Catholics should oppose ban on Muslim veils
Posted on Tuesday, July 13, 2010 at 11:03 PM
RSS 
Recent Posts
- Dialed down St. Patrick's Day
- A first time for everything
- Talking religion in 2011
- The uncertainty of prayer
- Smithsonian should have kept "ant-covered Jesus"
Archives
The French Parliament has approved a ban on face veils in public, in what proponents say is an effort to keep the state secular and detractors say is a grievous affront to religious freedom. The measure still needs to pass the French Senate to become law, but with little open opposition in France, at least from politicians, it is likely to be ratified. The law would fine women for wearing a niqab or a burqa, which both conceal parts of the face, and could heavily fine or jail men who force female relatives to wear such coverings. Other European countries are considering similar bans.
According to the AP, the language of the bill tries to paint it in broad, non-religious strokes, claiming that it applies to everyone, while making exceptions for almost every other instance one can imagine for a woman to cover her face in public, like wearing a motorcycle helmet or costume. No one has to say that it's aimed at Muslims.
The debate over whether or not wearing a burqa is oppressive to woman will never end, and I tend to agree with the camp that places forced covering in a negative light. It always goes back to the tiresome reasoning propagated by chauvinistic men that women are responsible for keeping their hot bodies under wraps because men can't control themselves, and if you're sexually assaulted in the market, it's probably because your cheekbone was exposed and you have only yourself to blame. It's the "short skirt = asking for rape" argument that is so ugly and logically flawed I won't even bother going into it.
At the same time, the reasons women wear burqas and other coverings are complex, and I don't pretend to know all of the arguments. It's also the case that some things are wrong (forcing your wife to wear something she doesn't want to wear, lying, verbal abuse, cutting in line) but not able to be legislated in a free country (although people who cut in line should be scolded severely by the nearest grandmother, in public).
While this raises a whole host of issues (including: Is the burqa making Muslim women fat?), the one I'm most concerned about is the fact that so many people think it's okay for their government to dictate what people can and cannot wear. France claims to have a secular government, but they're not banning yarmulkes or crucifixes. True, these religious symbols don't have the same effect on those outsiders who view the wearers, but they're still symbols of a particular religion.
Islam is not the only religion that, when practiced in its orthodoxy, encourages and sometimes requires extreme modesty of its women. Hello, nun habits? Parents force their children to wear Catholic school uniforms. Conservative Christians wear long skirts and even higher necklines. Orthodox Jewish women don't show any skin aside from the ankles, wrists and neck, no matter the weather. Not all Muslim women wear a full burqa; they wear variations of head coverings dictated by their particular sect of Islam and their regional and cultural heritage. So we can point them out and decry the practice as barbaric, but you know what they say about those who throw stones.
The slippery slope is real, folks. Civil liberties erode and will eventually crumble if they are not upheld forcefully. It's not overreacting or being paranoid or leftist to believe this. If France does it, so might Spain and Belgium. If the European Union does it, so might the United States. And if the U.S. decides that burqas are oppressive, and that we as a country ought to tell women they can't be worn, we will have crossed the already too-blurry line that separates church and state.
In a free country like France, women can choose to practice Islam or not. For some, wearing the burqa is an integral part of their religion. I personally don't agree with that philosophy. No one in the French Parliament has to, either. But banning face coverings isn't going to change an oppressive culture, it's only going to engender even more hatred from radicals who see the West as the enemy, and make life harder for Muslim women.
The Vatican has opposed this kind of ban, for the somewhat self-serving but still valid reason that if majority Christian countries don't respect Muslim minorities' right to practice their religion, Christians in majority Muslim countries could see their own rights taken away. Catholics as individuals are not always so open-minded, but in this case, I'd urge us all - Catholic or not - to side with the Pope on this one. Our right to practice Catholicism - not right now, perhaps not for several generations, but surely some day - will depend on it.
According to the AP, the language of the bill tries to paint it in broad, non-religious strokes, claiming that it applies to everyone, while making exceptions for almost every other instance one can imagine for a woman to cover her face in public, like wearing a motorcycle helmet or costume. No one has to say that it's aimed at Muslims.
