French Opposition to the Muslim Veil - Hijab - Essay Example

?Hijab in France has been a cause of disagreements and the abduction of French civilians following the ban of general public outlook and opinion on them being worn in publicly. This debate has gained political interest from legislators with the president included to the extent of commissioning an investigation to look into the issue of religious signs in public places. Therefore, it is crucial to evaluate the opposition of the Muslim veil (Hijab), since it provides an insight into the relationship between politics and religious rights or lack thereof, and the violation of human rights. The controversy over the Muslim headscarf or hijab has its history from the late 1980s in France following the suspension of two girls from school because they were dressed in veils, which occurred in 1989 and 1993. Over the years, French legislators came up with law and approved it with a large majority banning any form of conspicuous signs of religion in public schools. The law prohibited the Islamic headscarf and excessively large crucifixes, as well as kippas (Ezekiel, 2006). The law has seen students being expelled, and public workers losing their jobs, especially for wearing hijab; consequently, the law seems to be against the hijab, but not the other sign of religion, as it is the only conspicuous piece of cloth or sign that cannot be concealed. In addition, it has led to discrimination against Muslim in certain aspects of their lives, such as jobs and even social relations in weddings and other public places and events. Parties Involved Those that are involved in the controversy of the French hijab are parties interested in human rights and religious interests. In this light, feminist groups are involved in the controversy due to the headscarf’s symbolism in the Islamic religion and the role it plays in the identity of Muslim women and girls. This is concerning women’s submission to men, and it concerns this party, as the veil is believed to influence the school system. In addition, they are interested in fighting for women’s rights as the headscarf in public schools will allow incorporation of Muslim practices into the school system and influence other students, as well as challenge the fight against violation of women’s rights. In addition, an ethical issue is raised at this point in relation to the persons charged with the responsibility of making decisions that cover the rights of women and freedom of choice in following that which they believe in, both morally and religiously. This is because the hijab is viewed as a piece of cloth that limits the freedom of women, and that wearing the hijab itself is not a choice. This issue complicates matters considerably complicated. Educators and educational stakeholders are also involved in the controversy, and a majority are against the headscarf. This is following the debate on the social and cultural nature of the country in relation to religion. The argument is that France is a secular state making the headscarf a violation of the secular of this social and cultural state of the nation, and disrupts the state of harmony by expressing community affiliation making other interested parties in interacting with the said community locked out. The above two parties argue against the veil and have a strong basis for it despite the implications raised. However, they are the crucial voices involved in the entire issue. Rights The first issue is the violation of human rights despite French declaration of the universal human rights, which state that all human beings are entitled to their own religion, which goes together with the issue of religious expression. The headscarf is a form of self-expression relating to the Islamic faith and religion. The banning of the headscarf in public by the law is in clear violation of the women’s rights, particularly with the support of the law, which was mainly for political reasons and did not have the best interests of the group in mind (Gendrot, 2007). Following the ban in France, where human rights are advocated in all aspects, reveals the lack of tolerance for other people’s religion and religious affiliations, especially Muslim religion. Headscarf in public places plays a crucial role in their identification; moreover, it is covered in the human rights declaration as religious expression (Wiles, 2007). In addition, the controversy gets deeper with the question of those with the mandate to determine whether women get to wear hijab or not. In this light, the parties involved did not receive any form of consultation on the state of affairs involving the ban or permission. This relates to the fact that the bodies or parties to make the ruling relating to hijab are not known, which makes it difficult to take responsibility for such outright violation of religious rights. In addition, the issue of stigmatization of Muslim girls who do not wear the hijab appears in the same French community, where there is a law banning it altogether. Those who fail to wear Hijab are discriminated against by being termed as whores, which is another violation of their rights concerning their culture and personal preference (Gallala, 2006). The whole issue emanates from the expulsion of Muslim girls from public schools in France from wearing hijab, is in spite of the population of girls and women wearing them being a minority, which implied that it is the rights of the minority that were violated (Winter, 2006). This is also a proof that the Muslim population is oppressed due being labeled as terrorists, in which case all the rights of cultural groups be met (Windle, 2004). This has led to the abandoning of the cultural and religious requirements of the Islamic religion due to fear that the population may face worse conditions. Ethics It is