French Burka Ban

[waitasec]

I see you're intentionally missing the point. Lets say that it happens that there aren't any cultures today that refuse gay marriage, still we will use the example as a proposed scenario, which used to happen before. That of course is aside from the fact that there are societies today that refuse gay marriage.

you are intentionally in denial of reality...
what cultures object to same sex marriages?
i gave you a link and you choose to ignore it...

Being gay is about human companionship? Being homosexual or heterosexual simply refers to which gender your attracted to, thats it. These other feelinings you're referring to are present in all people, however it has nothing to do with them being gay or not.

of course it is...that is why banning same sex marriages is oppressive.

Wrong on all accounts. But for your impression about how i view gays, an explanation would be that any such tone you detect in my words are only there to match yours about women in face cover to try to show you your double standard. I'll just get you an example from this very post:


Not at all, they did chose to whether you like it or not. At best it will only be that their choice is affected by their upbringing (which in some cases it is), and that does not negate their choice.

of course it does because of the use of fear...

I'll disregard for now the fact that this doesn't come even close to remotely be victimizing others. I'll follow your reasoning instead. Okay, this does indeed need legal intervention. Lets see what else this applies to. How about someone who insults other people's religion?

freedom of speech (within the realm of common decency, something that some people do not understand)...doesn't hurt anyone...
if one is profoundly insulted by words...some one is profoundly insecure...

What is the purpose of that? doesn't that hurt their feelings and further alienates them? Seems to me this is an act of aggression. A planned and calculated one at that. It is an outright wrong too, it should be illegal as well.

what hypocrisy. are you telling me this came from no where? are you telling me that there hasn't been a prelude to this happening? get real. had the muslim community not go the way of arrogance maybe there would be more of a sense of tolerance for your right to be separated in society...
it's the law, ID is the law you even admit there are times ID is required...
there is the double standard right there for all to see...THERE ARE TIMES WHEN ID IS REQUIRED....TELL ME WHEN IS IT NOT?

Oh wait, i forget, freedom of speech is okay in western culture, i guess i'll have to find something else. How about men in long hair? Some people are pretty offended by that.

sounds like you're jealous of other people freedoms...

Mere personal opinion that has zero value to whether this should be legal or not.



It was only a matter of time before you said this.



No its not, its not your right to see her face whenever you like, she is not doing any suspicious behavior, and your feelings about her being around your children are completely irrelevant to the law. Its only relevant to you, don't let women wearing it around your children if you like.



Thats not true unfortunately. This law is not about security, as i already mentioned more than once, if you're talking about France that is.



Like have been said in this thread or the other one applying this logic should include all kinds of face coverings, any kind of object that covers the face. And once again, if the law was actually about security, it would have been less insulting, because it would be just a matter of stupidity, unlike the case we have here where its matter of discrimination. It would be stupidity in security reasons case because its silly to make something illegal because of its misuse by a few. You'll have to establish that this is causing a serious concern in order to make it illegal, or then we should ban a whole lot of other things, like cars.



False, irrelevant, and another mere sign of your inability to set aside your feelings towards religion in general, and this religion in particular.



Yeah probably, just like France will have to reckon with the growing population of Muslims sooner or later.

you really don't want to get to the issue at hand...for the reason the burqua exists in the first place..i get it...no one wants to look like the bad guy.
the veil is demeaning to western women...

actually it's rather entertaining watching how this double standard is exploding in the face of male chauvinism...
:beach:

 

[waitasec]

What exactly is the reason this law was passed? Does anyone even know the actual presidence or is it all speculation?

I have no clue

The main reason is the whole integration thing, as far as i've read in some articles about this. Another possible addition would be to "lift oppression of women" and so forth. However, not any source i've encountered states the security reasons.

you know you maybe right about that...i say silly things when i get emotional

but this reason is good enough for me...obvioulsy not for some

"Given the damage it produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place," the French government said when it sent the measure to parliament in May....
The French Council of State has warned that the ban could be incompatible with international human rights laws and the country's own constitution. The council advises on laws, but the government is not required to follow its recommendations."

French senate approves burqa ban - CNN

 

[waitasec]

i just found this:

many journalists failed to provide the reader with any historical context, making it difficult to understand why French President Nicholas Sarkozy and the government would pass this type of legislation.

The law which prohibits people from concealing their faces in public spaces, but whose verbiage does not specifically reference Islam, still serves as a blatant social referendum by the French government on the religious practice.

