Should Muslim veils be banned in public universities?

[Shadow Wolf]

Perhaps a clause for loose clothing, if the veil is considered loose clothing at the time, for classes which have a higher risk factor; flammables, machinery, etc.

As far as I know, loose clothing is already not allowed in any lab. Hair must be restrained, coat or smock worn, proper shoes worn, no necklaces or other things left dangling, and the general rule of thumb is to not wear anything that you don't want to have ruined by dyes, stains, chemicals, various organic bits, or other things that will ruin your clothes. Under certain circumstances you may even be required to wear a flame retardant lab coat. And these rules exist for a good reason. I haven't known any Muslims in this situation to know how this may-or-may-not cause any problems.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

I'm not sure where you are going with this, what sort of proportion would you see as significant? I would think that gun deaths are more common than from swords - but would not see that as an argument to permit the bearing of swords. Are you positing some sort of scale of threat where at some level you arbitrarily decide that they don't count if there are Santa impersonators who outnumber them? I'm not seeing your logic.

I'm saying that if you want to ban wearing niqabs in public in the name of "security" but aren't worried about things that are used by criminals more often, then I won't accept that your concern is actually security.

Imagine you were actually worried about criminals to use disguises to commit crimes. If you were approaching the issue rationally, you'd prioritize things based on the threat they posed. Apparently, you aren't worried about clothing that hide the wearer similarly to a niqab (e.g. Santa beards, zip-up hoodies, those surgical masks that some people wear in public when they have a cold), so I don't believe that your objection to niqabs is really about security.

Here's the other thing about your argument: even if niqabs were being used as disguises for crime, we wouldn't expect that banning them would actually increase security. Any criminal using a niqab as a disguise would, most likely, be happy to use any other disguise for their crime, so it's unreasonable to expect that these niqab bandits that you're so afraid of to say "oh - our favourite disguise has been banned. I guess we should just stay home and not commit any more crime." It's much more reasonable to expect them - to the extent that they exist at all - to switch to some other type of disguise and get on with their crime like before.

So that's what I'm getting at:

- if you were really interested in improving security and decreasing crime, niqabs should be way, way down your priority list.
- there is no good reason to expect that banning niqabs would improve security or increase crime.

I think what's really happening is that you dislike niqabs, so you're grasping for excuses to get rid of them. The problem is that the excuse that you've decided on is irrational.

What is the conflict there? Where did I argue that they were ideal for crime?

If they aren't ideal for crime, why are you so worried about criminals using them?

 

[Shad]

As far as I know, loose clothing is already not allowed in any lab. Hair must be restrained, coat or smock worn, proper shoes worn, no necklaces or other things left dangling, and the general rule of thumb is to not wear anything that you don't want to have ruined by dyes, stains, chemicals, various organic bits, or other things that will ruin your clothes. Under certain circumstances you may even be required to wear a flame retardant lab coat. And these rules exist for a good reason. I haven't known any Muslims in this situation to know how this may-or-may-not cause any problems.

I just was not assuming all universities have the same policies as my own nor provide the same level of safety measures as my own. Hence if there is an issue I rather see the student and faculty resolve it then the state.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

As far as I know, loose clothing is already not allowed in any lab. Hair must be restrained, coat or smock worn, proper shoes worn, no necklaces or other things left dangling, and the general rule of thumb is to not wear anything that you don't want to have ruined by dyes, stains, chemicals, various organic bits, or other things that will ruin your clothes. Under certain circumstances you may even be required to wear a flame retardant lab coat. And these rules exist for a good reason. I haven't known any Muslims in this situation to know how this may-or-may-not cause any problems.

FWIW, close-fitting military surplus nomex balaclavas are fairly cheap and readily available (online, if not locally). Even in a lab environment, it would be hard to come up with a situation where safety requirements can't be satisfied even while having your face covered.

 

[gnostic]

No. They shouldn't ban a woman wearing whatever she want on her head, regardless if it is for a religious reason or not.

