Discriminatory: The Benefits Of Bans

In the present case, the main issue is freedom of religion and how freedom of religion fits in relation to other rights guaranteed to Canadians. Current political tensions in Canada and conflicts in the Middle East put in doubt whether all religious groups can coexist under current legislation and legal practices. This paper will primarily present and discuss conflicts between: Islam and secularism, and the right to ones religion and a fair trial. Despite my unfavorable views of some sectarian beliefs, I believe that the trial judge erred procedurally by not following the analysis in R. v. N.S.(2012). The judge had the right to ask for the removal of the hijab only once a legal test designed to resolve conflict between competing rights was applied. Since no such analysis was done, the result was an inappropriate refusal to have a person’s case heard. This case was an example of improper judicial activism, which only served to intensify the ideological conflicts between Canadians.

The officers obviously do not have enough ground to be able to separate the peaceful protesters from the ones wanting to bring in the guns and the violent various weapons through Charlottesville. The various profound speech amongst us isn't supposed to have any "consequences". The police have a duty to protect the community and if they cannot do so, then they obviously cannot handle this job. They have to be prepared for all various scenarios that they may come upon in this type of work. Banning individuals from not being to carry a weapon in a certain place or time is completely understandable. That is why the first amendment is being brought upon by others because; they may feel as they don’t feel safe, so they now need protection. Although

("Religious Discrimination." Religious Discrimination. United States Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, n.d. Web. 11 Feb. 2015.) Miss. Khan told her future employers upfront that she wore her hijab for religious purposes. Abercrombie & Fitch were notified immediately before Miss. Khan started the job. Abercrombie & Fitch did not make it clear that their business was based on looks, rather than personal

Hijabs are not the only type of religious dress. Christians may wear crosses to express their religion, and Jewish people may wear yarmulkes to express theirs. When Abercrombie prevented

At a peak in time where the Muslim population in Europe felt most discriminated, the ban on the hijab was declared in France in 2004. This piece of religious clothing was no longer allowed inside public work settings

Taking away people’s rights to wear certain clothing like a burqa is unconstitutional. This is protected under the 1st amendment. Under this amendment, freedom of speech, religion, press, assembly, and petition are protected. According to that amendment, this would be violating the part that allows the freedom of speech and religion. It applies because wearing a burqa is part of their religion. There was a case in

It is unethical to question or make false claims about the values and symbols within a culture. In the case of Islam and the act of veiling, many people could easily mistake the hijab as a symbol for all of the Muslim culture. Yet, the hijab and act of veiling are merely one aspect of this cultural group. In fact, many people may believe that the women who choose to veil are oppressed or controlled by men, when in fact it is their own personal decision whether or not they choose to cover (“Wearing Hijab” film). Rather, instead of being a symbol of oppression, the hijab takes on a signal of piety, where the meaning is much deeper than it appears (“Ethnocentrism and Cultural Relativity” Lecture). This meaning differs by person, and it is up to that person alone how it makes them feel. The act of veiling is not always as it seems non-Muslims, and it can take much more effort to understand all of the reasons why women choose to cover which can vary from woman to woman or by region (Lila Abu-Lughod 786). In order to overcome judgmental concepts, we should strive to believe that “…It’s their culture and it’s not my business to judge or interfere, only to try to understand” (Abu-Lughod

In The legal status of the Islamic headscarf in Bulgaria, Kristen Ghodsee discuss the case of regulating religious symbols in public schools specifically and explore the local politics informing the headscarf cases in Bulgaria. This paper will review Ghodsee’s article as well as her main arguments, and will focus on any areas of weakness within the article.

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.

A Look Behind the Veil by Elizabeth and Robert Fernea states “ The thousands of words written about the appearance and disappearance of the veil and of purdah do little help us understand the Middle East or the cultures that grew out of the same Judeo-Christian roots as our own(para 3, pdf)”. Christians look down on Hindu and Islamic Groups by believing in a false sense of equality and treatment of others. This comes from how women in both cultures dress. Christian women are free to wear whatever they choose. Muslims women have the option to wear a scarf to cover their hair or hijab as referred to in Arabic. Christian culture tends to look at this as if it oppressive as losing a sense of fashion, identity, and expression. In reality, women have a choice whether to wear the hijab or not and if they do some places cater to their needs. A salon only for women called Le’Jemalink owned by Huda Quhushi is open to letting Muslim women express themselves in a space to get pampered and relax similar to things that Christian women do such as painting their nails, but making them okay to partake in in Islamic culture(Facebook, Now This,2016, Christianity video). Freedom of expression comes in different forms as others try to adapt the forms of western Christianity to fit in and educate others about other beliefs harmonizing for the greater

It is not the role of the State to decide which religious beliefs were valid. A society that is truly free allows for different beliefs, codes of conduct, customs and tastes, a blanket ban would come in place of other less restrictive methods. The interests of women like the applicant in S.A.S v France , who had to decide between wearing the veil and breaking the law, were much more seriously affected than the interests of those who disapproved of women wearing the veil. Further, the ban punished the women it was meant to protect by imposing criminal sanctions on

I was banned a long time ago. I recognize that my behavior was not only unprofessional but also harmful. I think I have already changed from my mistakes. Meaning that I have worked to think, feel, and conduct myself differently. But I promise that I have addressed the source of the problem and that I am taking the following steps to correct it and ensure that it never happens

Aaron, you make a great point about privacy concerns involving employers digging too deeply into an employee’s personal life. Potential issues involving privacy also can occur in the hiring process. Von Bergen and Bressler (2016) reports that organizations often avoid hiring candidates with a criminal history based on a belief that it reduces future risk and liability. However, recent data shows that those with a criminal history are less likely to break the law at work than individuals with a clean record. A criminal history box on applications may, therefore, be unwarranted and lead to disparate treatment of minorities and could lead to violations of anti-discrimination laws (Von Bergen & Bressler, 2016). Regardless, one could easily argue

In recent years, a small piece of cloth has managed to cause quite a stir. The scarf, or hijab, that Muslim women wear on their heads is making headlines around the world. Hijab is banned in French public schools and other European countries have adopted or are thinking about a similar legislation. In Australia, a radio presenter triggered both debate and outrage when he called for the face veil (niqab) to be banned from banks and post offices. In Canada on the other hand, it is allowed to be worn freely unless in places such as airports for security reasons. Even some Muslim countries such as Turkey and Tunisia ban the hijab in certain government buildings. When a small piece of fabric causes such controversy and conflict, wouldn’t it

When does the search for equality justify human rights abuses? As France has a large and quickly expanding Muslim immigrate population (Mamou, 2017) it provides an important case study regarding the intersection of two different perspectives, that of secularism and religion. In 2004 Law No. 2004-228 of 15 March 2004 (National Assembly, 2004) was adopted by the French National Assembly and Senate which forbade the wearing of overtly religious clothing which would identify individuals religious affiliation in public schools, colleges and lycees. In 2010 Law No. 2010-1192 of October 11, 2010, was passed which banned the wearing of any outfit, in a public space, designed to cover the face (National Assembly, 2010). Although neither the 2004 nor 2010 laws appear to be directly targeting Muslims they have gained recognition because as both have a direct impact on Muslim women. Both of these laws have been criticised since they appear to constitute human rights abuses. However, rather than looking at the laws in isolation one must understand their context in French society, specifically the broader human rights issues which they reflect such as gender equality, assimilation of immigrants, and the perceived threat of religious fundamentalism. All of these issues are related and they cannot be written about in isolation of the rest. As France fights to protect its culture of laïcité (secularism), care must be taken to not abuse human rights in the name of equality.