Survey: Europeans back Islamic veil ban, Americans opposed

To Nessie and others with a real interest in this subject: http://www.thepunch.com.au/articles/the-truth-behind-the-burqa/

A fascinating and informative take on the subject by someone who obviously knows about what she is talking about.

Where is Religious Freedom ? This is a direct slap to the muslim Comunity in Europe.

This is going to be a big Mistake in Europe.

If anyone wants to put a pair of panties on their head for whatever reason and walk down the street, you have the freedom to do so in the good ol' USA. Same reason we can wear face-coverings.

The issue is a tad more complex.

By the same token, a person may choose to put shackles and chain on their ankles or decide to handcuff themselves to go out in public. They have every bit of freedom to do so. But what is proper for the secular society to determine is that they have done this of their own free will.

I strongly suspect, and I was brought up in the community in the US with more Muslims than anywhere else, that a significant percentage of the veiled women are not wearing it of their free will.

I'm for the ban. After all I am sick and tired of muslims coming here and trying to supersede our law with their own. Time to conform or get out if you want to keep your backward ways you will be more comfortable in your own country. How many of us have to abide by your ways when in your countries? Like being deported in Saudi for having alcohol in your home etc? If you are not willing to bend over for us then why should we or the French be willing to bend over for you?

Ah, to be a proud American where we don't have to justify whether what we wear is religious purposes or not. Thank you Thomas Jefferson! If anyone wants to put a pair of panties on their head for whatever reason and walk down the street, you have the freedom to do so in the good ol' USA. Same reason we can wear face-coverings.

MistWizard:

" Freedom is worth such discomfort. "

Putting women in the permanent tent is not "freedom". Note that in those muslim societies that are always touted as examples how islam and modernity are compatible (e.g. Turkey or Azerbaijan), the thing is not allowed. How ironic that the West is sending troops to Afghanistan to free women from that, they are allowing it back home.

B>ut then wouldn’t it follow that if I were an armed robber I would for cultural reasons be entitled to wear my mask?

Yes, you would be entitled to wear it for cultural reasons or for no reason at all -- except where it contravenes reasonable security concerns (at airports, in banks). It's really not that complicated.

Talking cultural dress-codes, they exist in all countries.

As a women try walking into an orthodox monastery in greece wearing shorts, etc = no-no. Granted extreme example.

Everybody has something that other cultures/nations find offensive.

Agree that the veil carries a meaning in the middle-east and if only to ward of blowing sand(they have a lot of sand-storms every year). Same time you also have to live within the rules and standards of your adopted country.

I think what gets most people upset is the wording of the law "Veil" vs "Face-coverings"(could mean a helmet). Said that veils were common attire across the globe till not too long ago and are still worn today on occassions like funerals, etc.

Nessie, I know you would allow it, religious apparel or not. But unfortunately in France this may hinge on whether its religious apparel. But if we say it is, will that also include things like hairstyles and beards worn for religious reasons? How about that tiny skull cap some Jews wear, or the braids? Would that include Hassidic Jews wearing black? This is a giant can of worms. Defining religious symbols is less tricky, but then we got the flags of Switzerland, the Red Cross, the Red Crescent, etc..

MistWizard at 10:34 PM JST - 12th July

Nessie at 10:45 PM JST - 12th July

You two are really getting tied up on this one. Allow me to add a little extra confusion for you. Firstly I will tell you about something that happened in the UK sometime around the mid 60s I think. Sikhs were given permission to not wear crash helmets when riding their motorbikes, for religious reasons. Some people disliked this but generally it was accepted because it was for a religious reason. Now what we are seeing in France is that the veil is seen as a bad thing because it is a religious form of dress which is against the secular nature of the French state. If it were a cultural form of dress that would, it seems, be alright. But then wouldn’t it follow that if I were an armed robber I would for cultural reasons be entitled to wear my mask? I know, I am being deliberately silly here, but there is a crazy point in there.

One thing that most seem not to be allowing for is that the veil probably does have a function in the counties that it comes from. As most women will tell you that have travelled in those counties women alone will be harassed by total strangers and maybe that is just a cultural thing for those counties. However we in the west would find such harassment totally out of order and as such it really isn’t very common. So, as an excuse by Muslim women that the veil is a protection it is only true in their home counties, not in Europe.

