visitors to another culture.

I would never dream of visiting a Religious State without adhering to and honoring their way of life, regardless of my personal feelings. I find it dumfounding that someone will go to a foreign country and try to, essentially, "bring their country with them".

[whattheidonot]

62. correct

burkas also are a security problem. easy to assume a women is wearing one and hard to detect what is underneath it.

[frogmarch]

128. You took the words out of my mouth. nt

[msongs]

3. so will grown men in afghanistan pillage and murder innocents in protest? nt

[The Straight Story]

6. Yep, and france will be to blame (like a scantily dressed woman is responsible for her rape)

People like to blame the victims and explain how they made others do something...

[The Straight Story]

4. Bet halloween in france is no fun...no masks/etc now

:shrug:

[riderinthestorm]

8. No one under 18 yrs old is allowed to wear masks on Halloween

in school. Most common sense precautions about kids and Halloween also strongly urge kids and parents to pick costumes that do NOT have face masks because they are dangerous (obstruct peripheral vision).

[Lochloosa]

9. I see the Unrecs are hard at it

[truebrit71]

10. Wonder if she'd see where she was going better without that veil on...?

:sarcasm: ....but seriously folks...I don't see anything wrong with that picture or that law. If you move to a foreign country be prepared to adhere to their laws and their customs. It would be as stupid as me having moved to the US driven on the wrong side of the road, and then sued YOU for infringeing upon my rights...

[Lochloosa]

11. That is assuming that she is not in her county of birth.

[blondeatlast]

15. Thank you; I was about to post the same thing. nt

[Taverner]

92. That is irrelevant actually

It all boils down to identification

If its against my religion to have a license plate, and I take mine off, then I don't get to drive on Public Roads. Period.

You can yammer all you want about their 'religion' (the burqua is not mentioned ANYWHERE in the Koran or the Hadiths) but its not about that. It has NOTHING to do with religion.

[MedleyMisty]

16. Here's a deal

If women can't choose what to wear because others think it's sexist, then I declare being a housewife illegal. Start arresting all the stay at home moms for holding the gender back.

[cali]

38. you do realize that the French law bans a multitude of face coverings

[krabigirl]

86. so you can't cover your face from the cold in the winter in france now? interesting.

[riderinthestorm]

18. There are laws in every western country dictating what women may or may not wear in public

Women cannot go topless to court, nor wear a ski mask in a bank.

Our patriarchal, misogynistic culture ensures that people don't fight against clothing restrictions that actually DO keep women "clothed appropriately" (per whatever your yardstick may be) yet turn right around and fight for the most misogynistic, female-erasing garment on the planet.

You can't have both and unless you've been out there fighting for women to truly be free to wear whatever they want in the public square then I call bullshit.

We (the royal we) decide as a community what we will and will not allow clothing wise in our public square. We always have. We still do. Why the burka gets a pass from the same discussion is irritating, especially since it's very essence is to ensure that women are not equal.

I hate that picture but at least I'm consistent. If you want to be able to self-righteously pontificate about women having the freedom to wear whatever they want, then get busy working on women's rights in all ways.

[Shagbark Hickory]

21. How can you possibly say that wearing a ski mask in a bank or going topless in court is the same as

prohibiting someone to wear a certain piece of apparel in public?
That's absurd.

[riderinthestorm]

23. It's regulating what can and cannot be worn in public.

It's the same principle as regulating the burka. We as a society have had a conversation about clothing issues and what is going to be allowed in public. "We've" agreed on certain principles. Why does the burka get a pass on being discussed as an appropriate garment to wear in public?

[Shagbark Hickory]

47. Now it's not, it's regulating what you can/nt be worn in private.

There's a difference.
A fancy restaurant has a dress code.
A courtroom has a dress code.
A Bank has a dress code.
The high school I went to, had a dress code.

The law and france is a dress code for what can be worn in public.

[lukasahero]

49. Neither the courtroom nor (presumably) the school are private property

They are public paid for by the citizens.

[Shagbark Hickory]

69. It doesn't matter. If you don't want to abide by the dresscode, you don't have to go inside.

[lukasahero]

125. Of course it matters

Your premise was that this was private property. Courtrooms are not private property and therefore not subject to the whims of the owners.

[riderinthestorm]

67. Schools and courts are public property and thus are the definition of public

places.

Besides, as I've already stipulated, there absolutely ARE public dress codes for men and women. That we've all agreed upon and in general that we all follow or we go to jail.

