French Opposition to the Muslim Veil - Essay Example

Hijabs have been an issue of concern following the ban of general public outlook and opinion on the issue. It has gained political interest from legislators, the president included to the extent of commissioning an investigation to look into the issue of religious signs in public places. It is crucial to look into the opposition of the Muslim veil (Hijabs) as it provides some form of insight into the relationship between politics and religious rights or lacks violation of these rights. The controversy over the issue the Muslim headscarf, also known as the hijab has its history since the late 1980s in France. This is following the suspension of two girls from school, the reason being that they were dressed in veils, which occurred in 1989 and 1993. Over the years, the 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 banned the Islamic headscarf and excessively large crucifixes, as well as kippas (Ezekiel, 2006). The law has seen students expelled and public workers lose their jobs, especially for the use of the hijab, rather than any other form sign of religion. The law appears 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. It has also 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. Rights The first issue involved in this case is the violation of human rights despite their declaration of the universal human rights. They state that all human beings are entitled to their own religion, which goes side by side with the issue of religious expression. The headscarf is a form of self-expression relating to the Islamic faith and religion. Despite the banning of the headscarf in public by the law, it is in clear violation of the women’s rights. This is particularly with the support of the law, which shows that the ban occurred for political reasons and did not have the best interests of the group in mind (Gendrot, 2007). Following the ban in a country where issues of human rights are advocated from right, left and centre shows the lack of tolerance for other people’s religion and religious affiliations. The 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 right to determine whether women get to wear hijabs 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 hijabs 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. This is in relation to discrimination against them by calling them 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 hijabs. This is in spite of the population of girls and women wearing the headscarves being a minority meaning that it is the rights of the minority that are violated (Winter, 2006). It is also 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 the wearing of the hijab in France, this is because for a person with a conscience the hijab has no role whatsoever in the person’s life. This is concerning the person who does not have to dress in it, but for those who wear it out of religious obligation or preference, it affects their lives directly. It is for this reason that harmonious coexistence should be upheld by having those that are affected by the headscarf make 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). 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 that we live in with the freedom to be what one is. It also violates the rules of society where harmony is to be promoted for a pluralistic society. Impact Therefore, because of the law and the ban a number of unprecedented events may occur in the country and even globally. This is in relation 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 is in spite of the explicit naming of elementary and secondary public school to the extent of denying service to veiled women in public service and lack of legal recognition declared upon a veiled woman as a witness. Other than this, democracy is put in a fix due to minority populations and their interests. This is in relation to multiculturalism where the French society is supposed to compromise their mono-cultural 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). 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, the banning 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. 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 Winter, B. (2006). "Secularism Aboard The Titanic: Feminists And The Debate Over The Hijab In France." Feminist Studies 32.2: 279-298.  Gendrot, B.S. (2007). "France Upside Down Over A Headscarf?." Sociology Of Religion 68.3: 289-304.  Ezekiel, J. (2006). "French Dressing: Race, Gender, And The Hijab Story." Feminist Studies 32.2: 256-278.  Carle, R. (2004). "Hijab And The Limits Of French Secular Republicanism." Society 41.6: 63-68.  Ezekiel, J. (2005). "Magritte Meets Maghreb: This Is Not A Veil." Australian Feminist Studies 20.47: 231-243.  Brems, E. (2006). "Diversity In The Classroom: The Headscarf Controversy In European Schools." Peace & Change 31.1: 117-131.  Cusack, C. M. (2011). "Hijab And The Republic: Uncovering The French Headscarf Debate - By Bronwyn Winter." Journal Of Religious History 35.1: 113-114.  Gallala, I. (2006). "The Islamic Headscarf: An Example Of Surmountable Conflict Between Sharîa And The Fundamental Principles Of Europe." European Law Journal 12.5: 593-612.  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. Freedman, J. (2007). Women, Islam and rights in Europe: beyond a universalist/culturalist dichotomy. Review of International Studies, 33, pp 29-44. Windle, J. (2004). Schooling, symbolism and social power: The hijab in republican France. The Australian Educational Researcher, 31(1), 95-112. The Economist. (2004). A tragic twist of the scarf. 372 (8391), 49-50. Scott, J.W . (2008). The Politics of the Veil, New York, USA: Princeton University Press. Read More