Are the demonstrations on 17th January against the ban of headscarfs in public schools in France justified ?
On 17th January there will be big demonstrations in 25 countries all over the world against the ban of headscarfs in public schools in France.
The protests are organized from Muslim associations. But also left groups from Britain like GR call for participation on the protests.
Some worried people, lefties too just wonder because:
Is such ban a discrimination against Muslim faith ?
Many people and Muslims too in France mean, there is NO discrimination against the Muslim society in these case.
It was (some unspoken) law in France since long times, that public schools should be neutral in religious matters and that should be valid for ALL religions or atheists.
ALL religious signs will be forbidden for Christians, Jews, Muslims and others.
Where is there a discrimination ?
However, there also is another point to wonder?
There are big demonstrations against France and (Germany) in 25 countries all over the world organized in very short time now.
However, there were/are also big issues in the world for which - many people think - the Muslim society should care and protest in big demonstrations in 25 countries.
Problems like:
-- How is it in Bush's USA? Can Muslim teachers wear hijabs in public schools? Or vanish such people as terrorists in prisons?
-- What about the terrorist hunts against Muslims ?
or about Palestine - Where are the big demonstrations organized in many countries in short time?
Worried people think - it smells - it smells for clever, professional work - to punish countries which did not obey Bush's orders, and Muslim associations and some lefties are misused ?
Do protesters not support Bush ?
And is this the right side of the fence ?
The protests are organized from Muslim associations. But also left groups from Britain like GR call for participation on the protests.
Some worried people, lefties too just wonder because:
Is such ban a discrimination against Muslim faith ?
Many people and Muslims too in France mean, there is NO discrimination against the Muslim society in these case.
It was (some unspoken) law in France since long times, that public schools should be neutral in religious matters and that should be valid for ALL religions or atheists.
ALL religious signs will be forbidden for Christians, Jews, Muslims and others.
Where is there a discrimination ?
However, there also is another point to wonder?
There are big demonstrations against France and (Germany) in 25 countries all over the world organized in very short time now.
However, there were/are also big issues in the world for which - many people think - the Muslim society should care and protest in big demonstrations in 25 countries.
Problems like:
-- How is it in Bush's USA? Can Muslim teachers wear hijabs in public schools? Or vanish such people as terrorists in prisons?
-- What about the terrorist hunts against Muslims ?
or about Palestine - Where are the big demonstrations organized in many countries in short time?
Worried people think - it smells - it smells for clever, professional work - to punish countries which did not obey Bush's orders, and Muslim associations and some lefties are misused ?
Do protesters not support Bush ?
And is this the right side of the fence ?
Comments
Hide the following 7 comments
wail gnash censor censor censor...
16.01.2004 02:00
Rashid
difficult one
16.01.2004 11:06
Otherwise, I wonder whether there would be grounds for a legal challenge in France pointing out that the hijab is an item of clothing, not a religious symbol comparable to the christian cross? What would happen to a christian or atheist girl (or, come to that, boy) coming to school in a hijab? Presumably this would be allowed, as its not a symbol of their religion...the whole law is basically nonsense
laura
freedom to choose
16.01.2004 11:55
Now some will say that Muslim women face social pressure to wear hijab. Maybe.. but then don't non-Muslim women face social pressure to shave their legs + wear make-up? Should they be banned? Point is, imposing laws + bans only makes things worse. Women face enough pressure and tough choices without the state adding another.
In some ways it's similar to the reproductive rights (abortion) debate. Women must have a free choice and the state should just stay out of it.
kurious
Freedom to choose
16.01.2004 21:15
I think its ridiculous for the state to ban what people can and cannot wear. The original post has little understanding of the position of Muslims in Europe. There is plenty of tolerance for them to live there, but there is great pressure to assimilate, rather than simply live side by side. In other words, the people from other cultures who live in France are expected to act and hold the beliefs of all the rest of 'Secular France'. A kind of imposed secularity, where everybody is the same, as opposed to what I understand by secular, which is lots of different cultures living side by side.
England is in fact better than the rest of Europe in this regard. Which makes a change.
As for those women who feel the pressure from their families. Well, that is their battle to fight, not ours. The state shouldn't interfere in family affairs, except when a crime is being committed. My parents pressured me to do lots of things I didn't want to do. I rebelled. I would not have wanted the state to step in and stop them, though. If anything, these moves against the Hijab will make the pressure to wear it even greater, as Muslim families fight to maintain their culture and identity.
Hermes
no help from the left
17.01.2004 19:35
well i live in turkey, after the ban on hijab which first started in the universties then to colleges, than everywhere ( except the street and houses ), there were huge protests by the muslim groups however left chose to sided with the secular camp which the army / state was in. That was a big divide in the society and the working class, and no answer was given.Since then it was the first time the two groups came together against the war on Iraq with a success.
so i wonder what is happening. indymedia is the only press that we can follow.
ahmet kazici
Some things about this that are important to remember:
18.01.2004 13:39
The hijab is not being 'singled out' as the ban also applies to the kippa and the Sikh turban. Why is this being turned into a 'Muslim' issue?
Most people will conclude that the Islamist outrage at the ban proves beyond a doubt that, ironically, this law is the only way to protect freedom of religion. If some Muslims have to compromise on their headwear - which we should all realise is a political symbol, not a religious requirement (it is not essential or required to wear the hijab) - then they should compromise.
Rob
Only state run
18.01.2004 15:17
Its wrong to single out just Muslims, though I think it's an issue that will affect them harder than some. Christians are not compelled by their religion to wear a cross, and it can be worn under clothing. Religious Jews will be affected a lot, though. And Sikhs!!!! Poor Sikhs!!! Are they going to be compelled to cut their hair, then? They are not supposed to cut it, hence the turban. And there are various other articles they must carry about with them, as well.
You know, I think people who wear suits are foolish followers of the God of Capitalism. Therefore, if there is going to be a ban on religious symbols, I propose we ban suits, and burn the tie, that evil symbol of cultural slavery.
Hermes