[Shagbark Hickory]

71. Being in a publicly owned building isn't the same as being "out in public"

[riderinthestorm]

75. I believe the courts would disagree with you. Public buildings are designated

as being out in "public".

[Shagbark Hickory]

95. If the courts can decide that then they can also decide what people wear.

Just like they decide who can bring a gun into the court room and who can't.

[ZombieHorde]

108. The courts don't really have authority. All they really have is the real threat of violence. nt

[Common Sense Party]

63. Can the woman wear a burka in the bank? n/t

[Shagbark Hickory]

72. It's up to the bank.

[Common Sense Party]

88. Does the bank get to decide on the ski mask? n/t

[ecstatic]

22. I think you're comparing apples to oranges

It's true, we can't walk around topless in public. I'm against a woman being forced into wearing a burka, but if she wants to wear one for religious reasons, who am I to say she shouldn't? It's her body, her choice. Last I checked, freedom of religion is a good thing.

[riderinthestorm]

25. Nope, it's not. We as a society create the norms upon which we allow some things

and disallow others. Besides, this type of face covering is not religious. It's cultural only.

Going into another tangent if you want to discuss freedom to practice religion, Native Americans cannot sit in the public square and take peyote or magic mushrooms (which are part of their religious culture). We as a society have decided that religious practice can't happen like that.

[lukasahero]

50. "we can't walk around topless in public" Men can

Why can't women? Who decided that and why?

[WatsonT]

57. Not me

I wish that weren't the case.

But likewise men can't show any bits associated with reproduction in public.

Not saying it's right, but it is consistent. It's not like the law says "women must be covered at all times, but men can go around nude if they want".

[lukasahero]

126. Breasts are associated with reproduction?

Really?

[WatsonT]

145. Typically the little critters like to eat

following a successful reproductive act.

[Shagbark Hickory]

73. Well now you're on to something with that.

This is an example of restriction of liberty.

[closeupready]

85. In New York state, they can. Don't know about other states.

nt

[lukasahero]

127. Really?

I'll have to look that up unless, of course, you want to back that claim up yourself...

[closeupready]

147. Can't do it right now - Court of Appeals ruling in 1995..?

Re-affirmed in 2005, I think? Anyway, please do a search and post it, I'd appreciate it.

[riderinthestorm]

150. Yes they can, in limited circumstances. But public lewdness laws still exist in NY

so there's a balancing act. Women can go topless if they "don't engage in any commerce" which basically means they can't do anything but walk down the street. But the network of other laws about public lewdness means cops have great leeway in pulling a woman off the streets for going topless.

I googled images "topless women new york" and only came up with street protests... about toplessness!

[WatsonT]

56. Um, those same laws apply to men as well

Men can't cover their faces in banks, or go nude to court.

The whole no shirt, no shoes, no service thing is entirely against men. (by your logic).

[riderinthestorm]

66. Sorry I didn't stipulate exact regs. Women can't stand and watch a parade topless

for example, but a man can....

Yes, some of those laws apply to both men and women. The ban in France against face masks applies to both genders too.

[NutmegYankee]

24. It's a good thing.

Lets start off with this:

I believe that the state, and society, has an inherent interest in being able to see the face of the person they are conducting business with or walking past. It is too easy to commit crimes or other offenses and remain anonymous with a face covering. Frankly, in western society, covering ones face is associated with violent crime (commit a rape, rob a bank, murder on the street). It is disturbing for westerners to talk to a piece of cloth.

There is no religious requirement in Islam that requires the face be covered. In fact most Muslim women do not cover their face. It is merely a cultural tradition for some. Well, Human Rights does not protect cultural traditions that are disturbing to a host country. The women are still free to practice their faith.

[MH1]

65. +1

Well said.

[Shagbark Hickory]

74. Oh. So they're allowed to practice their faith but not practice their customs. I see.

[riderinthestorm]

77. Yes. some customs are illegal that have religious overtones like FGM.

Unless you believe that people should be allowed to persist in dangerous cultural actions even when we have laws against it?

We don't allow wives to be burned alive on their husbands funeral pyres either.

France has a very strong secular state and they believe that the burka damages their culture. There actually ARE some valid reasons why that may be so as this (and hundreds of other) burka thread shows. You may disagree about valid or not but that's why this is a discussion board. Cultural relativists however, get no pass from me as I find their POV even more detestable than any accusation of bigotry you may want to fling.

[Shagbark Hickory]

96. Lots of anti muslim sentiment in that country. Got nothing to do with protecting the secular culture

of france.

