The banning of the burqa has become an issue in many places, including France. The French Parliament has decided it is time to ban the burqa in public. They believe is a sign of the subjugation and submission of women to males. Some believe it is used to cover up abuse and they also believe it is unfair to the public that citizens cannot see the women’s faces. However it is unfair for these women to be banned from wearing what they choose as just everyone else does.The banning of the burqa should not be allowed because it is discriminatory towards Muslim women and violates their freedom of religion and their freedom to express themselves.
Synopsis of Rule of Law. The state can't compel supported religious action on its nationals by constraining them to pick amongst participation and their own particular intrinsically secured rights.
Politicians in Quebec have passed a controversial religious neutrality bill which would require people receiving and giving services to expose their faces and could mean that the Muslim niqab or burqa could be banned in public.
Over time, this has been interpreted as the government can neither impose a state religion upon you nor punish you for exercising the religion of your choice. Thenceforth, you may express your opinions, write and publish what you wish, gather
A whole lot of controversy and debate has been experienced in Quebec after the presentation of the bill. This recent debate is important because the consequences and implications of such laws should be evaluated thoroughly before being imposed to a population. It is also a subject that has a particular importance to me, considering that I want to be a lawyer later on and therefore I will face such difficult debate. Moreover, religious cases interest me a lot. It is important to know that veils are worn by certain women all over the world because of their religious interpretation of the hijab verses of the Quran in which God asks women to “dress modestly” (Stacey). The wearing of the veil has been made mandatory in some countries like Saudi Arabia and Qatar. However, many women in America and Europe decide freely to wear the veil as a religious and cultural symbol (Stacey). Considering that the face-covering veils, like other Muslim veils, are part of some Muslim women’s religion, should the government have the right to demand its removal while one is receiving or giving public services?
The biggest issue with this ban is that it does not impact all religions equally. A person in Buddhism can still live their lives without much of a change, but a person following Islam will have a harder time adapting to these changes, reason being is that Islam has more visible symbols than most other religions. Some examples of of symbols in Islam include Hijabs, Burqas, Chadors and the crescent moon and star. Whereas, in Buddhism for example, you have the Dharma wheel, Buddha, or orange robes if you happen to be a monk. As you can see Islam has more visible symbols since most symbols are clothing or headwear. The clothing that the women in Islam wear are symbols of modesty, you can’t simply wear a smaller Hijab or a smaller Burka. Whereas in Christianity you can wear a cross in a non visible way, in Buddhism you can wear a small Dharma wheel necklace if you
With so many religions, it may be difficult for some to understand what it means for Muslim women to veil. The purpose of veiling is a duty they are called upon and that is to obey their God. Many people believe in something, be it aliens, ghosts, the higher spirit, or their own God, one’s faith should not be judged. In addition, Canada clearly defined that it is unlawful to be a racist to one’s Religious beliefs in order to become a Citizen of Canada. It has been said, Gods and people can look through from one side to the other (Ellwood, Robert S., and Barbara A. McGraw. 5 print). Which could possibly lead for one to show respect to one’s faith and to understand their faith without
In the article,” comment”,Pat Lancaster, an editorial writer, argues let them discard that they should have the choice to do so but a personal one,as well as needing to uphold personal freedoms. She believes that without liberty,egality and fraternity France wouldn't be the same. She or he supports the claim by giving evidence about equality and emancipation. People culture and who they are being taken away by the government and people of the same culture supporting the ban. She follows this with reasons why they shouldn't ban the hijabs and how other ethics including muslims contribute leading european power .
Religious freedom: the right to choose a religion or no religion without interference by the government. Unfortunately, the rule doesn’t apply to society and some other countries - lately, more Muslims, Jews, and people in certain seperate religious groups have been victims faced with individuals who choose to insult and harm these innocent people. The dilemma is becoming so violent that the Jewish have been faced with a difficult decision: whether to wear kippas or not. Kippas, or yarmulkes, are caps traditionally worn by Jewish men, and the head of the Israelite Consistory of Marseille, had decided to ask Jews to not wear the kippas because of a recent attack on a Jewish teacher. Should Jews really stop wearing their skullcaps?
However, through briefly analyzing both cases, it becomes clear that this justification is propelled by anti-Islamic sentiments rather than the will to protect democracy from rampant oppressive patriarchy or an imminent threat of public safety. This is obvious because Islamic headscarves are being targeted rather than other examples of religious headscarves which can be found in Christianity or Judaism. Thus, through not applying this ruling to all religious headscarves it becomes clear that there is no real interest in protect Muslim women, but a vested interest in restricting expressions of the Islamic faith due to xenophobic rhetoric. In addition to this, Marshall correctly points out that there is no direct correlation between the wearing of a headscarf by a Muslim woman and gender inequality. As long as it is the choice of women to wear the headscarf, I see no issue with Muslim women wearing them in
I do not think that Jews, Catholics, or Muslims should have to change their ways just to accommodate the beliefs of someone else. People should be able to dress how ever they please, and if they want to wear a kippa, a cross, or a headscarf, then they should have the freedom to do so. It is not their fault that others do not “like” their religions; people like ISIS extremists should be the ones punished not those whom they are punishing.
In non-secular states, religious liberties of citizens are restricted and curtailed in favour of the state religion adopted. In such states, the struggle for religious liberty is a constant battle
When I was first introduced to the topic of France’s ban on the veil, I disagreed with the law. I took a position based on my customs as an American citizen which differs completely to those of France. International critics began to argue that France is violating what people call “Freedom of Religion”, which I agreed with at first. As a foreigner from America, I am accustomed to the American governments definition of freedom of religion. Protected by the First Amendment “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.” (Religious Freedom). You can express your religion in public, during church, mass, or religious meetings. So the presence of religious items such as the
When I was introduced to the topic of France’s ban on the veil, I disagreed with the law. I took a position based on my customs as an American citizen, which differs completely from those of France. International critics began to argue that France is violating what people call “Freedom of Religion,” which I agreed with at first. As a foreigner from America, I am accustomed to the American government’s definition of freedom of religion. Protected by the First Amendment, “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise.” (Religious Freedom). You can express your religion in public, during church, mass, or religious meetings. So the presence of religious items such as the burqa's and veil do not disturb the people or government.
There has been debates about whether the Islamic face veil should be banned in countries. The arguments that governments of countries that have banned the Muslim face veil (France, Syria, Netherlands, Spain, and Belgium) argue that the full-face veil is oppressive, degrading towards women, and goes against values of each country. However, many Muslim women believe otherwise and strongly disagree with the banning of the veil. I strongly believe that the Islamic face veil should not be banned because it is a complete violation of religious and expressive freedom and forces them to conform to an alternative culture.