Prohiber par la loi le port de la burqa ou du niqab soulèverait, en effet, deux questions plus qu'épineuses. D'une part, au nom de quel argument ou de quel principe interdire à des femmes majeures une tenue vestimentaire, quelle qu'elle soit, dans l'espace public, sauf à confondre le législateur français avec une assemblée d'oulémas ? Ce qui a été décidé pour les établissements scolaires, précisément parce qu'il s'agissait des jeunes et de l'école, trouve, là, sa limite. D'autre part, sauf à imaginer une détestable ou ridicule police des moeurs, comment appliquer une telle interdiction, si le choix en était fait ? Beaucoup plaident avec énergie pour un islam moderne et tolérant. Ils ont raison. Il faut convaincre plutôt que légiférer.
Meanwhile,the president of the CFCM, the organization representing French Muslims, says that Muslims are not asking France to accept the burqa, which the Koran does not require.
7 comments:
It is hard to argue with Le Monde's reasoning. I would mostly agree except for those areas where public safety would be involved, e.g., driving, and those functions involving the need for identification, e.g., the need to show a face to get photographed for une pièce d'identité or the need to lift the veil to have one's face compared with the photo. Beyond these very limited areas, it is difficult to disagree with Le Monde.
Some things are outrageous in themselves and not matters of opinion.
France2 conducted interviews a few months ago in which Muslim women in France argued that genital mutilation, another Muslim custom for women, was in fact highly desirable and even necessary. Should those women's opinions matter in deciding whether France should permit genital mutilation? I think not. Mutilation is an outrage.
Likewise, isn't walking around in public covered from head to foot also an outrage? Why should France consider the acceptability of a woman's being dressed like a tent to be a question of opinion if genital mutilation and polygamy are not matters of opinion?
this is what liberalism is about.
the strong assumption, i think, is that you can take the cloth off in a way you can't undo GM.
It is inappropriate to compare the wearing of clothing to the performance of ritual female circumcision.
The balancing act between freedom and constraint is not, thank God, determined by "outrage" but by the rule of Law.
Female circumcision is already illegal in France, and has been for many years. We all know it continues,in France, as it does in the US. Laws already on th books must be enforced, and those that violate them must be held to account and brought to justice.
As an American who highly values our Constitutional First Amendement rights to freedom of expression and the free exercise of religion, I find almost all attempts to constrain that freedom abhorrent.
In banning the Muslim headscarf in France, they also banned the wearing of the yarmulker and the cross. What next?
US law is not applicable in France. There is no Supreme Court to uphold First Amendment rights. It will be up to the French people to strike the right balance of freedom and constraint. I am certain they will deal with it in their own way, slippery slope that it may be.
So called "honor killings" continue in France, and in the Us. They are obviously homicides, criminal acts , and the men who commit these acts must be searched out, indicted, tried, convicted and jailed for life. In the recent case of "honor killings" in Texas a Muslim man murdered his two young daughters for talking to boys and wearing western clothing. In Texas, the death penalty should, and will be applied.
I do agree with Tom that the law must allow a clear, full face, uncovered face photo for ID purposes such as drivers license and passport. Green Card, etc.
Since there is no Carte d'identite in the US and most likely never will be, it is a moot question.
I think that simply saying "it's the law" is a truncated argument. The fundamental question is which areas of "private" life and "personal" choice can legitimately be subject to public legislation and prohibition. Female genital mutilation is against the law, but male circumcision isn't, even though it is practiced on non-consenting infants. Why is this accepted as normal? (I speak as one of the circumcised.) Clearly, the introduction of "novel" practices by immigrant populations is likely to pose this sort of problem most acutely. What is sanctioned by tradition in one place may be considered prima facie repugnant in another. The burqa falls into a somewhat different category, however, since it is a rather recently "invented tradition" even in its cultures of origin.
It is really a question of a clash of cultures,a clash of civilizations. When it involves something totally antithetical to those values and outside the boundaries of cultural norms,as female circumcision and polygamy do, the Law is the deciding factor.That would include the stoning of wome, as well.
It is against the law, and is criminal behavior, subject to legal sanction.
Female circumcision or genital mutilation cannot be compared to male circumcision, and are not part of the same debate.
Male circumcision is wholly in keeping with the underlying Judeo-Christian values of the US, France, and the UK. It is about the Covenant between Abraham and his people, as you well know. In the US, Jews, Muslims, many Protestant Evangelicals follow this paractice, as a religious ritual. Islam follows this Covenant as well.
It has become common practive among most other groups as well. The percentage of males in the US who are circumcised is very high.
Anecdotally, The sons and grandsons of the Queen of England were circumcised by the Grand Rabbi of England.
As far as circumcision of male infants goes, in the US, children actually have no rights under the Law. There have been movements to ban circumcision , but they gave never gotten very far.
The opposition to male circumcision comes from atheists, and is always defeated by Jews, Christians,(Roman Catholics, Protestants, Orthodox, etc) and Muslims.
i don't think you can just resort to 'norms' to solve this kind of problem.
Post a Comment