Security.

Everyone should be able to be readily identifiable, under a burqa, we don’t know who is in there. Given the recent, but fortunately foiled terror attacks, can we really afford people walking around under tents that may or may not hide weapon or heaven forbid a suicide bomber?

Secondly, many countries around the world do set up measure be it sociological, political, etc to preserve that particular country’s identity and heritage, why are we demonizing the French for something most countries do? Especially Muslim countries, so why the hypocrisy?

What’s wrong with being antireligious?

Sarkozy has a hidden agenda in causing this controversy, just looking at his background reveals more than what he says or does.

The sooner Sarkozy gets voted out of power the better for all concerned.

If any women feels oppressed by being forced to wear or not wear a particular style of clothing then there should be a law to protect them.

The law should not be used as a blunt instrument by banning a particular dress style.

Banning an Islamic dress style in this case will cause animosity between the French Muslims who want to wear it and the French State who will not allow them to do so.

This case will end up at the European Court of Human Rights and the French government will be forced to repeal this law.

More waste of time and European tax payers money.

Dean
(a Lawyer:))

Oh, and: here’s nice explanation of how an earlier law, that banning “ostensible” religious symbols in schools, wasn’t even particularly faithful to the supposed neutrality of laicite–only crosses of “manifestly excessive dimensions” were banned.

For a more sympathetic take on this *sort* of approach, though, see Susan Moller Okin’s “Is Multiculturalism Bad for Women?” and responses here (scroll down).

The same is true in many countries: how they define themselves has a large effect on how they shape policy. I could say something about why France in particular has these issues with their definition of unity, their views on religion (not simple, and not just that it’s private), and their conflicted relationship with the work force they imported from the Mahgreb, but the reasoning behind the effect is ultimately not the most interesting thing for the future. Because, as I said, France is only the first country to react to their Muslim population in this way, but they aren’t alone.

From what I can tell through my reading and travels, and the accounts of friends who have studied in north/west Europe, a lot of the countries there define themselves largely as white, agnostic/apathetic, and tolerant. If they’re going to incorporate a piously Muslim group of Semitic/African immigrants into their cultures, the first two have to change. Instead, they seem to be realizing that they’re not really as on board with the third one as they thought they were (shocking!)

But,Kithkin, I wouldn’t say France is antireligion per se; there’s just a very different approach to it than in the US, mainly that religion is something private and has nothing to do in State/public affairs. Which is why Sarkozy wants to legislate on this matter, logical isn’t it!

It also bears pointing out that the son of Hungarian immigrants defining “Frenchness”, (whatever that is, because I disagree with Baraqiel that it’s quite so clear-cut, for the general population at least) is quite amusing. Unfortunately, only the full-on racists from the far-right fringe ever comment on it…and i’m pretty sure they’re beside themselves with glee at this burqa-banning idea.