Religions, religious values and practices, and the roles religion have in society are fairly controversial topics of discussion. Often times, many people support their religious values and practices as the right way of life, therefore neglecting and opposing any other religion different from theirs as wrong. To bring this conversation closer to home, although the Untied States has a large population of Christians, since the late 19th century there have been many laws passed that promote the idea of separation between church and state–especially in public education. In a nation that is very religious, these laws were among the first to differ from public opinion. The separation between church and state has removed religion from conversations to protect Americans’ First Amendment right to the freedom of religion along with the establishment clause and free exercise clause. However, while the American government takes a neutral stance towards religion, recently, many European governments have not made a distinction of such separation between church and state. For example, the French government has recently passed a law that bans Muslim women from wearing burqas or niqabs in public spheres. Intertwining religion and politics can be a dangerous move and an infringement on many people’s religious freedom. In this case—under the name of national security—the French government’s new law of banning burqas and niqabs not only infringes upon Muslims’ religious freedom, but it also forces Muslim women to assimilate to French mainstream society’s behaviors and further perpetuates stereotypes, stigmas, and misconceptions about the Muslim culture.
For many religions, there are traditions and practices that accompany ones participation in the religion: clothing is one form of these traditions and practices. For Islam, many Muslim women voluntarily choose to wear a burqa, a garment fully covering the body, or a niqab, a veil covering the face besides the eyes, to avoid exposure in public spheres. However, in the recent years, many European countries like Germany, Turkey, and Italy, have had a growing attempt to ban these attires. On April 11, 2011, French President Nicholas Sarkozy passed a law that made it illegal for women, manly Muslim women, in France to wear burqas or niqabs in public spheres. This new law made France the first country to ban the Islamic attires. On AOL News, writer Robyn Price reports in her article “Banning the Burqa: Behind the Veil of France’s New Law” on the controversies that have arose from this new legislation. Price provides basic information that has been covered in other major media outlets such as the two women who have been fined for violating the law. However, Price also criticizes the way the media has covered this event; she argues that the media coverage is not doing the event justice because it is leaving many questions unanswered.
The flawed justifications used to reason the passage of the law banning burqas and niqabs in public spaces, specifically targeting women only, clearly illustrate a breach in Muslim women’s religious rights. Government officials have cited the need for prohibiting Islamic attires for national security purposes. However, Price questions this statement, stating that there is no correlation between crimes and people wearing burqas, niqabs, or anything covering their face. The lack of statistics supporting that these attires interfere and threaten France’s safety makes this reason illegitimate therefore clearly infringing upon Muslim women’s religious freedom as well as their right to participate in their religion as they interpret it. President Sarkozy also argues that the Islamic attires “is a sign of enslavement and debasement” (Price 2). As I read the comments AOL users posted on Price’s article, many users support the ban of burqas and niqabs because they see these attires as a form of oppression that Islamic men forces upon Islamic women; wearing these attires symbolizes Muslim women’s inferiority. Price states, “For them, the new law might feel more like a form of enslavement rather than the burqa that reflects their religious and personal sensibilities” (2). While these critics might hold some truth, I agree with Price’s point that making a law prohibiting Muslim from wearing their religious attires is as equally as appalling as these views AOL users have. What these French male politicians think to be a form of liberating Muslim women, is in actuality, still a form of oppression because MEN are still trying to control what Muslim women can wear; being forced to wear a burqa or a niqab is as bad as being forced to not have the choice to wear one as enacting on their religious freedom.
Beyond the fact that this new French law infringes on Muslim women’s religious freedom, it also forces them to assimilate to French mainstream sociality behaviors and values. Banning Muslim women’s right to wear burqas and niqabs in public suggest that this act and the people who perform it are not welcomed in France—even though Muslims make up 10% of the French population— because this practice is not aligned with France’s mainstream societal values. As Arwa Ibrahim expressed her concern that she can never fully be viewed as an American regardless of how many documents that prove her American-ness, this new law also labels some Muslim women in France as not being welcome. The neocolonial approach to the situation, the imposition of French behaviors and values (specifically in terms of dress), comes across as the French government is dictating what is superior and best for French society. These Muslim women are being singled out and this French law only suggests that they must assimilate to the “right” culture. To put this into better perspective, Price questions why we are not skeptical of western fashion “such as baseball caps, dark black sunglasses, and even designer scarves that cover their neck, mouth, and nose in the chillier months” (Price 2). As an ethnocentric society, people often overlook other people’s culture and only regard theirs as the norm; those people are not tolerant of differences and want to force everyone to adapt to their ways. Furthermore, this paternalism in France is not helping Muslim women at all, instead it is stripping Muslim woman of their autonomy.
Lastly, this new law further exacerbates the stereotypes, stigmas, and misconceptions the media and society have already portrayed of Muslims and their culture. After the September 11th Attacks, Muslims and those who look like Muslims faced difficulties in America as most people assumed that they were associated with or were terrorists. This stereotype and stigma was not only apparent in the United States but also in Europe, which is clearly visible in President Sarkozy’s reasoning for passing the new law banning burqas and niqabs in public. Using national security as a justification for the law further perpetuates the violent yet vulnerable image of Islamic people. According to Lila Abu-Lughod, she argues that we are putting to much emphasis on little things that do not address the greater issues women face. The Western focus on the veil and the obsession of needing to save Islamic women, neglects the greater context to why society is the way it is today, which the United States had part in. This law not only further portrays a negative image of Islamic culture and values, but it further glorifies the United States and Westernized nations as saviors when in actuality they are not.
In conclusion, the new French law banning burqas and niqabs in public undermines Islam’s legitimacy. It suggests that Islamic practices have no place in society, especially in a society that embodies westernized values. However, we should no longer be using the erroneous excuse of protecting the safety of the nation as a justification to suppress people of cultures that differ from western ideals. Therefore, instead of focusing on religious symbols like the veil, people should recognize the need for acceptance, tolerance, and respect for other culture and religious values. As Charlotte Bunch suggests the need to connect conversations about local and global laws, we must see the need to address this blatant attack on Muslim women and Islam. Although, this law seems to only affect Muslim women in France, we must learn to see that this is a women’s issue and a violation of their religious freedom as a human issue. Only when we do, so can we fully achieve equality for all without compromising any group’s cultural values.
No comments:
Post a Comment