They also want to do away with minarets. Let me guess, minarets are hurting the french culture too.

[riderinthestorm]

97. No France does not want to ban minarets. WTF?? nt

[Shagbark Hickory]

99. Sorry. Switzerland. But Sarcozy supports the ban

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minaret_controversy_in_Switzerland
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/.../Nicolas-Sarkozy-defends-Swiss-minaret-ban.html

[blondeatlast]

98. Wrong--Switzerland DID ban minarets, not France. nt

[Shagbark Hickory]

100. My point is there is a lot of anti-muslim sentiment in that region. Sarcozy seems to be playing into

that as he has publicly stated that the ban is fine with him.

[krabigirl]

80. wow. Sorry, so if one wants to cover their face from the cold with a scarf and a pulled down hat..

i guess they should be arrested for "pre-crime."

unbelievable. Makes me want to start wearing a mask.

[NutmegYankee]

159. This debate isn't over a scarf protecting cheeks.

The only thing seen in the dress banned in France is eyes from eye holes, if that isn't screened over. Besides, we drop the scarfs away from the face when talking to other people in anything but a horrible wind storm, and even then, most of the face is visible.

[ZombieHorde]

112. Don't visit Montana in the winter. You will have a heart attack from fear of all the masked people.

Our scarves and face masks will be hiding our suspicious identities, while your uncovered face turns red, and your ears and nose fall off.

[NutmegYankee]

158. I live in a cold place as well.

We take off our face coverings when dealing with other people "face to face", like at a store.

[ZombieHorde]

161. I don't remove my face covering in stores, unless I am going to be spending more than 10 minutes in

the store. If I am restocking my house with food, I will loosen my scarf in the store, but if I am just buying some milk, why bother?

[Chris_Texas]

28. Religion, by definition, is the oposite of freedom

[Common Sense Party]

64. ????

:wtf:

[MatthewStLouis]

29. This kind of law surprises me for France.

I don't care for the repressive practice of wearing face coverings, but if a person wants to cover his/her face in public, they should have every right to.

[riderinthestorm]

33. France's history with religious costuming is far different than ours.

Their revolution had a strongly anti-religious bent as the church was seen as colluding in oppressing the population. Many many clerics died in the revolution. At one time France even had laws going so far as banning clerical collars.

Their secularism is part of both their history and their heritage. If you've ever spent any time in France, you'd understand how deeply it extends into their culture.

I've said my piece in other posts on this thread about the actual law and it's execution.

[JustAnotherGen]

68. Amen

[krabigirl]

78. Meh, I have spent time there, and I still think it is rooted in racism in this case.

[MatthewStLouis]

151. Thanks. Very interesting.

I knew the revolution was highly secular. I guess I assumed their liberal tolerance of Islam (as portrayed in our media, compared to the U.S.) extended to a tolerance of dress.

[riderinthestorm]

153. They have banned all religious gear in schools, from headscarves to

yarmulkes and necklaces with crosses. And the French overwhelmingly endorse that, including their Muslim population.

France is not the US. They don't have a first amendment like we do, and their culture is very different.

[Turborama]

31. What a paradox for 1st Amendment absolutists who support both the burning of the Qur'an & this law

This law is a double whammy, too. It restricts citizens' freedom of expression and prohibits the free exercising of their religion.

First Amendment - Religion and Expression

Amendment Text | Annotations

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/data/constitution/amendment01/

BTW if you reply and I don't respond it's probably because you were permanently put on ignore recently for supporting Terry Jones and denying his culpability.

[NutmegYankee]

32. It is not religion - it's culture.

Very different.

[Turborama]

34. I know that. It's culturally how they like to exercise their religion.

[NutmegYankee]

37. Cultural expression can be controlled by laws.

I can name plenty of cultural traditions that are restricted because of the impact on society. Pacific islanders restricted from eating the dead by health laws, polygamy, restriction on who can harvest eagle feathers, etc

This is just another. It is inherently disturbing to westerners to not see the face of the person they are dealing with. It is often associated with violent crime. The women are not restricted from practicing their faith.

[Turborama]

42. Whatever. Is the wearing of the Burqa protected under the 1st Amendment or not?

In America.

BTW wearing a Burqa is nothing like cannibalism in random Pacific islands.

Who is to decide what's "inherently disturbing to westerners" or not? And what other laws could that biased (almost racist) subjectivism lead to?

You're entering dangerous territory when you start talking like that.

[riderinthestorm]

44. It's not religious. And yes, it is worn in public in the US legally

(but not in banks, or for your drivers license, etc. where it's been legally banned).