This is not just a discrimination against religion, it is a discrimination against all women.

If a woman shaved off all her hairs on head, for religious reason, would they ban her too?

When does the discrimation end?

But at the same time, I can also understand as to the motive of the government wanting to ban women from wearing veils.

Some women and girls are forced to wear veils because of the men in their families (husbands, fathers, uncles or brothers) or because of the (Muslim) community. When that happened, then the wearing of veils are not voluntarily, which would mean that (some) Muslim men are oppressing them.

But what happens, if it is voluntary, and it is the Muslim woman's choice to wear one? If that's the case, then it is the French government who are oppressing the women.

And beside all that, can the French government really deny women higher education, just because of headgear they wear? Wouldn't they be acting like the Talibans who deny girls any form of formal education?

 

[Bunyip]

I'm saying that if you want to ban wearing niqabs in public in the name of "security" but aren't worried about things that are used by criminals more often, then I won't accept that your concern is actually security.

But I am concerned about criminals wearing face masks - they are already outlawed here. You have misread.

Imagine you were actually worried about criminals to use disguises to commit crimes. If you were approaching the issue rationally, you'd prioritize things based on the threat they posed. Apparently, you aren't worried about clothing that hide the wearer similarly to a niqab (e.g. Santa beards, zip-up hoodies, those surgical masks that some people wear in public when they have a cold), so I don't believe that your objection to niqabs is really about security.

You are repeating the same misrepresentation, I AM concerned about criminals wearing face coverings, it has already been banned here in banks, service stations and so on.

Here's the other thing about your argument: even if niqabs were being used as disguises for crime, we wouldn't expect that banning them would actually increase security. Any criminal using a niqab as a disguise would, most likely, be happy to use any other disguise for their crime, so it's unreasonable to expect that these niqab bandits that you're so afraid of to say "oh - our favourite disguise has been banned. I guess we should just stay home and not commit any more crime." It's much more reasonable to expect them - to the extent that they exist at all - to switch to some other type of disguise and get on with their crime like before.

Wow! You repeat essentially the same misrepresentation for the third time. I AM concerned with people wearing disguises for exactly the same reasons as I am concerned about the burka.

So that's what I'm getting at:

- if you were really interested in improving security and decreasing crime, niqabs should be way, way down your priority list.
- there is no good reason to expect that banning niqabs would improve security or increase crime.

I think what's really happening is that you dislike niqabs, so you're grasping for excuses to get rid of them. The problem is that the excuse that you've decided on is irrational.

Gosh, four times! The 'excuse' I decided on is your misconception.

If they aren't ideal for crime, why are you so worried about criminals using them?

Amazing! FIVE TIMES, you get something in your head and just can't get past it.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

But I am concerned about criminals wearing face masks - they are already outlawed here. You have misread.

If you're claiming that Santa beards are illegal in Australia, then I don't believe you.

You are repeating the same misrepresentation, I AM concerned about criminals wearing face coverings, it has already been banned here in banks, service stations and so on.

You're arguing for a general ban of niqabs in public while - apparently - you're happy with only banning other masks in banks and service stations. Still sounds like a double standard.

 

[Bunyip]

If you're claiming that Santa beards are illegal in Australia, then I don't believe you.

You appear to be deliberately misrepresenting me. I do not know why, and do not care to persist.

You're arguing for a general ban of niqabs in public while - apparently - you're happy with only banning other masks in banks and service stations. Still sounds like a double standard.

As I said, you appear to be misrepresenting me deliberately, I do not know why - but given that you are staff would prefer to disengage.

 

[suncowiam]

Definitely no.

One is side choice, the other side is force.

 

[George-ananda]

What do you think?

I think freedom of Muslim dress should be allowed in public universities. Who's right is it infringing? I thought France to be this bastion of liberal tolerance.

 

[psychoslice]

If a woman went to their country, that is the ones who are born there, then they would have to wear a veil of some sort, now why don't we have the guts to say we don't want the veil to be worn in our country, that is western country, if its good for goose its good for the gander.