Security reasons were cited as one of the government's motivations for the ban. The inability to see one's face in public, according to some lawmakers, compromises security and is a just reason for outlawing a religious practice that is sacred to many Muslims.

In almost all media reports there appeared to be a quiet assumption that the reader would be aware of why France might be suspicious of the burqa clad women, and why we needed to get a good look at their face, and into their eyes ... the same way that many of us did after 9/11 when boarding a plane with anyone who looked even remotely Muslim.

If this is a safety issue for France, are there any statistics that could help the reader to better understand the government's position? Are there any reports that indicate that crimes are being committed by people covering their faces or that police are facing increasing difficulty apprehending suspects because they are not easily identifiable on the street? Where there any events that prompted this legislation?

CNN quotes a government official stating that, "Given the damage it (wearing the forbidden clothing) produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place."

The protest where the two women were arrested took place, ironically, in front of Paris' famous and heralded Cathedral of Notre Dame, where women are not allowed to become priests.


And if this is an issue of equality between the sexes, why is the burqa a threat to equality anymore than the denial of professional upward mobility in Catholicism if a woman wants to become a priest?

......What has prompted a secular government to involve itself in religious affairs, and define what certain religious symbols mean?

As journalists fail to address important questions, maybe it does something even more damaging than leaving the reader with a flurry of unanswered questions and a one dimensional understanding. Maybe the impact this failure is having, serves to perpetuate existing stereotypes that assume the reader should understand why certain groups are being singled out -- allowing for what could be discrimination directed at a particular groups to become acceptable, normal, and unquestioned standards of behavior.

Robyn Carolyn Price: Banning the Burqa: Behind the Veil of France's New Law

 

[Badran]

you are intentionally in denial of reality...
what cultures object to same sex marriages?
i gave you a link and you choose to ignore it...

I'm struggling to believe that you're actually saying this, if not for the fact that this means you're actually saying there are none, but for the fact that i already addressed the hypothetical situation of there being no societies or cultures that oppose homosexuality.

An example however, would be Muslim or Arab culture in general. It don't accept gay marriage or homosexuality altogether.

of course it is...that is why banning same sex marriages is oppressive.

What is the difference between a heterosexual and homosexual? One is attracted to the opposite, one is attracted to the same. Regardless of that, you have failed to answer this point: Merely someone being born with something, obviously doesn't mean its necessarily good. Therefore, the question at hand is irrelevant to the fact that homosexuals are born as such, but it is addressing whether or not there are arguments against homosexual marriage to be victimizing someone else. Which there are none, therefore there is no reason to oppose it. Same case with face covering. Except that you of course have attempted to argue (in a fascinating way) that they actually do victimize someone else, when i applied the same argument to other things, you as expected evaded the question, and instead offered this answer:

sounds like you're jealous of other people freedoms...

of course it does because of the use of fear...

Okay, now you have insisted on claiming that these women actually had no choice in wearing those face coverings. Are you going to provide a proof for that, or are you going to admit that its a mere personal opinion and thus irrelevant? ( A personal opinion which also happens to be false).

freedom of speech (within the realm of common decency, something that some people do not understand)...doesn't hurt anyone...
if one is profoundly insulted by words...some one is profoundly insecure...

Here is what you said when describing why face covering actually do hurt somebody else in the level that warrants legal intervention:

you answered your own question...hurt being the operative word..
verb-transitive
To cause physical damage or pain to; injure.

To cause mental or emotional suffering to; distress.

To be detrimental to; hinder or impair

To have or produce a feeling of physical pain or discomfort

Now, obviously these criteria are met when someone insults someone else's religion, so?

what hypocrisy. are you telling me this came from no where? are you telling me that there hasn't been a prelude to this happening? get real. had the muslim community not go the way of arrogance maybe there would be more of a sense of tolerance for your right to be separated in society...
it's the law, ID is the law you even admit there are times ID is required...
there is the double standard right there for all to see...THERE ARE TIMES WHEN ID IS REQUIRED....TELL ME WHEN IS IT NOT?

Regardless of the fact that this in no way comes even close to addressing what i said, i still appreciate you sharing it. As for your question, its not required whenever it is not essential to identify the person. You know, like all the times when other people wear other things that cover the face and makes it harder to identify them, yet no problem emerges as you have no need nor a right to see everyone's face whenever you feel like it.

you really don't want to get to the issue at hand...for the reason the burqua exists in the first place..i get it...no one wants to look like the bad guy.