Can Native Americans take religiously mandated hallucinogenic drugs in public? No. We can and do place limits on religious traditions in public if we believe them to be problematic for our greater society at large. I'd say that the Native Americans have a far better case for their religious rights being infringed, than burka clad women (where the burka is of course, not religious but cultural). Both of them however, touch upon grey areas that are open for discussion imho drug usage in public, and women's rights in a misogynistic, patriarchal culture.

Since both of these are "hot" issues in the US, they get a fair bit of scrutiny, discussion and legal fine-tuning ("biased subjectivism" if you wish). Do you think it's okay for KKK hoods to be worn in public? Those are also banned. What message do we send to our greater society if we allowed them?

[NutmegYankee]

48. In many states it is not.

Many have laws forbidding shielding ones face in public. There is a valid secular reason for a law like that, and I completely support it.

And dangerous territory? LOL. This is a Democracy - and we make laws that preserve our society. As long as the law is equally applied to all members of the community, it is OK. We ban facial coverings in public for all people regardless of religion or race or ethnicity. These laws are not targeted at a minority. Sorry, but your attempt to paint me as a bigot is FAIL!

[Turborama]

58. Last time I looked state laws cannot supersede the American constitution.

Supremacy Clause

Article VI, Clause 2 of the United States Constitution, known as the Supremacy Clause, establishes the U.S. Constitution, Federal Statutes, and U.S. Treaties as "the supreme law of the land." The text decrees these to be the highest form of law in the U.S. legal system, and mandates that all state judges must follow federal law when a conflict arises between federal law and either the state constitution or state law of any state. (Note that the word "shall" is used, which makes it a necessity, a compulsion.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supremacy_Clause

And in answer to the bleating about what I said regarding dangerous territory, other readers can make their minds up about where making laws based on that sort of biased subjectivism leads to. I've suddenly lost interest in what you think about it.

[NutmegYankee]

156. LOL.

[JustAnotherGen]

70. No

There is no first Amendment in France. In the picture by the OP - she has no rights in America - as she is not in America.

[Turborama]

87. That's not what I asked.

Read my post again.

Here's what I asked, for your convenience.

"Is the wearing of the Burqa protected under the 1st Amendment or not? In America."

[JustAnotherGen]

89. Ask Rock Bama

He's a Constitutional Law Professor.

[ZombieHorde]

116. I like to think so. nt

[msanthrope]

162. Yes. But things can be denied to you. For example, a driver's license.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sultaana_Freeman

Entrance to an airport. Entrance into public buildings. I've watched dumbasses try to convince court personnel to let them in--denied.

Your religious freedom to wear the burqua is unquestioned. BUT, should you choose to interact with society, you must submit to its lawful rules. for example, you have no constitutional right to a driver's license. So, you choose to obey the law, or not.

[blondeatlast]

90. The constitution covers EVERYONE in the United States--including visitors.

Yours is a common misconception, to be sure, but a misconception it is.

[ZombieHorde]

115. "It is inherently disturbing to westerners to not see the face of the person they are dealing with."

This is why places like DU don't get any members from western countries. We hate to deal with faceless people.

This is also the reason the telephone never caught on. You can't see the person's face.

[NutmegYankee]

157. OFFS

You know exactly what I'm talking about. Or have you never worked retail?

[ZombieHorde]

160. I have never worked retail, so I won't speak for retail workers, but I do talk to people with their

faces covered. It doesn't bother me.

[riderinthestorm]

35. That's the US. The OP is about France. Very different. nt

[cali]

39. lol. except the 1st amendment isn't French law.

[Poll_Blind]

36. "Two bits, folks! Step right up! SEE the savage unmasked! RELISH in her naked shame!"

It's a one-way mirror, Ladies and Gents, so gather 'round close!

LOOK at her quiver in fear! LOOK at her knees betray her! SEE the animal weep! WITNESS the savage try to cover her face with her hands!

SEE...HER...WRITHE...IN...THE...GLARE...OF...FREEDOM!

Come back for the two o'clock show and we'll do her mother and grandmother!

HEAR their grunted pleas for the warriors of their SPEEEE-CIES to save them!

PB

[Octafish]

40. France should be ashamed.

Double shame on Sarkozy and his handlers.

[joeybee12]

41. Very unsettling...fors those who approve of this, shame...

education, not outlawing this is the way to go.

