veil or no veil?

Question

its the latest thing in the news, should they uncover themselves or not?

Answer 1

I must express my annoyance with Tony Blair over his anti-veil stance. His words 'mark of seperation' are simply a less direct way of saying 'different to us'.

Now hang on a minute. Isn't this supposed to be a country that prides itself on tolerance of diversity? What's next to be called a 'mark of seperation'? Wearing goth gear? Having a funny hairdo? Blair makes the point that the veil makes some people uncomfortable. Well, poor diddums them! Maybe some people are uncomfortable in the presence of fat people or people who wear flares or who grow big bushy beards. Or men with long hair. Or gay people. Or people who wear dark glasses. Or people who wear make-up, like lip gloss or eye shadow. Maybe some people are only comfortable in the prescence of other GAP clones like themselves.

I know some people will say that Muslim women who wear the veil have been coerced by their husbands or family into doing so. Maybe they have, but that is a seperate issue which cannot be treated as a generalisation. People are always in the habit of persuading one another to wear this and that. Persuasion is not the same as threat. A woman who is threatened should have recourse to the law. I know it's a complex issue but I'm sorry, simply assuming that every woman who wears a veil is doing so out of fear rather than choice and seeking to 'liberate' them is politically and socially naiive.

I have read quite a few comments on the 'net in recent days about how the veil is proliferating lately, as if this is something sinister. Well, actually, leg warmers have been proliferating recently as well. It's called fashion, remember? I bet more than one Muslim girl is wearing it specifically as a mark of rebellion, because of all the hoo-hah - just like others might go and get a tatoo or a tongue piercing or a mohawk because they want to give the finger to authority.

Mr Blair has said that there is now a "full scale public debate underway on the extent to which Muslims should integrate into mainstream British society".

What does he mean by that? The extent to which they should integrate is simple - they should not break the law. Same as anyone else. And the law should not discriminate against people on the basis of what they choose to wear, aside from some basic standards of 'common decency' that are agreed by pretty much everyone. Most people irrespective of their religion would agree that certain bits ought to be kept covered up in public a civilised society, aside from a few naturists. To be honest, if the decency laws were done away with, I wouldn't be that bothered, myself, but I can accept the existance of such laws.

However I don't feel that the law should prevent people from covering parts of their anatomy as this is a privacy issue. What about people who have suffered facial disfigurement? Are they not allowed to cover their faces? Can blind people not wear dark glasses to hide their unsightly eyes, if that is their wish? Isn't wearing makeup a form of mask-wearing? How about halloween?

I know just exactly what Tony Blair thinks. He wants to come across as being 'moderate and fair but not a pushover'. He knows that intolerance towards Muslims is on the rise, and disturbingly he's capitalising on it in the hope it will improve his flagging popularity.

TB calling Muslim veils a 'Mark of seperation' is far more reprehensible an act than commiting us to a war in Iraq. Because he's taken us one step closer to the Britain portrayed in 'V for Vendetta', under a guise of moderation. That 'full scale public debate' is being fueled by his own words. It's a debate that doesn't need to happen. Yes, deal with extremists who break the law or who plan to break the law. But start putting the squeeze on people who haven't done anything wrong and you'll just breed more extremists.

Now i'm no rabid Islamophile, but I do feel strongly that authority figures like the Prime Minister should not be making out that it's OK to discriminate against people on the basis of their appearance, whether their appearance is an accident of birth or a free-willed choice, simply because their appearance makes one feel uncomfortable. It's xenophobia, pure and simple.

However, having said this, I do agree that Muslims must bow to necessity at airports and reveal their faces for security purposes - although if female immigration officers are on hand this shouldn't pose too much difficulty. If they are not on hand and the Muslim in question feels that strongly about it, they should not use air travel. That may seem harsh, but security checks are part of the 'terms and conditions' of your ticket. Reasonable steps might be taken to ensure that a female official is on hand to do the facial inspection. A booth could be set up for privacy if necessary. I think airlines and airport authorities should take reasonable steps to accomodate a wide range of cultures, but not to such an extent that passenger's lives might be endangered by security loopholes.