FYI some women claim the veils and burqua reduce sexual harrassment and sexual advances, and even ward off rape. So long as they don't say anything about the Koran is it now okay for them?

Yeah, it's okay. It's always been okay by me. Whether or not they cite the Koran, it's fine with me if anyone wears a veil. This doesn't address the questions of whether the veil arises from religion -- I argue that it does. I'm just saying it's irrelevant from where it arises. People should be free to follow whatever irrational beliefs they choose, as long as it doesn't infringe on other people's rights.

That's always been my position, with certain reasonable accomodations for determining identity, for example checking one's passport photo against one's face.

Does anyone use the Genesis story to support the wearing of underwear?

Not lately, but that is because its not popular to do so. But its still a core reason, no matter what people say or don't. FYI some women claim the veils and burqua reduce sexual harrassment and sexual advances, and even ward off rape. So long as they don't say anything about the Koran is it now okay for them? Because Koranic passages or no, a woman's face has a whole lot to do with male sexual desires.

Golly, I hope you are starting to see what a conundrum this is.

If a cloth that covers the face is deemed religious because of a passage in the Koran, then the covering of genitals meets the same criteria.

It's not deemed religious because of a passage in the Koran. It's deemed religious because those who insist on wearing clothing in this way tend to use the Koran to support their wearing of the clothing. Does anyone use the Genesis story to support the wearing of underwear?

Nessie said: I'm not sure what you're saying. Coud you please clarify?

Defining clothing as being "religious" is a giant can of worms, as in, I can say the only reason we cover our genital is the Adam and Eve story, therefore, no Christian or Jew may cover their genitals in public. What? If a cloth that covers the face is deemed religious because of a passage in the Koran, then the covering of genitals meets the same criteria.

So you can wear a veil, just so long as its not for a religious reason.

I'm not sure what you're saying. Coud you please clarify?

I'm against all veil bans in principle.

Nessie said: A cultural tradition backed by scriptural interpretation. So, religious.

So you can wear a veil, just so long as its not for a religious reason. You need to contemplate that one Nessie.

Veils are not a religious requirement- they're a cultural tradition

A cultural tradition backed by scriptural interpretation. So, religious.

"Freedom of speech and freedom of religion" ARE european concepts.

European concepts that Europe is increasingly turning its back on.

Madverts said: I will never take it off, not when I got to the bank, not when I drive my car and not even for my passport photo.

Then you may not get into the bank and you may be refused a passport. However on the street you may wear it...until a policman with probable cause or other valid reason asks you for an ID check.

What possible problems can there be from people who choose to permanantly cover their faces?

Why play the hypothetical game when it is happening in the real world right now? I prefer to ask: What problems have there been for women wearing there veils? A little discomfort in people not used them? Cry me a river. Freedom is worth such discomfort.

semperfi said: 2. THE NIQAB promotes the oppression of women

Sure. Removal of these things will no doubt make their husbands see the error of their ways and start recognizing their wives' humanity and human rights. So few women actually wear them in Europe. Truly, there are bigger fish to fry.

american_bengoshi said: I don't believe the results of this survey. In truth, I bet most Americans actually support a ban on Islamic veils.

As an American, who grew up surrounded by people like RR, I can tell you that a great lot of Americans just enjoy being contrarian, causing conflict and won't agree with the French on anything just because...they are French! After the French come Europeans in general.

I am with Cleo in this. The veil ban could make things worse, people should have a right to cover their face if they want, and RR has two faces (at least).

This poll proves once again how Americans are much more progressive than our europeon cousins in regard to this issue. Hopefully, some day they will abandon their intolerant attitudes toward others and catch up with us.

RR

Moreover . . .Turkey and Tunisia BOTH also BAN the niqab.

