So has France got it right banning the veil?

[Neil]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/10611398.stm I have to say, personally I see it as nothing more than an antiquate left over from a sexist religion, so I see no problem with it. But hey... That's just my opinion

[Ghost Of War]

Yep, they've got it right. If I walked into a shop or a bank with a mask on, I'll be arrested. Their religion should move with the times.

[JDFP]

Religious persecution is religious persecution. Doesn't matter if we don't "like" the religion very much. Wearing a veil isn't causing harm to anyone (even though some unseedy individuals may attempt to use this as a mask it's a tiny minority of people doing it). I find this highly disturbing. j.p.

[Skippy911sc]

I don't think the government should get involved in religion any more than religion should be involved in government. I also don't see veils as being any stranger the the number of other strange things other religions do... eating the body and drinking the blood... for example. I am picking mine to compare and criticize by the way.

[Neil]

I don't think the government should get involved in religion any more than religion should be involved in government. Ummm... So you'd be happy if we let a religion walk around with ceremonial daggers for example? Government dictates what happens in society. Religion is part of society. The two cannot be distingished. How would you feel about someone driving in a full head veil? Surely it's somewhat dangerous? So it's government/society's job to have a view on it!

[JDFP]

Government dictates what happens in society. Religion is part of society. The two cannot be distingished. They can and must be distinguished. I'll say up front I don't know how the sep. of Church and State works in France and/or England, but in the U.S. the sep. of the two entities is the very core of society. It's not intended to protect the State from religion -- rather to protect religion from the State (i.e. religious persecution implemented by the State that occurred quite regularly for centuries). Government cannot dictate to a religion what it "must" or "must not" do. If the government states that it's okay for homosexual couples to be married by the State (court houses, etc.) the State certainly has this power -- but the State can't go to a church and say: "Yeah, you all must recognize these State marriages as valid in your religion now and be willing to allow homosexual marriages to be allowed in your church buildings". This would be in clear violation of the Constitution. This doesn't mean that organized and recognized religions have a right to do whatever the hell they want. A Church can't decide to go kill all foreigners in a country because "Gold told us to." -- the line is that unless a religious mandate/teaching violates constitutionally imposed law (i.e. -- law that doesn't infringe on base individual rights of the nation -- such as the protection of individuals within society) then the State cannot impose laws to interfere with the organized/recognized religious body as well. It's a delicate balance that works and is the only way to ensure religious liberties are honored and respected (as should be) as well as ensuring that said religious liberties due not conflict with the welfare of all citizens under the mandate of the State for the protection of said citizens. I think the whole issue with the veil is a sticky one because the government of France seems to be using this very essence of "protecting society" as an imposition to the Islamic belief (the one case in which a State can impose itself over religious liberties -- at least as constitutionally defined in the U.S.). Wearing a veil is clearly not the same as an organized religion deciding to kill all foreigners because "God told them to" or similar such issues though -- so, to me at least, it's a really sticky ground. I can understand both perspectives -- France wanted to ensure the protection of businesses from the * MINORITY * of individuals that mask themselves by veils while at the same time whether or not it's an imposition of the religious liberties of a world-religion. Is the State's mandate to protect all individuals (as constitutionally defined) being hindered by a religious activity due to small minority of individuals in the religion? Argh...it's really shaky ground to me. j.p.

[Eyebiter]

No one is forcing followers of Islam to live in France. If they are so unhappy with the laws in Europe they are free to return to the Middle East.

[Neil]

Government cannot dictate to a religion what it "must" or "must not" do. Can't see this... Again, let's see a religon try and get its followers to carry ceremonial weapons? You're suggesting society/government shouldn't have an opinion on such a matter? Religion is just another part of society, so falls under the same umbrella as all other social behaviour...

[JDFP]

Can't see this... Again, let's see a religon try and get its followers to carry ceremonial weapons? You're suggesting society/government shouldn't have an opinion on such a matter? Religion is just another part of society, so falls under the same umbrella as all other social behaviour... Yeah, I'm not disagreeing with you, Neil. It's the State's responsibility to ensure the safety of all citizens. In my rather lengthy response above () I even state that organized religion's cannot do whatever they want if their beliefs/practices interfere with the government's mandate to proect all citizens in society. However, in as much as their beliefs/practices do not interfere with the government's mandate to protect citizens then the government cannot interfere/intercede with the practices of a religion under the sep. of Church and State. j.p.