 

[suncowiam]

If a woman went to their country, that is the ones who are born there, then they would have to wear a veil of some sort, now why don't we have the guts to say we don't want the veil to be worn in our country, that is western country, if its good for goose its good for the gander.

Because a Western country isnt about hats or garments. Its about freedom even if that freedom leads to offensive or unpopular ideas.

 

[psychoslice]

Because a Western country isnt about hats or garments. Its about freedom even if that freedom leads to offensive or unpopular ideas.

I was using that as an example, they don't like women not wearing head wear there, so why would should we not stand up for ourselves and stop this silly head wear, for me personally it makes women look ugly.

 

[suncowiam]

I was using that as an example, they don't like women not wearing head wear there, so why would should we not stand up for ourselves and stop this silly head wear, for me personally it makes women look ugly.

The foundation here is freedom of expression.

Isn't forcing someone not to wear the same as forcing someone to wear? It's force regardless of what direction or intent you have.

If you want to fight oppression and assert equality then I suggest education on the subject. Make it absolutely known that here is no shame to show your face in public. It is not wrong and will not condemn you.

 

[psychoslice]

The foundation here is freedom of expression.

Isn't forcing someone not to wear the same as forcing someone to wear? It's force regardless of what direction or intent you have.

If you want to fight oppression and assert equality then I suggest education on the subject. Make it absolutely known that here is no shame to show your face in public. It is not wrong and will not condemn you.

Yes that may work, education I agree, but still they expect women in their own country to wear the veil, they can even be killed if they don't wear it, I think it would be a big relief for women to stop this nonsense quit frankly.

 

[suncowiam]

Yes that may work, education I agree, but still they expect women in their own country to wear the veil, they can even be killed if they don't wear it, I think it would be a big relief for women to stop this nonsense quit frankly.

I do understand and I would agree.

 

[Tiapan]

I think it is worn these days as an act of defiance saying I am Muslim more than I am French. Which is sad if you consider which social group is better educated and has a higher standard of living, but each to their own

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

You appear to be deliberately misrepresenting me. I do not know why, and do not care to persist. As I said, you appear to be misrepresenting me deliberately, I do not know why - but given that you are staff would prefer to disengage.

As far as I know, I'm not misrepresenting you at all. You've said in this thread that you're in favour of niqab bans on university campuses:

I think it is a basic safety issue to ensure that students and all other people on site are unmasked. When people are masked we can not identify them and so it places the entire facility at risk for no good reason.

... as well as general burqa bans, and a ban on hijabs in universities (emphasis mine):

All public displays of the burqa and,I think, niqab,are banned already. This would extend a ban on hijab, or the headscarf, to public universities. They're already banned in primary and secondary public schools.

I tend to support that. In Australia it is illegal to enter a bank or servo masked. I do not think that there should be exceptions to this most reasonable of laws, especially given that there is no directive in Islam to wear a veil.

... but maybe this is a situation where there was a disconnect between what was meant to be said and what was actually said. So... what did you mean to say?

 

[Unification]

wearing a covering is not to be taken literally in scripture. It represents carnality being led/covered by the Spirit.

Husband: Spirit
Wife: Body
Man(mankind): soul
Woman: heart/mind

 

[Bunyip]

As far as I know, I'm not misrepresenting you at all. You've said in this thread that you're in favour of niqab bans on university campuses:

Correct, on university campuses, not in public generally as you inferred. Nor did I claim that the wearing of Santa beards in public had been outlawed as you claimed, along with a number of other outlandish inventions of yours. University campuses are secure locations. If you are unaware of how catastrophically you are misrepresenting me, all the more reason for me to disengage.

... as well as general burqa bans, and a ban on hijabs in universities (emphasis mine):



... but maybe this is a situation where there was a disconnect between what was meant to be said and what was actually said. So... what did you mean to say?

What i said. If there is a 'disconnect' it is between what you read, and what you imagine it infers.