Religion??

Nothing symbolizes the crevice between radical Islam and west as non-violently and emblematically as BURQA. This month, Belgium passed laws banning women (and presumably men, actually law makes it illegal to wear any clothing that prevents the user from being identified. This just happens to include niqabs and burkas, but it also includes motorbike helmets, masks, balaclavas, etc.)from wearing a full burqa in public. In France, President Sarkozy is trying to institute a similar law.

Surely, these events have drawn a lot of media attention lately about the opposition to burkas being worn in European countries.

Of course, as expected, Muslim leaders, even Catholic leaders and groups like Amnesty International, are protesting the laws, saying it is a discrimination against Muslims, violation of human rights, freedom of speech and so forth.

The problem is, they view the burqa as an individual choice - which is arguable - and a religious requirement, which it is not (numerous Islamic scholars claim that there is not a single reference in Quran that mandates women to wear burqa).

And as far as my rationality tells me, a form of clothing or for that matter anything tangible cannot be a flagship of any religion. If religion offers such a carte blanche, then perhaps we should see the reaction people would have to someone claiming their religion mandated that they carry a machete at all times. (Sikhs, for example, are obliged to carry a Kirpan, or small sword).

And the best is to argue that ban violates the freedom of speech whereas Burqa itself violates the freedom of speech of a woman. It is a hauler of the school of thought where women are considered to be inferior sexual temptress, whose female form is a problem and must be covered and they should subscribe to the views mandated by the men.

Rather than debating we all should understand that these bans are hardly a case to pick on Muslims but to counter the security threat these veils can pose. Burqas and niqabs or any face covering attire present a security risk. Anyone might lurk under those shrouds – female or male, Muslim or non-Muslim, decent citizen, fugitive, or criminal – with who knows what evil purposes. Someone in a burka can't be identified. They could be anyone, they could have anything under their clothing.

A person masked and anonymous, who could be carrying any sort of device under formless clothing, will and should always be seen as a potential threat. This is why anyone wearing a motorbike helmet into a bank will be asked to take it off or be escorted out by security. It is not something concocted up to suppress Muslims.

The time calls us to be more proactive to stand against the ruthless terrorism and to support every concern rather than howling and countering such measures on the name of religion and faith.

P.S I am not a very qualified person to write on this whole issue but as a foreigner in France, it made me think about the different nationals and religions that enter into a new country and a new culture. Aren’t they suppose to adapt to it and embrace it but not to refuse it or worse is even imposing their own culture. I am not against religious freedom but religious freedom also encompasses the respect and honor to other cultures, traditions and desires.

http://www.monaeltahawy.com/blog/?p=253 (Do read this blog also)