[ZombieHorde]

117. Exactly. Education is the best way to handle this. nt

[pampango]

43. It's Sarkozy trolling for far-right votes using the "scary" Muslim immigrants as his foil.

When a conservative politicians wants to run for reelection and has a terrible record and low popularity (of course), what do they do? Scare the voters, particularly those on the right. The targets change to suit the season, in France from the Gypsies to the Muslims, but the "other" is always whom you should be afraid of.

And once you're afraid who better to protect you from "them" than the conservatives. You certainly wouldn't want to turn to liberal/socialist multiculturalists who realize that Sarkozy is just playing politics with the less than one-tenth of one percent of Muslim women in France who wear a burka. The socialist party in France has come out against Sarkozy's "distract the voters by focusing on a tiny, tiny minority of an immigrant population" instead of dealing with France's real problems.

[Shagbark Hickory]

76. ^ Somebody who sees the bigger picture ^ n/t

[krabigirl]

79. Yep. absolutely. sarko sickens me.

[blondeatlast]

91. Arizona politics writ larger--you are spot-on. nt

[closeupready]

46. The irony is that if she'd been half naked with prostitute high heels, everyone here would approve.

As if prostitutes are free.

[PufPuf23]

129. Unless burquas and nun costumes are worn commando

they should be limited by a zoning, whether legal or assumed and allowed.

Insert sarcasm.

The issue of burquas and religious practices in general by a minority that conflict with civil law in a secular democracy is not a set of issues with an answer except but shrinking zoning and social adjustment (evolution) over time. Is Santeria animal cruelty?

Some American Indians set wildfires in ritual.

The subject is hard to generalize especially when one considers perspective.

Personally, my belief is that only a very indoctrinated or activist woman would want to appear in public in such inappropriate and uncomfortable apparel in their resident towns.

[WatsonT]

55. While I do detest what the veil stands for

and the culture that created it, and anyone who feels it should be forced on others (on penalty of violence often), I can't support laws telling people what they can and cannot wear.

If it's forced on them then obviously punish those doing the forcing.
But if it's a choice, how can the government justify saying no?

[howard112211]

59. But it's for her own good, right? Seems similar to making it a crime to be beaten up by the husband

so that the victims can be thrown into jail in order to protect them :crazy:

There are two possible scenarious for wearing a veil: Either the woman made the decision on her own, in case of which no one who believes in a free society has any ground to argue against it OR she was forced to wear it, in case of which it is nuts to criminalize her and not the person who forced her to wear it.

[blondeatlast]

93. +1. nt

[ZombieHorde]

119. I once made an OP which said pretty much the same thing.

This whole situation is absurd.

[krabigirl]

81. Sarko is an idiot..pandering to the frightened far right and racists. disgusting.

[JitterbugPerfume]

82. this is the only life these women know

and compassion costs nothing.

The bottom line is religion is another word for misogynist

[JackRiddler]

105. Sure enough. Now tell us how a ban improves her situation. Or that this is even the law's intent.

[JitterbugPerfume]

109. the ban does not in any way improve her situation

and I have no idea what the true intent of the law is ,but I suspect that it is fear .

[riderinthestorm]

113. I don't believe anyone knows how it will impact their lives.

We know that banning FGM pushed it underground with all the unsanitary and dangerous implications of that, but it also made it far harder to accomplish in the west. Banning abortions doesn't really diminish their numbers but it does make it much harder to get one safely.

Nobody knows what this will bring. I do know that banning other harmful cultural practices that hurt women (like FGM and suttee) met with strong initial resistance, then capitulation, and then cultural shifting of attitudes about it. Government dictates sometimes are necessary to stop harmful cultural practices that have no place in our western cultures (or any culture really).

[JackRiddler]

122. That's pretty much how I see it, having lived in Europe and seen the racism first-hand.

This is pandering to fears of a future "Muslim Europe" for the VOTE. Obviously they're not going to pick out exemplary qualities of Islam (banking, for instance) to attack, they're going to focus on things we will (with reason) find most repulsive and "other." This is analogous to Bush invading Afghanistan for "women's rights." Yeah, sure.

If this was serious, they would make a very public and financed offer of protection to women who wanted to drop the veil, establish means by which they could contact the state for help anonymously, etc.

.

[ZombieHorde]

123. Some religions, like Wicca and Thelema, are very pro-women.

Taoism is probably as pro-woman as the culture it is being practiced in.

[fishwax]

83. Incidentally, there are several U.S. states and cities that have laws against masks/hoods in public

Including Washington, D.C. Many of these laws were originally intended to curtail Klan activity. I wonder if these have ever been applied to women wearing the veil.