Quite the contrary, make a thread about why is there burqa in the first place, and we can talk about it there. However, that is not what we're talking about here. Neither are our opinions on that matter relevant in anyway.

the veil is demeaning to western women...

Right, so, i hope this time you'll address this example: When a man with long hair goes to live in a country that has a code in its culture that takes long hair on men to be offensive, disturbing and quite simply an example of human beings sinking to the lowest level they can. Is that man, in your view, obliged to follow their culture and cut his hair? Merely to conform basically, their opinions?

actually it's rather entertaining watching how this double standard is exploding in the face of male chauvinism...
:beach:

Well, at least we're both enjoying ourselves.

 

[Badran]

i just found this:

many journalists failed to provide the reader with any historical context, making it difficult to understand why French President Nicholas Sarkozy and the government would pass this type of legislation.

The law which prohibits people from concealing their faces in public spaces, but whose verbiage does not specifically reference Islam, still serves as a blatant social referendum by the French government on the religious practice.

Security reasons were cited as one of the government's motivations for the ban. The inability to see one's face in public, according to some lawmakers, compromises security and is a just reason for outlawing a religious practice that is sacred to many Muslims.

In almost all media reports there appeared to be a quiet assumption that the reader would be aware of why France might be suspicious of the burqa clad women, and why we needed to get a good look at their face, and into their eyes ... the same way that many of us did after 9/11 when boarding a plane with anyone who looked even remotely Muslim.

If this is a safety issue for France, are there any statistics that could help the reader to better understand the government's position? Are there any reports that indicate that crimes are being committed by people covering their faces or that police are facing increasing difficulty apprehending suspects because they are not easily identifiable on the street? Where there any events that prompted this legislation?

CNN quotes a government official stating that, "Given the damage it (wearing the forbidden clothing) produces on those rules which allow the life in community, ensure the dignity of the person and equality between sexes, this practice, even if it is voluntary, cannot be tolerated in any public place."

The protest where the two women were arrested took place, ironically, in front of Paris' famous and heralded Cathedral of Notre Dame, where women are not allowed to become priests.


And if this is an issue of equality between the sexes, why is the burqa a threat to equality anymore than the denial of professional upward mobility in Catholicism if a woman wants to become a priest?

......What has prompted a secular government to involve itself in religious affairs, and define what certain religious symbols mean?

As journalists fail to address important questions, maybe it does something even more damaging than leaving the reader with a flurry of unanswered questions and a one dimensional understanding. Maybe the impact this failure is having, serves to perpetuate existing stereotypes that assume the reader should understand why certain groups are being singled out -- allowing for what could be discrimination directed at a particular groups to become acceptable, normal, and unquestioned standards of behavior.

Robyn Carolyn Price: Banning the Burqa: Behind the Veil of France's New Law

This is the first time i encounter any mention of security reasons. What do you think that means? Also, what do you think about the other points raised by the article?

Lastly, if indeed it turns out this was a problem with Journalists not doing their jobs, and France did indeed mention security from the start in official statements (which would be very strange), this would be less insulting.

However, there should be statistics showing that there actually is such problem, because if there aren't any, then either the French government are incredibly stupid, or merely a bunch of liars.

 

[waitasec]

Right, so, i hope this time you'll address this example: When a man with long hair goes to live in a country that has a code in its culture that takes long hair on men to be offensive, disturbing and quite simply an example of human beings sinking to the lowest level they can. Is that man, in your view, obliged to follow their culture and cut his hair? Merely to conform basically, their opinions?

that man is obliged knowing what he's getting himself into...
he is knowingly moving into a different culture...
now if you want to use another example of a man who already lives in this culture where long hair is looked upon as disgusting...the odds are he won't grow long hair or, he grows it long KNOWING he is acting AGAINST what is culturally acceptable...


western culture accepts the wearing of hats and sunglasses for the purpose of either fashion or convenience (a bad hair day, sun exposure to the eyes....) these reasons are clearly not chauvinistic reasons...because both men and women can and do wear them...
the double standard comes to play when another standards is applied to another group of people....male chauvinism insists on a double standard when it comes to the burqua
if you disagree with my reason then explain to me what the real purpose of the burqua is...and why are muslim women subjected to it
you can PM me...that would be fine...