The remaining 4 points : . . .3.THE NIQAB is NOT required by Islam. MOST MOSLEMS DO NOT WEAR IT. Many Islamic theologians oppose its use. 4.THE NIQAB is an archaic symbol of oppression that undermines the values of democratic societies; 5.THE NIQAB could be used as a cover for criminal or terrorist activity; * 6.THE NIQAB poses a public security threat in situations where policy calls for one’s identity to be ascertained.**

The Question :

Are street preachers annoying? Yes

Banning the niqab is not about whether it is as "annoying" as a street preacher . . . . . . . . . It is about the assertion of human rights, security issues, foundational principles in western society that SUPERCEDE some fanatic sect's insolent disregard of these. > > > > BELOW 6 POINTS THAT PROVIDE RATIONALE FOR THIS MEASURE.> > > > > > 1.THE NIQAB precludes social integration and cohesion; 2. THE NIQAB promotes the oppression of women *

Religion is and has always been a personal matter, when you try to take it beyond that boundary problems arise.

Some people prefer to openly express their religious views, so long as they don't damage any person or property in process I can see no reason why they shouldn't be able to. Are street preachers annoying? Yes. Are they actually putting a gun to my head to convert? No.

I believe as long as they don't go as far as to use the veil as an excuse to go against the laws if they need to show their face for fotos, and when asked to do so...and they refuse, then I can see it being a problem.Maybe they should let them wear the veils just pass a law stating they have to follow all rules of identifcation as everyone else needs to...

But to take away ppls rights just because you don't agree, is not the right way to go about it...

@Bebert61

Ask those same Americans if they would ban Klansmen (pretty much a defunct species now) from wearing hoods in public and this 72% that supported freedom for Muslim women to cover up would expose themselves as politically correct hypocrites and want to ban the hood. Perhaps 10% of them would remain consistent and support this freedom for everyone. That's just how Americans are.

A bit drastic if you ask me...we are talking of a veil that does not mean to kill others because of their race! The klu klux klan, it is a very different situation!

Freedom of Expression, Freedom of Religion; as uncomfortable as the veil makes me, I am more uncomfortable with the idea of curtailing these. That is American.

I agree with djuice. Most "socially conservative" Americans are completely opposed to immigration into the U.S. and pro-American imperialism.

they don't allow the propagation of Roman Catholicism (Indonesia and Malaysia) and confiscate Bibles (Middle East) and use Allah as the Arabic word for "God" (in Malaysia) and now they don't want to adapt to European life (removing religious clothes)? They should go back to the Middle East then.

What Americans did they survey??? I think that most Americans would support the ban. Must have been a very, very poorly done survey.

TheQuestion.

Religion is and has always been a personal matter, when you try to take it beyond that boundary problems arise. Like trying to convince people your religion is better, etc.

Old european saying "NEVER discuss SEX, RELIGION or POLITICS nothing good will come of it."

If they take off the veil for identification purposes there shouldn't be a problem. If they don't take off the veil for identification they can get shuttled to jail, no need for a law that will only end up pissing off a whole lot of people.

No religion is banned perse in europe, what is banned is the external/public expression/representation of your religion.

So basically you're allowed to be yourself in private but the rest of the time you are subject to the whims and disapproval of the government. How lovely.

Clearly entities invented by man to suit their purposes.

Many would argue that it was the other way around.

Veils are not a religious requirement- they're a cultural tradition. That's why the women from some countries wear them & others don't- it's not their custom. I think they're worn by some just to show their heritage, especially in NYC where I see lots of women with veils & skin-tight jeans- sending some mixed signals there. It also makes a convenient place to put the cell phone so your hands are free. Ironic that women who wouldn't show their faces to the cops in all likelihood wouldn't be able to drive in whatever country they were from & may have been stoned for being out of the house without a male relative.

Ask those same Americans if they would ban Klansmen (pretty much a defunct species now) from wearing hoods in public and this 72% that supported freedom for Muslim women to cover up would expose themselves as politically correct hypocrites and want to ban the hood. Perhaps 10% of them would remain consistent and support this freedom for everyone. That's just how Americans are.

Agree too a certain degree.

Met many that forced their wifes to learn Arabic as they wanted to go back, same token many that were happy to settle on foreign soil were more laid-back and open.

Said that 1st group also had a high divorce rate. ;)

Also had 2 country-men that ONLY accepted german to be spoken at home from their japanese wifes.