The debate over whether or not wearing a burqa is oppressive to woman will never end, and I tend to agree with the camp that places forced covering in a negative light. It always goes back to the tiresome reasoning propagated by chauvinistic men that women are responsible for keeping their hot bodies under wraps because men can't control themselves, and if you're sexually assaulted in the market, it's probably because your cheekbone was exposed and you have only yourself to blame. It's the "short skirt = asking for rape" argument that is so ugly and logically flawed I won't even bother going into it.At the same time, the reasons women wear burqas and other coverings are complex, and I don't pretend to know all of the arguments. It's also the case that some things are wrong (forcing your wife to wear something she doesn't want to wear, lying, verbal abuse, cutting in line) but not able to be legislated in a free country (although people who cut in line should be scolded severely by the nearest grandmother, in public).
While this raises a whole host of issues (including: Is the burqa making Muslim women fat?), the one I'm most concerned about is the fact that so many people think it's okay for their government to dictate what people can and cannot wear. France claims to have a secular government, but they're not banning yarmulkes or crucifixes. True, these religious symbols don't have the same effect on those outsiders who view the wearers, but they're still symbols of a particular religion.
Islam is not the only religion that, when practiced in its orthodoxy, encourages and sometimes requires extreme modesty of its women. Hello, nun habits? Parents force their children to wear Catholic school uniforms. Conservative Christians wear long skirts and even higher necklines. Orthodox Jewish women don't show any skin aside from the ankles, wrists and neck, no matter the weather. Not all Muslim women wear a full burqa; they wear variations of head coverings dictated by their particular sect of Islam and their regional and cultural heritage. So we can point them out and decry the practice as barbaric, but you know what they say about those who throw stones.
The slippery slope is real, folks. Civil liberties erode and will eventually crumble if they are not upheld forcefully. It's not overreacting or being paranoid or leftist to believe this. If France does it, so might Spain and Belgium. If the European Union does it, so might the United States. And if the U.S. decides that burqas are oppressive, and that we as a country ought to tell women they can't be worn, we will have crossed the already too-blurry line that separates church and state.
In a free country like France, women can choose to practice Islam or not. For some, wearing the burqa is an integral part of their religion. I personally don't agree with that philosophy. No one in the French Parliament has to, either. But banning face coverings isn't going to change an oppressive culture, it's only going to engender even more hatred from radicals who see the West as the enemy, and make life harder for Muslim women.
The Vatican has opposed this kind of ban, for the somewhat self-serving but still valid reason that if majority Christian countries don't respect Muslim minorities' right to practice their religion, Christians in majority Muslim countries could see their own rights taken away. Catholics as individuals are not always so open-minded, but in this case, I'd urge us all - Catholic or not - to side with the Pope on this one. Our right to practice Catholicism - not right now, perhaps not for several generations, but surely some day - will depend on it.
68 comments
SingleDonald | Jul 16, 2010, 07:50 AM EDT
I must disagree with both Megan & Pope Benedict. The proposed French law would lead to the "liberation" of Muslim women living in France. Now, I have long been an opponent of the modern "woman's liberation/feminist" movement, but concede that Muslim women badly need such liberation.
I recently saw, in a news documentary, how a brother in a Muslim country killed his sister. He did so, after she was brutally raped!! He did go to jail, but was released 6 months later!
I especially like the part of the proposed law which calls for sanctions against male relatives who force their women to cover up. Let those oppressors also be accountable!
I am wired like all other straight guys, and can appreciate a girl in a mini skirt, without going into "attack mode"! It's time Muslim men stop blaming their women for every little display of healthy sexuality, and also take responsibility for their own self control!
Report abuse
EvelynDavey | Jul 15, 2010, 11:18 PM EDT
As an American, I have to say they must have the freedom to wear what they want, but as a human who knows from a grandson who served in Iraq & Afghanistan, when I come across someone in a store wearing ghe burqua I move far away. He brought me back a burqua and I wore it once to see what it felt like. I say very clearly, no one in their right mind would voluntarily wear something like that. So, let them wear it, but don't for a second believe they do so willingly.
Report abuse
IrishAndProud | Jul 15, 2010, 08:51 PM EDT
I have nothing in common with Muslims OR Xtians, Sean, since I'm neither of those. Do I understand you correctly, that you're equating Xtian missionaries who peacefully preach their faith (and who are not in fact even allowed to do so openly in most Muslim nations...they're not even allowed to set FOOT in Mecca), with extremist Muslims who vow death to the infidel who does not convert to their faith...on European soil, no less? What Xtians today are going around committing jihad in the name of their faith, and threatening so, whilst standing and living in countries that they're not from...and cutting peoples' heads off slowly with knives, or stoning women for adultery, or recruiting teens and mentally challenged youth to be suicide bombers, and vowing death to Israel and world conquest, to boot? What Buddhists or Hindus, for that matter, are doing that? Equating Xtians or any other faith with Islam on this matter is a joke. Islam is the world's fastest-growing and hands-down most aggressive religion, and Xtianity is slowly but surely dying and retreating, and is not spreading itself by violence, or threatening violence, or planting unassimilated, foreign communities (toward exactly that end) in lands it's not even from...anywhere on earth.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Jul 15, 2010, 07:39 PM EDT
No one is telling you what faith you must follow IandP.I am reminded of christian missionaries who enter other countries (including Muslim countries)
and telling them to accept Christianity and lo! and behold! some Muslims reject this interference to their faith. So! IandP what do you think you have in common with those Muslims?
