Sarkozy condemns burka
France is divided over Nicolas Sarkozy’s recent statement that the burka is not welcome in France. In a speech to legislators he said:
We cannot accept to have in our country women who are prisoners behind netting, cut off from all social life, deprived of identity. … That is not the idea that the French republic has of women’s dignity. … The burka is not a sign of religion, it is a sign of subservience. … It will not be welcome on the territory of the French republic.
In 2004, France banned the headscarf in state schools. Almost 60 French legislators recently formed a parliamentary inquiry to examine the spread of the burka as “a breach of individual freedoms on our national territory.”
Sarkozy’s view stands counter to Obama’s. In Obama’s recent speech in Cairo, he spoke on the issue of women’s rights but emphasized women’s rights to choose more traditional roles:
I reject the view of some in the West that a woman who chooses to cover her hair is somehow less equal. … I do not believe that women must make the same choices as men in order to be equal, and I respect those women who choose to live their lives in traditional roles. But it should be their choice.
While its measures towards Muslims seem to get the most press, it’s worth noting that this stems from a trenchant commitment to secularism, which BBC writer Henri Astier calls “the closest thing the French have to a state religion.” France did not just ban headscarves. It banned all conspicuous religious apparel, including Sikh turbans, Jewish skullcaps and Christian crosses.




Learn it! Speak it! Live it!
Bring Christmas to a child in need!








Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top51 Comments to “Sarkozy condemns burka”
As someone just said to me when I mentioned what I was reading: “I knew there was a reason I like this guy, but he’s looking for trouble.”
I agree with my co-worker.
Report comment to moderator
As a practice of national policy, this probably won’t stand. Many Muslim women choose the head coverings, or burka and wear it with pride.
If a Muslim woman is assaulted by Muslim men in France, then the police should arrest, the courts should prosecute and the men should receive the punishment that fits the crime for assault. The French would be obligated to defend her right not to wear a burka or head covering if that was her choice.
Now if Muslims come to power in France and they determine that French women are obligated to wear the burka, that’s a different story.
Report comment to moderator
When someone hides their face, ic could mean something other than a religious reason —- it might mean they don’t want to identify themselves. I believe Sarkozy is right.
Report comment to moderator
Surely you don’t agree with the French interpretation of a ’separation of church and state’ that bans students from attending public school wearing a cross, a skullcap or a headscarf? Don’t you think such a ban could be extended to just about every public place until the only place left to wear them is inside your home or a church, synagogue or mosque?
Report comment to moderator
Driving is a privilege, not a right. If the government demands to see the face behind the veil in order to obtain an operator’s license, then so be it.
Report comment to moderator
It is interesting that the most liberal of all countries is into banning so many things. What happened to Liberté, égalité, fraternité?
If Sarkozy were to say women should not be forced to wear them, then that would be on the side of liberty. But banning? That is hostility to freedom.
I’m not sure what Obama’s point was, other than he respects female subservience under Islam as long as they agree. Well, they have to if they want to survive. That isn’t freedom.
Report comment to moderator
I was driving one night a few years ago on what is usually a busy street, however it wasn’t this particular time – a car drove up along side mine on the passenger side, inside was an individual with a full black head covering, only the eyes showed, I had no idea if it were a male or female – I slowed down, and they drove off, I might add very fast and erratic. Had this car not taken off, I would have called the police on my cell phone.
Report comment to moderator
If a woman has a religious conviction to cover her face, she should be allowed to cover her face, or wear a cross, or some such. She should also be willing to have her picture uncovered on a driver’s license and uncover while driving or conduction other discourse.
Some time ago I was watching a video clip on (Memri, I think it was). Arab men were discussing permitting women to drive. The primary objection was that women would not be able to see to drive with her head covered. Also, she must have her picture taken and a man might see it.
Makes sense, soon they will be going out without a male escort, smoking in public, voting, and showing their ankles.
Remember, “A woman out without a man is like a piece of meat in the sun”. Ayaan Hirst Ali, Infidel
Report comment to moderator
The Western concept of freedom of religion is inherently conflicting with a religion that is inherently and inflexibly both monotheistic and theocratic (as Islam is).
We in the US will see this better in a few years when Islam has gained a bigger foothold here.
Report comment to moderator
I say ban the burqa and mandate underarm shaving for Frog gals and daily showers for everyone else.
Ya say ya wanna revo-lution?
Report comment to moderator
Chas, I think that first paragraph is a very reasonable, common sense approach to such things.