Happens from all cultures, etc.

YOU are absolutely right, Zenny, mid-eastern peoples are very warm, hospitable and generous. . . . . . .Too bad they too often do not transfer that congeniality & egalitarianism to the women in their society.

Agree with semperfi.

Some muslim sects allow women inside the mosque(separate area granted). A few are also liberal to alcohol consumption, etc.

Many sects and views, like trying to judge all christians by the roman or even orthodox catholic church.

IME, very few sects as with jewish, christian are very hardcore and strict.

Some of my muslim friends said they should have a beard but feel it is better to integrate locally.

One thing I got to say though for muslims and most middle easterners and many africans(of any sect/religion).

If you do get invited for supper or a celebration(like eid, etc) bring a BIIIG stomach, the spread they put out is luvely and not eating is an offense. Even the breaking of the fast during ramadhaan is gorgeous.

Hospitality is taken very serious.

Muslims are simply the current day "Jews"

Sorry. That is a non sequitar.

It seems like the muslims are singled out here, that they are discriminated

Not ALL muslims oppress and subjecate their women forcing them to wear medieaval head coverings. There are liberal Muslims . So sob somewhere else !!!

make that 2nd world war

presto345.

European memories tends to work in millenia not decades or centuries.

1st and 2nd world are skirmishes compared to the 30 and even 100yr, etc wars. 100yrs, etc is nothing for us when we can trace families back to the roman emperors, etc.

Muslims are simply the current day "Jews" of the early/middle 20th century and most europeans realise that.

It will pass as things have done so before.

No religion is banned perse in europe, what is banned is the external/public expression/representation of your religion.

Isn't it sad that the latter had to happen. But apparently the religious wars, if you can call them that, as in the early middle ages, are not over yet. People have invented their own gods and dictate rules as if the gods dictated them. Who are these gods? Clearly entities invented by man to suit their purposes. Who are these people? Just those who lust after power at any cost.

I grew up in an era and a part of the world where people were tolerant of each other's conviction, people respected differences of faith and it was mutual. This is no longer true, unfortunately.

It seems like the muslims are singled out here, that they are discriminated. That is regrettable, but the truth is that in their midst there are those who believe they can create a better world by hiding their identities, by blowing up themselves, their fellow men and those who adhere to a different faith, those who believe in a different god. Their numbers may be small, but the threat is a real one. The Europeans are in no mood for Islamization. Do they remember the Moors? Do they remember more recent events Americans seem to have forgotten? Whatever it is, those with entirely different traditions and patterns of behavior when settling in countries with an entirely different culture from their own should conform to the local customs and beliefs. So, political or economical refugee, immigrant for whatever reason, when in Rome do as the Romans do. No hiding of identity.

To me in this case she tried to enforce her religious rules above the law = no-no.

Sorry religion can't take precendent over the laws of the land, maybe she can get away with it in a muslim country doubt it though that any law-enforcement agent would let it slide.

Granted in a muslim country they might call in a female law-enforcer to verify her id, but same can't be expected anywhere else.

tclh

She provided that and then police told her to reveal her full face in order to match it with the photo in the licence. She refused to do that and told the police she only reveal her face to her husband, nobodyelse!..food for thought?

Excellent point . . . Demonstrates the subjecation and denigration of women; as well as, the security risks ( because maybe she really isn't who she said she is). We had many similar cases in Canada- - and finally Quebec passed a Law - that forbids people wearing hijab in public areas.

He don't need to there is is a recognised religion of the "Jedi", etc already. Believe the "Jedi" religion got quiet a following too.

@Madverts

Just make your religion slightly more hysterical, and a couple of thousand years old, and you'll probably be given free reign.

@RR

America was also the first 'First World nation' to have two skyscrapers brought down in the name of the same religion.

Ban the Ninjas.

Kind regards,

Europe

This actually happened in Australia about a month ago: A police stopped a burqa wearing driver and asked for driving licence. She provided that and then police told her to reveal her full face in order to match it with the photo in the licence. She refused to do that and told the police she only reveal her face to her husband, nobodyelse!..food for thought?