Report abuse
krisdaly | Jul 15, 2010, 06:46 PM EDT
Our Creator did not make us to be covered from head to toe! Obviously Adam and Eve would wear nothing until Satan tempted them to go against their Creator! Out of shame they hid from their Creator! Islam is the religion of the Son of Perdition!!!!!!!!
Report abuse
IrishAndProud | Jul 15, 2010, 05:49 PM EDT
sean wrote: "It's none of our business when they want to wear it. You right wing middle of the road fas-cists like to pick the freedom of choice's that you approve of. You certainly crawl out of the woodwork when the word Muslim or Arab enters the conversation." **** Just as it's no MUSLIM'S business telling my western culture that I must accept a faith that has destroying western culture as its goal. No free society can tolerate just anything and everything, othewise that will include things that will destroy it. A wee bit counterproductive, wouldn't you say? I might add (using your very own approach): It's none of our business if Jews want to build apartment buildings in their own ancient city.
Report abuse
peterson | Jul 15, 2010, 01:59 PM EDT
What if a terrorist dresses like a woman incl. a burka, blows himself up, killing hundreds attending a public event ??
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Jul 15, 2010, 10:56 AM EDT
If our religion becomes the dominant one of society, you can bet those that are not members and do not practice our idealoogy of wearing their ski masks in public will be ostracized, ridiculed and kept out of management positions.
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Jul 15, 2010, 10:47 AM EDT
Here will be the recitations of the new religious order: "Not to go on all-Fours that is
the Law . Are we not Men ? Not to eat Flesh or Fish that is the Law . Are
we not Men ? Not to claw Bark of Trees that is the Law . Are we not Men ?
Not to chase other Men that is the Law . Are we not Men. This will be the mantra of the beast men and we will obey the law sincerely, but sometimes
certain events will make it difficult to do so .
We will constantly strive to attain this archetype. Thus if we make mistakes we will feel immensely guilty . Have I covered all the bases: wear symbolic clothing, repeat mantras and feel guilty.
Report abuse
Monsoonman | Jul 15, 2010, 10:32 AM EDT
In almost all cases I would say "who cares" when it comes to religious observances by those who wish to show the rest of the world, "see how holy I am?" The Quakers used to do it, the Jews still do it with their black hats, yamahas,and dreads. The catholics do it with the ash on the forehead and there are plenty of other, in my opinion, silly observances. The only objection i have to the burkhas is that you can't identify who is under it. I will invent a new religion that requires all members to wear ski masks while they are out in public, we will call my religion the new "Inspirational Reciters Association." We'll see how well I am received, the next time I walk into a bank to make a withdrawal.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Jul 15, 2010, 08:41 AM EDT
It's none of our business when they want to wear it. You right wing middle of the road fas-cists like to pick the freedom of choice's that you approve of. You certainly crawl out of the woodwork when the word Muslim or Arab enters the conversation.
Report abuse
lynchsteele | Jul 15, 2010, 08:19 AM EDT
In recent years, the Vatican hasn't been the Guiding Light, abusive priests, nuns, monetary theft. These muslims are dog doo animals, they've even stooped to their"men" using veils to perpetrate Heinous killing by posing as dog doo women. Yeah you turn your cheek....not me, I'm no fool!!!!
Report abuse
GeorgeDillon | Jul 15, 2010, 06:59 AM EDT
seanmelbourne: ".It's not that long ago when christian women had to wear a hat or veil for religious services but I suppose that's ok". That's a really inane analogy. No one is objecting to Muslim women covering themselves in a tent inside the mosque, or frolicking naked if that's what they want. What is offensive is when they go out into society and skulk in their tents. Very disappointing that you should make such a monumental logical faux pas in conflating the two cases.
Report abuse
seanomelbourne | Jul 15, 2010, 04:32 AM EDT
I have no interest in debating half-baked ridiculous ideas that have no factual base.
Report abuse
68 Comments
Report abuse