 

[Badran]

that man is obliged knowing what he's getting himself into...
he is knowingly moving into a different culture...
now if you want to use another example of a man who already lives in this culture where long hair is looked upon as disgusting...the odds are he won't grow long hair or, he grows it long KNOWING he is acting AGAINST what is culturally acceptable...

Okay, why do you think this should be alright though? What justifies him being forced to do something when he has not victimized someone else? Are you not in favor of personal freedoms?

western culture accepts the wearing of hats and sunglasses for the purpose of either fashion or convenience (a bad hair day, sun exposure to the eyes....) these reasons are clearly not chauvinistic reasons...because both men and women can and do wear them...
the double standard comes to play when another standards is applied to another group of people....male chauvinism insists on a double standard when it comes to the burqua
if you disagree with my reason then explain to me what the real purpose of the burqua is...and why are muslim women subjected to it
you can PM me...that would be fine...

I do agree actually, however both our opinions are mere perceptions that has no value in the issue. The fact is, some women willfully join this religion when they are old, not raised on it, they choose on their own to wear this as they think this makes them closer to their god. What business do you and i have in that? It doesn't matter if it were even a fact (not mere opinion) that this was unjust to them, because they simply chose to.

Btw i only used the example of women who joined when old to make the point clearer, however that does not mean that women who were born to Muslim parents have no choice in this.

 

[RitalinO.D.]

I think the problem I am seeing with this debate is, how can anyone know 100%, that a women is wearing a burqa out of nothing but her own desire?

If you were to ask a women wearing one, and she is wearing it in regards to being told to do so by a male relative, then would she answer honestly, or just say she chooses to wear it to avoid complications?

The natural inclination(in the west at least) is to assume that the women wearing it is doing it out of oppresson, because that is what people see in the media in cultures that are oppressive towards women, like Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan, S.A., etc.

Theres no way to tell if a women walking down the street in France, or anywhere for that matter, immigrated from one of those cultures where women are forced to wear it, and is just following what she has been indoctrinated into her whole life. And I would wager that theres a good percentage of women living in western cultures who wear them out of fear of reprisal.


It really sucks but theres just no way to tell for sure.


Just a gee wiz question here. If there were some way to find out exactly what percentage of Muslim women wear it out of choice, and what percent wear it because of religious pressure, and it turned out that say 75% wear it because of the latter, would you see this ban as a good or bad thing? Obviously an impossible task, just curious how you would view it.

 

[Badran]

I think the problem I am seeing with this debate is, how can anyone know 100%, that a women is wearing a burqa out of nothing but her own desire?

If you were to ask a women wearing one, and she is wearing it in regards to being told to do so by a male relative, then would she answer honestly, or just say she chooses to wear it to avoid complications?

The natural inclination(in the west at least) is to assume that the women wearing it is doing it out of oppresson, because that is what people see in the media in cultures that are oppressive towards women, like Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan, S.A., etc.

Theres no way to tell if a women walking down the street in France, or anywhere for that matter, immigrated from one of those cultures where women are forced to wear it, and is just following what she has been indoctrinated into her whole life. And I would wager that theres a good percentage of women living in western cultures who wear them out of fear of reprisal.


It really sucks but theres just no way to tell for sure.


Just a gee wiz question here. If there were some way to find out exactly what percentage of Muslim women wear it out of choice, and what percent wear it because of religious pressure, and it turned out that say 75% wear it because of the latter, would you see this ban as a good or bad thing? Obviously an impossible task, just curious how you would view it.

Being forced is one thing and being pressured is another. In the case of pressure, such as that found with social pressure and religious pressure, the choice is still there, unlike in the force's case, therefore not warranting any kind of intervention from the law.

And once again like you acknowledged, the fact is some women choose freely, so this law oppresses them.

 

[Kathryn]

Who cares whether women are being pressured to wear a burka? Are pentecostal women being pressured to wear denim skirts down to their ankles, no makeup, and never cut their hair? Are Amish women being pressured to wear somber colors with no pattern, and bonnets? Is anyone up in arms about THEIR dress code or asking if THEY are oppressed?

We are talking about women who wear burkas in democratic countries. Honestly, if wearing a burka or a bonnet or a long skirt is truly oppressive, these women have the choice (and the public resources) to get out of that society and out of that burka.

Therefore, I assume that most women who are wearing a burka choose to wear one.