The hijab and burka are women's equity, as well as 'national' security issues. I agree entirely with Europes boldness to call a spade a spade.

Well I started my own religion this morning.

It involves me wearing a balaclarva at all times.

I will never take it off, not when I got to the bank, not when I drive my car and not even for my passport photo.

What possible problems can there be from people who choose to permanantly cover their faces?

To clarify.

Religion like political orientation is a personal matter(you can't even tell which party you voted for).

I was christined as a lutherian prostestant but was never raised as one never attended church, etc. At age 14 I decided to leave the church(legal age to chose your religion). Later I learned that my parents were of different christian faiths and thus were barred from a church wedding. Stupid christians.

Personally I don't give a hoot what religion your are or if you worship the flying spaghetti monster.

Same for my son, he will make his own choice and it will be supported.

No religion is banned perse in europe, what is banned is the external/public expression/representation of your religion.

Heck my home-town has churches from all religions(centuries old) and the town even donated a Mosque to the muslim community(can hardly be called biased now).

I don't believe the results of this survey. In truth, I bet most Americans actually support a ban on Islamic veils.

Zenny11

But you can't demand that your religion is given preference over others, like right to wear a hijab, etc.

But thats my point..if it is "freedom of" then why ban any relgion as say the christians from wearing a cross..not so much freedom if you ask me, but I do see your point...

I can also understand what @cleo, means by topless, in a sense that it is uncomfortable, so the women may also feel uncomfortable.without covering their faces..figure of speech..

Also I do believe it can opress many women then again it is their culture, I am sure for some it might be a relief to have the veil banned, but many women in this religion have strong beliefs and use the veil to honor those beliefs...

Cleo.

Topless is a bit extreme. Said that back home I as a guy can't jog/run without a shirt in public as "topless" is banned.

I don't think anyone should be forced to go around with their face covered if they don't want to - by the same token, I wouldn't like to be forced to, say, go around topless, and if a women feels as awkward about showing her face in public as I would feel about showing my breasts, I don't think she should have that kind of embarrassment forced on her. What bothers me about laws forbidding women to cover their faces in public because the veil 'oppresses women' is the possibility that the husbands and fathers who don't want people looking at their women will simply force them to stay indoors, which would be more oppressive.

we are the first First World nation to select a minority to lead us

lol

Are you claiming credit for that? Did you vote for him? Will you be voting for him in the next election? Were you jesting when you wrote in the summer before the last election that He'll need to borrow about 40 million blacks from somewhere for a day in early November in order to be given the keys to the White House and *barack obama has absolutely nothing going for him besides that he's half-black .... don't expect "typical white folk" blue collar voters who "clings to their guns and their Bibles" to be rushing to the ballot box to vote for obama?

When did you join the 21st century, Ramen? does it take you twice as long in the morning to wash both faces?

"Freedom of speech and freedom of religion" ARE european concepts.

You can say anything you want(within limits) and you can practice any religion you want. Freedom of speech also means freedom to get popped on the nose when people disagree.

But you can't demand that your religion is given preference over others, like right to wear a hijab, etc.

Neither in europe has the church/religion any say in goverment matters and vice-versa, same any politician that bases his views on a religion publicly is a goner. (like saying I was inspired by god, etc).

Freedoms are to be practiced without them infringing on anybody elses freedoms and rights.

If the law states that your drivers licence needs to show your face than that is it. Same way when you get stopped and a cop needs to see your face to verify identity.

With freedoms also come duties and many forget that. They come in pairs.

So I dont know much about Europe, guess they don't go by the U.S. "freedom of relgion freedom of speech" ?

Reason because most european nations ban all form of religious attire.

That includes christians too who want to hear a cross around their neck.

Eiher allow all or none.

In many parts of Europe it is now considered taboo to wear hijab in public, but it's not illegal to be naked. Go figure!

I for one don't agree with their beliefs but to each his own as long as it doesn't hurt anyone..Then let them be.

Makes sense Americans overwhelmingly oppose this ban. Afterall, we are the first First World nation to select a minority to lead us.

The time has come for euros to end their overt racism and join us here in the 21st Century.

RR