But the article linked above said that public school children in France were not allowed to wear any religious symbols at all, including a cross. Some symbols are intrusive and others are not. A simple headscarf shouldn’t be intrusive, nor should a skullcap or a cross. That’s different from a full face covering.
The article indicated that these things were banned because of their interpretation of the ’separation of church and state’. It seems a bit ridiculous to me.
Report comment to moderator
KRM, our only hope is the secularized hipster Iranians in the USA. A gal I knew named Shabnam was sent to the USA as a teen and if we can get other muslim youths that soon they’ll be into the boozing clubbing bed-hopping lifestyle of secularized American gals in any major city you care to cite.
Report comment to moderator
DJ – 11
YOU WROTE: —– “But the article linked above said that public school children in France were not allowed to wear any religious symbols at all, including a cross.”
DJ – it didn’t say all crosses, it said large crosses – small crosses must be OK – there is a big difference between a large cross and a normal sized cross. Some kids buy huge crosses to wear as a fashion statement.
Report comment to moderator
#6 Xion,
You hafta see things as the Euros do. In Norway, more than half of all rapes are done by non-European males. (Not a high muslim population in Norway, but high muslim crime rate) Europe’s battered womens shelters are mainly populated by muslim immigrant women.
I applaud Sarko for doing this. It might make Europe a less appealing destination for muslims
Report comment to moderator
there is a big difference between a large cross and a normal sized cross
Yeah. Probably a whole inch or 2. It’s a ridiculous law, and very intrusive.
Report comment to moderator
DJ
I don’t trust anyone who would hide their face, I have no idea who they are. We don’t live in a country where people can hide their identity – further more we are living in an era where crime has become rampant —— anyone could wear a face covering, be it male/female and you would never know who they are.
This has nothing to do with a cross – it has EVERYTHING to do with safety. People who commit crimes could cover their faces, never being recognized for who they REALLY ARE.
This isn’t about a Cross, it’s about people hiding their identity.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner, Wouldn’t it just be easier to say: Keep out. Conservative Muslims need not apply?
I don’t have a problem with limiting immigration, and limiting it in a way that the particular country perceives to be their best interest. But once they are allowed in, apart from health and safety issues, I don’t see how you can forbid someone to wear a piece of clothing. That’s a bit out there.
Of course, schools can have dress codes. That’s not a bad idea actually. But I still don’t think it is conducive to freedom to tell people they can’t dress in their traditional attire. Should we run up to the Amish and tell them they’re oppressed and must remove their hats?
But I guess the French have their reasons, I’m just glad I don’t have to live with them.
Report comment to moderator
Yes, Victoria, I did say that a face covering would be a safety issue. A scarf or skullcap is not. Nor is a cross, unless it’s the size of a small knife or is weaponized in some way.
Actually, my bank has signs up that you must remove your hat and sunglasses before you come in. So safety issues are a valid concern for everyone, I agree. And especially while driving you wouldn’t want anyone with a covered face, not even partially covered.
Report comment to moderator
It is apparent from the Barna study above that even a substantial number of Americans, including some evangelicals regard the Christian faith as an agency of intolerance and even repression.
Others regard Islam in the same way.
The objective of edicts like Sarkozy’s, at least as far as the schools go, is to prevent public wearing of insignia that others are likely to find offensive.
Makes sense to me, at least in the schools.
But once one gets “out in the streets” I think the state should bend over backwards to permit and protect public expressions of faith or political belief or whatever by private parties.
Banning burqas, skullcaps, headdresses or monks’ cowls, or a face painted with a large black cross is just dumb.
Report comment to moderator
A white French man is presuming to tell Muslim women of color what’s good for them, and he doesn’t see a conflict of subservience?
Report comment to moderator
Well, I suppose people can walk around with a tent over themselves, hiding how big or small they are, not to mention male/female, or their face which would identify them.
YES by all means, lets make identity a secret.
Report comment to moderator
Take a look at this site on Breitbart, you can enlarge the photo – the individual on the right is large enough to be a big man, WHO WOULD KNOW? – SAFETY ISSUE?
If they want to wear these tents, why not stay in the countries that promote such costumes?
http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D98VP85G1&show_article=1
Report comment to moderator
This just in..
France..
the govt now plans to dissolve the Scientology “religion”, charging this “church” with financial fraud.
Church spokesman say those who allege fraud are in fact apostates out to sue their ex-religion.
Germany too is concerned about the actions of Scientologist in the Bundesrepublik.
Report comment to moderator
Sawgunner, this doesn’t surprise me – there has been a lot of problems with the Scientology group – I don’t consider their organization to be a church.