I understand security purposes. For instance, I work at a bank. If someone comes in in a burka, they are going to have to remove it from their face if they want to do any banking business. We have to be able to verify a person's identity via a photo ID. And we also have security issues to deal with - we don't allow any customers to wear a hat or sunglasses, either.

Otherwise - get your burka on, girlfriend! Better you than me!

 

[waitasec]

Okay, why do you think this should be alright though? What justifies him being forced to do something when he has not victimized someone else? Are you not in favor of personal freedoms?

he is victimizing himself by knowingly doing something that is socially unacceptable, where he is a visitor, and he should also be aware of a backlash his actions causes.
it's as if you welcome a guest into your home and as soon as he sits he puts his filthy feet on the dinner table...wouldn't that be considered as rude behavior by insulting the host?

i'm all for personal freedom, trust me... if this were a perfect world no one would be telling anyone how to live their lives.
it is the act of control that i find offensive. and that is what the burqa represents to me and to many other people, i believe.

this burqa ban is really interesting because it is used as a way to put religious freedom in the spot light all while the idea of the burqa is an act of oppressing a group of people simply because of their sex in the first place.

the western world is trying to defend the ideals of human rights which is a big part of their society...being politically correct... while the burqa symbolizes oppression. even though you may disagree with that, it is how the west generally approaches it... it is why most of the french population is against it...
i do not think it has to do with the islamic religion per se, i think it has to do with the stigma the burqa places on women...besides, french women are very progressive when it comes to women's rights...

I do agree actually, however both our opinions are mere perceptions that has no value in the issue. The fact is, some women willfully join this religion when they are old, not raised on it, they choose on their own to wear this as they think this makes them closer to their god. What business do you and i have in that? It doesn't matter if it were even a fact (not mere opinion) that this was unjust to them, because they simply chose to.

Btw i only used the example of women who joined when old to make the point clearer, however that does not mean that women who were born to Muslim parents have no choice in this.

yes i get that...but i am really interested in finding out why the burqa is used in the first place.



btw, i also found this article from last year in which i think played apart of the ban...
Driver in Louvroil, France, fined for wearing a burka | Metro.co.uk

 

[waitasec]

I think the problem I am seeing with this debate is, how can anyone know 100%, that a women is wearing a burqa out of nothing but her own desire?

If you were to ask a women wearing one, and she is wearing it in regards to being told to do so by a male relative, then would she answer honestly, or just say she chooses to wear it to avoid complications?

The natural inclination(in the west at least) is to assume that the women wearing it is doing it out of oppresson, because that is what people see in the media in cultures that are oppressive towards women, like Iran, Afghanistan, Sudan, Pakistan, S.A., etc.

Theres no way to tell if a women walking down the street in France, or anywhere for that matter, immigrated from one of those cultures where women are forced to wear it, and is just following what she has been indoctrinated into her whole life. And I would wager that theres a good percentage of women living in western cultures who wear them out of fear of reprisal.


It really sucks but theres just no way to tell for sure.


Just a gee wiz question here. If there were some way to find out exactly what percentage of Muslim women wear it out of choice, and what percent wear it because of religious pressure, and it turned out that say 75% wear it because of the latter, would you see this ban as a good or bad thing? Obviously an impossible task, just curious how you would view it.

i thought of an interesting twist on this issue. imo, because women are subjected to wearing the burqa, i think one the reasons why they are protesting against the ban is for the purpose of fighting for her rights because she normally doesn't have the opportunity to fight for her rights...and it becomes counter productive for her rights...do you know what i mean?

 

[waitasec]

Otherwise - get your burka on, girlfriend! Better you than me!

remember in france the muslim population is 6% and only .6% in the states.
if you had to run into a rebellious woman who refused to remove her burqa in your bank, and this happens more than you are comfortable with, or if these women show up at your grandchild's school, or if you got into a car accident because she wore one in the car, i am of the opinion you wouldn't be saying this...
but yes you are right ... better her than you :sarcastic

 

[Kathryn]

remember in france the muslim population is 6% and only .6% in the states.
if you had to run into a rebellious woman who refused to remove her burqa in your bank, and this happens more than you are comfortable with, or if these women show up at your grandchild's school, or if you got into a car accident because she wore one in the car, i am of the opinion you wouldn't be saying this...
but yes you are right ... better her than you :sarcastic

If anyone at our bank refuses to remove their hat or sunglasses (and this DOES happen on occasion), we simply have security remove them. It's always interesting and adds a little excitement to the day.