[Danny]

Sinister leftie atheist opinion? It, like all religious customs, is a culture thing. Relgions on the whole are always a little ...not backwards. thats not the right word. i suppose 'aged' is the closest word to what i mean, but its ritualistic and passed on so its a bit more of a special case than teens wearing hoodies or guys wearing pants down by there ankles. It has more history, stretching back long before current social rules and needs more consideration because of that. And religion is almost like a side culture. For example i live in a modern english town between city and countryside and ten minutes down the road there is a zen bhuddist temple. So sometimes on the bus i'll see a buddhist monk with a shaved head and sandals and robes getting on the bus. Yeah the guys get heckled by yobs but its there sub culture they have devoted there life too and the clothing is an expression of that. I think the two biggest factors with veils are that we, as a 1st worldwide society, are more paranoid and scared than we have ever been, seeing enemies anywhere. Particularly terrorists. So we, as a people, find something associated with terrorism unnerving and feel it is a 'security risk'. However at the same time its also a social fopa thing. Like many say, you wouldnt go in a bank wearing a mask and thats true but at the same time i feel that islam is still very "knew" to people on the whole. Like hari krishna in the 60's and 70's its an appearance we arent used to and in predominantly christian countries we are used to priests with dog collars so to speak. I think its a cultural thing that might seem odd. But so does bowing to an effigy of a man being crucified to me. So for the most part its not a religious problem at all. Just cultural. We can yell security measure or whatever but at the end of the day i can walk down any high street and see a group of a dozen "yooofs" with scarfs covering there face, a baseball cap on and a hood pulled up and around both. Thats all we have to compare veils to and naturally all we have experienced is "people hide there faces because they are up to no good". Now i don't agree with the idea of women having to hide themselves. It's asinine. But then so is saying the earth is 3000 years old and dinosaurs were dragons put there to test us as a cosmic joke. The act of wearing a veil as part of expressing your faith and culture? Yeah sure i can see a workplace wanting it gone where face to face talking is needed, but out and about? i don't think they should be banned no.

[Tricky]

It always gets me when I go to a shopping centre, and there will be a young asian couple walking around, and the man will be wearing all this snazzy gear, you know, the G-Star jeans, henleys T-shirts, cool sunglasses & flash expensive trainers, while his wife/girlfriend is shuffling along behind with a full veil on, probably cooking underneath it! Something just isnt right about that to me! when I was in Spain last summer there was a load of asian women swimming in the sea in full Burkas, and it was 40 degree heat!! I was absolutely melting in just a pair of swimming shorts! All that gear is just oppressive & degrading to the women I think, but then again some of them genuinely think it makes them a better muslim to wear it, and of course plenty do it because their husband will probably give them a beating if they dont...

[acealive1]

Yep, they've got it right. If I walked into a shop or a bank with a mask on, I'll be arrested. Their religion should move with the times. amen to that

[Legion2213]

Yep, they've got it right. If I walked into a shop or a bank with a mask on, I'll be arrested. Their religion should move with the times. This is all that needs to be said...one law for all and we'll all rub along a lot easier. This full face veil seems to be mostly used in the West anyway, it's a political/seperatist statement IMO. It should be banned throughout the West

[Skippy911sc]

Last I checked the veil thing was not harming me. The whole idea of terrorism is to frighten someone or terrorize...how did they do on that one? I refuse to walk around scared of anyone, however I just choose where I will walk. Next thing it might be the cross necklace someone wears, or the star of david necklace or ya-mica... “I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another” TJ I am not french nor do I live there, so I could give a rats ass what they do, but I can use all my superhuman wisdom to think it might be a step in the wrong direction.

[JDFP]

Last I checked the veil thing was not harming me. The whole idea of terrorism is to frighten someone or terrorize...how did they do on that one? I refuse to walk around scared of anyone, however I just choose where I will walk. Next thing it might be the cross necklace someone wears, or the star of david necklace or ya-mica... “I am for freedom of religion and against all maneuvers to bring about a legal ascendancy of one sect over another” TJ I am not french nor do I live there, so I could give a rats ass what they do, but I can use all my superhuman wisdom to think it might be a step in the wrong direction. Well said, Skippy, and I agree 100%. I'm worried about my friend Los though, I've been missing his opinion on the death penalty / veil / etc. stuff we've been having around here the last week or so, anyone hear from him to know if he's doing groovy? j.p.