Report comment to moderator
The objective of Sarkozy’s banning of the burka in public is to force the Islamic women and the men, when you think about it, to adopt “French” standards. There is a safety element, but what he’s really trying to force is that the muslims will adapt to western society, not the other way around.
Report comment to moderator
NJL – 25
I usually agree with many things you post, however on this issue with terrorism a threat, I would want to see the face of the person eating next to me in a restaurant, walking towards me on the street, shopping next to me in a store. I had a very unfortunate experience a few years ago, and then a few others which has made my opinions far more safety conscious.
I believe it is a SAFETY ISSUE.
Report comment to moderator
This is a good example of the assimilation attitude the French hold towards immigration. Once you have gained French citizenship, you become only French. The government does not track the ethnicity of the population as is done in the US. There are no official figures on the percentage of African descendants or of Arabian descendants. The United States has adopted an integration stance on welcoming immigrants. It recognizes individual backgrounds and cultures.
Sarkozy’s statement that the burqa is no longer permitted is reflective of the cultural attitude in France. Once permitted residency in France, that is one’s primary identity, and it is one’s duty to learn the language and culture quickly.
As for safety, I am not afraid to walk around French cities alone, even during the evening or soon after sunset. I am more nervous to be out by myself in an upper middle-class suburb in the United States. (I say this as a young woman who has lived in both situations.)
I simply wanted to offer a bit of cultural perspective to this issue. Whether or not Sarkozy has made a good or poor decision is not for me to judge.
Sylvie
Report comment to moderator
Sylvie – 27
YOU WRITE: “I am more nervous to be out by myself in an upper middle-class suburb in the United States. (I say this as a young woman who has lived in both situations.)”
I disagree with you, even though you cite your experience –
The information below comes from the U.S. Department of State -
This might be one of the major reasons why burkas are not welcome in France -
Report comment to moderator
Victoria #28
I certainly respect the warnings posted by the respective governments. And, just to clarify, I am not a risk-taker. I respect possible dangers with a healthy fear.
I went to the document you cited from the US govt. Their practical warnings relate primarily to pickpocketing, student strikes and demonstrations, and caution in tourist destinations. Despite a recent Hollywood production (Taken) such violent crime is extremly rare in France and shocking to the citizens and the government.
“Americans are advised to avoid street demonstrations, particularly if riot police are on the scene.” This quote from the article is slightly in error. Demonstrations and strikes in France are scheduled and the proper authorities are always notified. Therefore, the presence of riot police is normal and to be expected, not a sign of increased danger.
However, because weapons, especially firearms, are so heavily regulated in France, I did feel much safer.
When traveling or living in France, the usual travelling precautions suffice.
Sylvie
Report comment to moderator
Sylvie,
There is much more to the crime problem within France, perhaps you didn’t read it – “street demonstrations” was the least of crime problems –
Those who love France often defend the problems which exist, especially in Paris.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria,
France is certainly not a perfect country, nor would I say that it is uncategorically “better” than the US. It certainly has its own problems, but excessive violent crime doesn’t seem to be the most pressing, even according to the US govt. I don’t have time to immediately research comparable crime rates between the two countries, but I am interested in seeing such statistics.
que Dieu vous bénisse (may God bless you),
Sylvie
Report comment to moderator
Actually, we are in agreement, Victoria. I could make an argument that on safety alone the burka should be banned — a woman can’t see where she’s walking in that thing and will be struck by a car. But I don’t think safety is behind Sarkozy’s action. The muslims do not want to adapt, and he wants to force them to do so in France. They have a problem in France with the muslim youth being unemployed and hanging out in certain neighborhoods. Somehow these people have to adapt and try to fit in to French society, not the other way around.
I believe there was a case in Florida where a judge ruled that the woman had to remove her head covering in order to get a driver’s license. (I agree. In fact, I would vote for a statute that requires a driver to remove head coverings that impede with vision.) And I believe another judge dismissed a case because the plaintiff would not remove her head covering and the jury would not be able to determine her truthfulness because they could not see her facial expressions. He told her the only way to go forward was to let the jury look into her eyes.
I have to admit that it gives me pause when I see a completely covered woman here in my town. It’s so rare it’s startling. Mostly, I don’t understand why anyone would want to be so restricted, especially when it’s hot.