If a woman in a burka showed up at my grandkids' school, why on earth do you think that would bother me?

As for the car wreck scenario, like I've said all along, I believe burkas should be banned in situations involving security/safety.

 

[darkendless]

If anyone at our bank refuses to remove their hat or sunglasses (and this DOES happen on occasion), we simply have security remove them. It's always interesting and adds a little excitement to the day.

If a woman in a burka showed up at my grandkids' school, why on earth do you think that would bother me?

As for the car wreck scenario, like I've said all along, I believe burkas should be banned in situations involving security/safety.

Isn't that racist by targeting their dress code though

 

[Badran]

he is victimizing himself by knowingly doing something that is socially unacceptable, where he is a visitor, and he should also be aware of a backlash his actions causes.

He didn't victimize himself. Just because he already knows that the society is messed up doesn't mean he is the one to blame for keeping his hair long although knowing that the society will probably victimize him, this is blaming the victim.

Also, i failed to give a proper example, because i said "what if a man with long hair goes to live..." as some women who are already born in said countries wear face covering.

i'm all for personal freedom, trust me... if this were a perfect world no one would be telling anyone how to live their lives.
it is the act of control that i find offensive. and that is what the burqa represents to me and to many other people, i believe.

This concept is either applied properly or either its hypocritical and useless. We can't say yes for personal freedom and at the same time deny it for someone else in a particular incident for whatever reason, if that reason is not that this thing is hurting people.

the western world is trying to defend the ideals of human rights which is a big part of their society...being politically correct... while the burqa symbolizes oppression. even though you may disagree with that, it is how the west generally approaches it... it is why most of the french population is against it...

They have no right to be against it. And you can't fix supposed oppression by doing oppression yourself. The proper way to go about this is to try and convince women not to wear this, and explain why we think so.

i do not think it has to do with the islamic religion per se, i think it has to do with the stigma the burqa places on women...besides, french women are very progressive when it comes to women's rights...

It might be not about Islam in particular, but like i said it doesn't matter what French women think, they don't like burqa, don't wear it, simple.

 

[gnostic]

I don't think the French law is anymore silly than law in some Arabic countries where women have to wear one form of headdress or another.

Actually punishing women for not wearing them or not wearing the right size are even sillier, as well as oppressive and barbaric.

But that's not to say what the French government is doing the right thing, but if they do enact the law, then I don't think it is any Muslim place to question the law. Muslims don't like it whenever outsiders question their laws, so why should the Muslims should question the French law.

But if they do enact their law, then no one should wear anything religious that may cover any part of the heads. So to be fair, they should ban nuns too from wearing their headdresses too.

But personally, I think all women should not be told what they want to wear or don't wear. Politicians, religious leaders, community leaders, and other organisations really should stay out of women's personal wardrobe.

ps.

I do and would understand it, if they did ban burqa or anything that cover their faces in security-sensitive places, like the banks, airports, customs, judicial courts, government building, etc.

 

[Badran]

I completely agree gnostic, except for this part:

but if they do enact the law, then I don't think it is any Muslim place to question the law. Muslims don't like it whenever outsiders question their laws, so why should the Muslims should question the French law.

Simply because its not true that all Muslims don't like it when their law is questioned, not all Muslims think like that. And because this assumes that all the women wearing face coverings are immigrants.

I do agree however that if a Muslim does not like it when others criticize laws in countries that contain a majority of Muslims, he would be a hypocrite to complain here.

 

[gnostic]

Simply because its not true that all Muslims don't like it when their law is questioned, not all Muslims think like that. And because this assumes that all the women wearing face coverings are immigrants.

Apology. That sentence did come out as being too "general" or inclusive.

 

[YmirGF]

Apology. That sentence did come out as being too "general" or inclusive.

I agree with your position, as well, Gnostic Storyteller.

In my view, is some lady wishes to trot about covered from head to toe, that is her right. Personally, I don't understand why anyone would want to do so, but I also cannot understand why all too many overweight women (and girls) try to dress like Jennifer Lopez either or why many boys and young men like to wander about with their pants about to fall off. So, there you go.

That said, I think that Muslim women should not receive special consideration of having only female personal confirm their identity. Logistically, that is not always possible. If a female official is available, by all means, if not, no dice. It should be mandatory for the female Muslim to submit to the people who are present and be done with it.