Answer 2

I've got no personal objection to women wearing veils. I do think it's concerning when you read some muslim people's objections to it on the grounds of disempowering women.

I do think though that it puts up a barrier in the same way that wearing a hood or really dark glasses does - I'd be unlikely to strike up a conversation in the bus queue with anyone wearing any of these things. But if we're talking about banning something, I'd rather hoods were banned than veils... it's really intimidating when people wear hoods down to their noses! At least you can see the person's eyes with a veil, which is really important.

Answer 3

I don't think they should wear a veil with just the eyes showing, as it is important to be able to see people's faces in the west. These women ought to be aware that in a western country not only do people want to be able to see your face, not showing your face is a sign of not wanting to integrate or communicate. Also if covering yourself totally from the eyes of men is important, this type of clothing actually draws more attention. Having said this, I wouldn't expect a government to legislate against the wearing of veils, but if they dress inappropriately for the culture they are in, these women shouldn't expect equal employment opportunities.

Answer 4

Nick L: a response*. As president of my country's InterReligious Dialogue Association, I was host to a senior Cardinal on a visit from Vatican. He wished to go to a historical Muslim shrine. He was wearing a very large Cross, as the part of his usual dress, visible from a distance. He was taken around all the corners of the shrine and the Mosque; he mixed up with the devotees; he was welcomed warmly by everyone, despite the Cross ! I can give the name of the Cardinal, who is alive, to anyone, for personal verification, via email. Nick L may kindly update on the large-heartedness of Muslims.

Answer 5

There is absolutely NO requirement in either the Qur'an or the Hadith for a woman to wear a niqab, and since, for Muslims, the Qur'an is the inerrant word of God and the Hadith the inerrant words of His Prophet Mohammed, then the claim that the niqab is a religious requirement is totally spurious and without foundation.

The veil is an 'in your face provocation'. There is no reciprocity when Westerners go to strict Muslim countries. They cannot dress as they please. They cannot build a Church. They cannot consume Communion wine. They cannot consume pork. If we go on like this we are heading for a real, tangible, 'clash of civilisations'.

Answer 6

Why should they cover themselves in a mainly Christian country?
Go to an Islamic state and try to wear a cross openly.
Try to take the Bible to Saudi Arabia.
Women try going about your lawful business, with your head uncovered in an Islamic state.
Just some reasons for NO VEIL IN THE WEST.

Answer 7

They should do what they want. There are days I wish I could wear a veil.
Love & Light
Sharon
One Planet = One People

Answer 8

i say yes to veil,it make u feel protected, respected,and precious
i can say that as i myself wear a veil,
women is a precious thing and evry precious thing has to be cover or else it will loose it's value
if u start finding diamonds and pearls on the road u will care the least about it
that's what islam says and i believe

Answer 9

I'm a Muslim, and I have a message to Muslims in the UK...

You have the right to cover your hair, this we all agree on. But covering your whole face is something you cant do, becuase it doesnt agree with the country's laws, which you have to respect...If you can't tolerate that, then go back to your home country.

But please stop making Islam and easy target for others, the news gossip all day long...Be modern, and at the same time decent, there's no wrong in that

Answer 10

In Iran girls are wearing jeans and short mantos that are very fashionable with pretty thin coulerful scarves that let their hair fly out (I don't like that way of wearing scarves they should respect Islam).and they put on too much make up.How beautiful they are. what niqab?which country are you talking about?they are much more beautiful than American models and their beauty is natural.some tend to wear black because it's more formal than for example pink!In Iran some girls wear evey colur such as pink,purple,light green,yellow,orange but black is heavier than all of them.I like black colour too.
veil or not veil?should you cover yourselves or not?IN IRAN PEOPLE WANT TO COVER THEMSELVES BECAUSE THEY DO WHAT GOD HAS ORDERED THEM.If you think nudity is good well,I respect your opinion.I like your culture but I respect my own religion.no onw can tell you why do you practice your religion.agree?

Answer 11

if it's really a free country when everyone is fre to wear whatever he wants as its not disturbing the freedom of others, if it's a country when people from different cultures and religions are respected, then let those girls wear whatever they want, if they like to wear the veil then it's ok, it's a personal decision in my opinion