Report comment to moderator
NJLawyer – 32
We have those here who wear a white scarf, the interesting part is, it reaches a part of the face where the eye couldn’t possibly have side vision which is imperative when driving. These women walk around in the stores not being able to see anything but what is directly in front of them – The LINK below shows the hidden view. However, if the photo had been taken with a direct side view, the woman would not have vision to the side, with glasses as well, vision totally lost on left and right – sort of reminds me of a horse race, when the horses vision is obstructed by BLINKERS.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/3619988.stm
Report comment to moderator
Sylvie: The French certainly have gotten the protest march down to an art. A couple of years ago I was in Paris and came across a huge line of police vehicles, maybe 30 or so. I thought to myself, “gee,a parade, I wonder what the occasion is”. But the police were followed by the real protesters, teachers fighting against some kind of cuts. They were loud and colorful, and the few hundred of them were followed by yet another huge line of police cars…
It was a rather sharp contrast to my other experience with Parisian protests 40 years ago, the week after Daniel Cohn-Bendit was shot…
Report comment to moderator
19. Arcadia, are you saying the public schools are obligated to indulge people in their prejudice and stereotyping. If a lot of people think the English are snotty should British accents be banned lest someone be offended? I think the school rule is dumb must less banning religious clothing is public. Most of the arguments against the burka could be applied to a nuns habit and will be eventually.
Report comment to moderator
Kbells,
Nuns do not cover their faces, they are in full view – A burka covers the face, no one knows whether it is a man or woman -very convenient for those who don’t want to be recognized.
Report comment to moderator
I find my thoughts going all over the place on this one.
I think that Victoria’s point about safety has its merits.
What most intrigues me about this matter is that the burka does not seem to be an actual requirement for Muslim women, as many devout Muslim women do not wear one. Some wear scarves that do not hide the face. If it is not actually required by their religion, then I see no problem with banning it in public places, where it does represent a safety issue.
I think that public schools have no right to ban anything that is required by a person’s religion. A cross is not required in the Christian religion, so they can ban it if they wish, although I don’t think they should if they allow other jewelry. A yarmlke/kippah is required by the Jewish religion, and boys should be allowed to wear it. A turban is required in the Sikh religion. A prayer cap is required for some Mennonite, Brethren, and Amish girls.
Report comment to moderator
Burkas and hajibs are not religious apparel but merely cultural preferences. Its not religious discrimination to speak out against the use of the burka in Western society. Photo IDs, highway and workplace safety are all instances where tradition meets modernity and something has to bend and quite frankly paternalistic cultural practices should bend. On a personal level, I have no problem with a hajib — many of my students wear hajibs — but I find the burka disconcerting. Its as if an alien non-entity is lurking in the background — the person is robbed of her humanity when separated from the rest of us in such a manner.
Report comment to moderator
I have a real problem with the government forcing the students to dress according to secular principles because students are forced to spend most of their childhoods in the government schools. If children were more free to learn at home it wouldn’t be so bad to enforce draconian rules on those who chose to go there. I wear a headscarf, so if I went to school in France I would be punished I guess. As much as I don’t like Islam, forcibly removing someone’s clothing is mean.
Report comment to moderator
Are nudist colonies the safest places on Earth?
If any part of Victoria’s body is covered I do not feel safe.
Report comment to moderator
No, I take that back. Victoria in a burka! Now I feel safe. As do all the homosexual people.
Christians feel oppressed when they can’t insult homosexuals and Muslims. However, I believe in freedom of speech, even in those cases.
Report comment to moderator
Contented Joy- It may depend on the reason for which you wear a headscarf. What the French system does not permit is religious apparel in schools, and that only at the grade school and secondary level. At the university, headscarves, crosses, and the like are permitted.
Report comment to moderator
Victoria, I feel badly that you have been personally attacked in this thread.
Report comment to moderator
RN: You seem to be increasingly curmudgeony lately. It’s almost as if you want to be banished rather than going into self-imposed exile.
I’m with NJL on this one. The attack on Victoria was unwarranted and in bad taste.
Report comment to moderator
Arcadia – One very significant difference between Christianity and Islam is that Christianity is designed as being moderately tolerant (although subject to twisting due to the basic human nature issue of intolerance) whereas Islam is designed to be intolerant (and to emphasize and enshrine the basic human nature issue of intolerance).
Report comment to moderator
Sarkozy shouldn’t stop with the burka, he should ban the wearing of crosses and yamakas as well.
Report comment to moderator
#46 I take it you believe that freedom of religion is a quaint old fashioned idea to be discarded?
Report comment to moderator
#46 KWatson,
If your suggestion were implemented, the Marais quarter of Paris would look very bland.
Report comment to moderator
#47, No, the quaint old fashioned idea of religion should be discarded.
Report comment to moderator
You think the quaint old fashioned idea of individual rights should be discarded too?
Report comment to moderator
#50. No. who would? I’m talking about educating people so they can chose to make up their minds based on evidence instead of faith.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDonTheWeb.com to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!