For Or Against France's Burka Ban?
And why? Read Timothy Garton Ash's op-ed in the LA Times for background and some thoughts on the burka ban that goes into effect in France on Monday.
I will say that he's wrong about this below -- the part about the burka wearer who "has to put up with the cartoons."
And that's the deal in a free society: The burka wearer has to put up with the cartoons; the cartoonist has to put up with the burkas.
The actual deal? The cartoonist, in most Western societies, must put up with the disturbing image of women walking around covered in pup tents with eye slits. But, there's no exchange here. Quite the contrary. The cartoonist has to put up with censorship in return.
Cartoonists who draw cartoons critical of Islam live in fear for their lives, the cartoons end up going unpublished in papers and books about censorship out of fear from the publishers, and one cartoonist has had to disappear from her life altogether...lest she end up like one poor man who made a film critical of Islam.







The obvious lesson is to have plenty of friends, air your grievances loudly and continuously, and practice violence on those with whom you disagree.
So much for civility. Since a burka is a near perfect disguise and an impediment to vision, I can see prohibitions on things like entering a bank or driving, but otherwise, my take is feel free to wear the costume of your choice.
MarkD at April 7, 2011 4:36 AM
If you can't see the face, sorry, it has to go. For all we know it could be a guy with explosives strapped to his chest. Also, it sends the message that we support the isolation and degredaton of women.
Canada has the same debate raging up here. For the most part, the women only wear the niqab and not the full burqa, as I think they realize that most westerners find it degrading.
Quebec has gone whole hog and banned it altogether.
http://www.politicsdaily.com/2010/04/22/quebec-burqa-ban-province-moves-to-prohibit-the-total-veil/
Angel at April 7, 2011 5:18 AM
For it, with reservations, as I don't like the idea of government telling people what to wear. However, France should be able to do what it likes.
NicoleK at April 7, 2011 6:54 AM
I am for the ban for several reasons but the most compelling for me is that the ban would force the immigrant population into adhering to at least some of the cultural norms of the country into which they immigrated. This is just the flip side of cultural norms and rules on nudity.
If they do not wish to adopt at least some of the dress standards of their adopted land, they should go home rather than to try to impress their ways upon the existing social structure.
Midwest Chick at April 7, 2011 8:27 AM
BAN IT.
If I walked into a bank, grocery store, or library with a face mask, I'd most likely end up having a conversation with security and/or police officers.
Quite obviously, you don't have to wear full face covering as an Islamic woman, as most of them don't.
Bottom line to me is this - I go to a house in Japan, I take off my shoes. I'm in their country, I feel obliged to obey their societal norms. Here in the west, we don't cover women and we don't accept full facial coverings in public places. Don't like that? Go back to the Third World.
UW Girl at April 7, 2011 8:31 AM
From the article
"Meanwhile, violent street demonstrators have for decades hidden their faces behind balaclavas, and a nylon stocking over the head has long been the native dress of the armed robber. It is ridiculous to suggest that women who wear the burka (thought to be fewer than 2,000 in France, and fewer than 500 in Holland), suddenly constitute more of a security threat than those muffled and hooded men."
I suggest that they constitute the same security threat. Try walking into a bank with a balaclava or a stocking over your face and see if a security guard stops you. Walk through a mall. I'll bet the police are called.
Steamer at April 7, 2011 8:38 AM
Ban it. I'm not crazy about government dictating dress, but then, neither am I crazy about Islam using the burka as a tool for subverting our freedoms, either.
Jen Wading at April 7, 2011 8:53 AM
"If you can't see the face, sorry, it has to go. For all we know it could be a guy with explosives strapped to his chest."
Or a woman....
Feebie at April 7, 2011 9:18 AM
I am not for the ban 100%. I can see the logic for it in govt buildings, banks, schools, and transportation hubs as I think one should be identifiable in those locations and would support a ban on ANY item that covers one's face in those locations. But in a public park or private business wear the owner doesn't care? Not so much. By telling a woman she isn't allowed to wear her burka, which for her may be a religious choice, (I am not arguing for Islam because I find it disgusting, but there are some women who choose to practice it and wear a burka of thier own free will) how is that different from telling her that she has to wear it? It should be her choice.
Sabrina at April 7, 2011 9:47 AM
The only objection I have to the ban is the difficulty in stipulating the exact restrictions? Face covering illegal? We'll be sending eight-year-olds to Gitmo for going trick-or-treating. And skiers really do wear skimasks on particularly bitter cold days. If they didn't they'd suffer windburn, possibly frostbite. Clothing that could be used to conceal explosives? Arrest all nuns.
So, I'm wondering how we could enforce such a ban?