I also wonder if many of those who object to France's law also object to these laws ...

[ZombieHorde]

120. I object to most all clothing laws.

Hospitals have some understandable dress regulations.

[LadyHawkAZ]

118. Would you let a man in a ski mask into your workplace?

Neither would I.

This isn't a religious issue or a feminist issue, it's a safety issue. Although I think dragging them off to jail is a bit on the extreme side.

[ZombieHorde]

121. Of course I would allow a man in a ski mask into my workplace.

It's really cold here sometimes.

[riderinthestorm]

132. Would you let people in Klan hoods into your workplace?

Would you be comfortable with that? As an AA woman, I would not.

Some face coverings are not appropriate. Ever.

I believe the burka falls within that purview as dehumanizing and degrading women.

[ZombieHorde]

138. The KKK would not be welcome regardless of how they were dressed.

The KKK ghost costume is not why I don't like them. Their bigotry and history of violence is why I don't like them.

[riderinthestorm]

140. But their KKK costume is their outward expression of their philosophy

And thus is the burka the outward expression of their misogyny and repression of women. So you are saying that misogyny and the forced subservience of women is more acceptable than a KKK hood? You seem to be stating that a KKK hood symbolizing their bigotry and history of violence is somehow "greater" than what is symbolized by the burka. Are you sure you want to go there??

Cuz I can tell you, the repression of women symbolized by the burka is just as great as that symbolized by a KKK hood. And if you are okay with that....??

[ZombieHorde]

154. I consider their actions to be their outward expression of their philosophy.

Their ghost costume is one of the least offensive things about the KKK. I don't care what they wear, I care what they do.

"And thus is the burka the outward expression of their misogyny and repression of women."

If a woman is wearing a burka because she is being forced, then punishing her is punishing the victim. If a woman is wearing a burka because she wants to wear one, then we are not actually addressing repression. Either way, the ban on burkas is absurd.

"So you are saying that misogyny and the forced subservience of women is more acceptable than a KKK hood?"

I have no idea how you came to this conclusion. I would love for you to walk me through your logic on this one.

"Are you sure you want to go there??"

I think you are the only one going there.

edit: quotes

[blondeatlast]

130. Yes, because I don't live in fear. nt

[riderinthestorm]

136. How about KKK hoods? I'll tell you this AA woman would be intimidated if I had to work w/ that.

Some face coverings are not appropriate. Ever.

Having government regulate face coverings isn't such an outrageous bigoted action that warrants the fits that DU produces every time this issue comes up. Face coverings in the west have strong negative associations. Burkas have even stronger misogynistic, dehumanizing, and anti-woman messages.

The US (and virtually every other western country) have always had laws regulating what a person may or may not wear in the public square. They are on the books right now in the US from not going topless to court, to not wearing a motorcycle helmet at the police station during questioning, to not wearing your underwear while shopping at the grocery store. These are laws we have all agreed upon as a civil society. Fighting for this garment, the burka, designed to virtually erase a woman from society, is crazy unless you are willing to take on ALL dress codes/laws in our land. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite.

[ZombieHorde]

124. She looks so free! She must be so happy with her saviors.

This is sarcasm.

[uppityperson]

131. She'd probably not stumbled if she could see better. Good thing those guys caught her so she didn't

fall and hurt herself.

[Liberal_in_LA]

133. unsettling picture

[SoCalDem]

137. protesters like to be provocative..it fuels their cause..no matter the cause.

[aikoaiko]

141. No country is perfect. Certainly not the US, or France.

[Canuckistanian]

144. You will be free or we'll FORCE you to be free, dammit

Even if that means going to jail.

We take our freedom SERIOUSLY here in France.

[riderinthestorm]

152. Which of course, western societies have done. Like with FGM and suttee and other

cultural practices that clash with our western norms of women's rights and equality. These have been forcefully enforced in some cases. And that's okay with me. I'm not a cultural relativist who believes that everything another culture wants to import to the west is fine.

The pic is ugly, no doubt. But I've also seen pictures of little-girl-FGM-butcher-shops, and the removal of those women by law enforcement looks just like the OP too.

[Liquorice]

146. It looks like they're dragging her out of the 16th century. nt

[Zax2me]

149. Kinda, right?!

I can certainly understand how she stumbled.
Her face is covered flush to her eyeball - how can she possibly see where she is walking unless she is looking directly down?

[Quantess]

148. I like it.

I really don't feel too bad for her.

[Fuzz]

155. Religious and Government oppression both suck, HARD.