ethically wrong to ban wearing of hijab in France because, in case of a person with a clear conscience, the hijab has no role whatsoever in the person’s life. This is concerning a person who is not obligated to wear a hijab, but for those who wear it out of religious obligation or preference, as it affects their lives directly. Therefore, harmonious coexistence should be upheld through having those directly affected by the wearing of headscarf making decisions, for themselves or at least have consultations with the parties. This is for the sole purpose of promoting a sense of moral acceptance by only doing that which right for all members of the community. In addition, there is the ethical issue that women and girls who wear the veil are subjected to concerning assimilation and patriotism (Freedman, 2007). In addition, it is wrong of the society to judge veiled women who walk around with their religious identity. This is concerning the view that they are a disgrace to the French culture and values by perversely rejecting their values. This is due to the differences in culture and values that the native French and Muslim cultures have in relation to the French identity and the French Republican tradition. In light of this, the society tends to favor the western standard of the identity of women on a social scale, as opposed to individualistic cultures (Carle, 2004). This practice of banning the headscarf is destructive to the democratic age, which we live in where one has the right of expression and the freedom to be affiliated with any religion. Furthermore, it also violates the rules of society where harmony is to be promoted for a pluralistic society. Impact Therefore, because of the law banning wearing of hijab, a number of unprecedented events may occur in a country and even globally, considering to national public and international outrage against the action of the French government (The Economist, 2004). For this reason, Islam activists in Iraq took matters into their own hands and abducted two French journalists and their chauffer in protest against the ban (Brems, 2006). They were held for more than a hundred days with their demands being simply the abolition of the ban against the hijab. The law seems to be pouring over other areas of public life too with the adoption of the same in legal and public events. This discrimination has worsened to the extent of denial service to veiled women in public service and lack of legal recognition of information declared by a veiled woman as a witness. Other than this, democracy is put in a fix due to minority populations and their interests. This is concerning multiculturalism where the French society is supposed to compromise their monocultural tendencies to cater for other cultures (Scott, 2008). This is also likely to boil over to other non-hijab related cases such as social discrimination on racial grounds and white supremacy practices (Ezekiel, 2005). Therefore, this is bound to create social unrest on a massive scale. Still on democracy, France has a policy on the separation of state matters from those of religion. With this in mind, every person in the country has a freedom of conscience, but the government still insists that it does not recognize, remunerate or subsidize any faith (Cusack, 2011). The implication is clear in that the French is not willing to democratize religion by allowing its citizens to display their faith publicly except in places of worship, museums, exhibitions, cemeteries and funeral monuments. In conclusion, French ban of all forms of conspicuous religious signs in public schools appears as a direct hit at discriminating against Islam. This is due to the attention paid to the hijab as opposed to other religious regalia and signs in public schools. In addition to the allowance provided, for Christian signs to the point that they can easily be concealed to meet the requirements of the ban. Moreover, the ban infringes on democracy and the rights of the people on both a personal and religious scale. Therefore, it is wrong to have such a partisan law block the moral obligations of the society for just the selfish political gains of a few people. References Brems, E. (2006). "Diversity In The Classroom: The Headscarf Controversy In European Schools." Peace & Change 31.1: 117-131.  Carle, R. (2004). "Hijab And The Limits Of French Secular Republicanism." Society 41.6: 63-68.  Cusack, C. M. (2011). "Hijab And The Republic: Uncovering The French Headscarf Debate - By Bronwyn Winter." Journal Of Religious History 35.1: 113-114.  Ezekiel, J. (2005). "Magritte Meets Maghreb: This Is Not A Veil." Australian Feminist Studies 20.47: 231-243.  Ezekiel, J. (2006). "French Dressing: Race, Gender, And The Hijab Story." Feminist Studies 32.2: 256-278.  Freedman, J. (2007). Women, Islam and rights in Europe: beyond a universalist/culturalist dichotomy. Review of International Studies, 33, pp 29-44. Gallala, I. (2006). "The Islamic Headscarf: An Example Of Surmountable Conflict Between Shari'a And The Fundamental Principles Of Europe." European Law Journal 12.5: 593-612.  Gendrot, B.S. (2007). "France Upside Down Over A Headscarf?." Sociology Of Religion 68.3: 289-304.  Scott, J.W . (2008). The Politics of the Veil, New York, USA: Princeton University Press. The Economist. (2004). A tragic twist of the scarf. 372 (8391), 49-50. Wiles, E. (2007). Headscarves, Human Rights, and Harmonious Multicultural Society: Implications of the French Ban for Interpretations of Equality. Law & Society Review, 41(3), 699-736. Windle, J. (2004). Schooling, symbolism and social power: The hijab in republican France. The Australian Educational Researcher, 31(1), 95-112. Winter, B. (2006). "Secularism Aboard The Titanic: Feminists And The Debate Over The Hijab In France." Feminist Studies 32.2: 279-298.  Read More