Patrick at April 7, 2011 10:18 AM
In my opinion people who are not native to a country should live within their laws and not try to change them. After all this woman picked France as her new home so she should respect the fact that a burka has no place in their society, so it should not be an issue. I say this with all due respect, if you cannot live within a countries laws that is not your own, then please move to one that meets your views. I don't agree with how some of the nations in South America deal with their internal problems, so I will never be able to move there, even though living in the north it would be a pleasant change. I would never ask that country to change for my views, why should France?
This is a non issue as far as I am concerned,freedom comes at a price sometime.Laws sometimes are intrusive and restricting but this is the price we pay for freedom. To focus on such a small issue and forget all we have is somewhat confusing. Not being able to wear a burka but be able to live free, in my view is a worthy sacrifice.
To those who say that is not fair consider the alternative.Where would you rather live here or there?
J at April 7, 2011 12:04 PM
What about French women who convert to Islam on their own? They're weirdo natives. We all have some crazies among our native populations...
NicoleK at April 7, 2011 12:17 PM
"In my opinion people who are not native to a country should live within their laws and not try to change them. "
The issue is whether a new law should have been passed. This will come to the US too. France has a long bureaucratic nannyish bent and this time it just might save them. Our liberality here will be our undoing.
Vive la france.
carol at April 7, 2011 12:58 PM
For it. I'm sure the reaction will be entirely civil, with reasonable debate and logical discourse.
If not, c'est la vie. It's about time the French grew vertebrae. Hopefully we're not too far behind.
Juliana at April 7, 2011 1:50 PM
"Meanwhile, violent street demonstrators have for decades hidden their faces behind balaclavas, and a nylon stocking over the head has long been the native dress of the armed robber"
I'm sorry but when the fuck did 'armed robber' become an oppressed ethnic minority? And from what country do they hail? And please also explain how foribly stealing my goods and/or money with the threat of armed assult and/or death is a religious 'right'.
Fucking morons, when will stupidity FINALLY become a captial offence?
lujlp at April 7, 2011 2:48 PM
agree with the comments about "when in rome". You want to be a servile idiot, stay in your shithole country.
ronc at April 7, 2011 3:18 PM
Fucking morons, when will stupidity FINALLY become a captial offence?
It used to be one, when Darwin was allowed to work and the stupid were allowed to fail. Now we let them survive way too often, and breed in far too large a numbers.
True story, I'm getting my hair done and the woman in the chair next to me is complaining about her daughter being in jail again, leaving her to care for her *4* grandchildren. The woman says that she had asked the judge to require her daughter to be sterilized as a condition of parole the next time she gets out, because every time she is released she gets pregnant. The judge refuses. He says that "She is too young and may want to have more children." ?!?!?!?!?!? She has FOUR already! To different ex-con fathers!!!! And in her own mother's words she *will* have more, and she will re-offend and go back to jail, leaving them to be raised by their grandmother, til she can't do it anymore, and then what?
Yep, can't fix stupid.
Kat at April 7, 2011 4:12 PM
Ban it. In the US, there are already many states where it is against the law to wear a mask in public--these laws were passed when the Klan was important. I think that Islamists are worst than the Klan.
ken in sc at April 7, 2011 6:44 PM
The issue is whether a new law should have been passed. This will come to the US too. France has a long bureaucratic nannyish bent and this time it just might save them. Our liberality here will be our undoing.
Vive la france.
I couldn't agree more, even a nanny state should grow a pair.This is my view is a win for common sense.I would love to see a western woman walk down the beach in a bikini in Saudi Arabia and not get thrown in jail. Second, how many Saudi's would come to her defense like in France. This complacency will be our downfall, though it seems that Pandora's box is open.The more we bend, the faster we break!!! WHAT A SHAME
Vive la common sense
J at April 7, 2011 7:05 PM
Ban it.
Feebie at April 8, 2011 12:24 PM
I don't agree with any country deciding what its population should and should not wear, and I don't really see that the security concerns or cultural assimilation should outweigh personal freedom.
As far as using the burka to hide an individual's identity during say, a bank robbery: What difference would a burka make as opposed to simply wearing a mask? It maybe gets you in the door without being noticed, but as soon as you start asking for money that isn't yours, it makes no difference if you're in a burka or a hockey mask.
The assimilation argument: If there is one thing that makes a group more likely to fiercely defend its practices, its an attack from an outside force. France banning the burka gives the hard liners a enemy to rally the fence sitters against.
JC at April 9, 2011 9:42 PM
Ban it..
Cultural assimilation is a huge part of immigration IMO. This is like a vegan visitor coming to my house and demanding I throw away all my meat to make them happy.
@JC; if an immigrant from the ME decided he wanted to have a polygamous family,would that be fine by you so as not to offend his 'personal freedoms?'
WKI at April 11, 2011 5:39 AM
Leave a comment