What was their reasoning?

"Speaking before Tuesday's vote, Michele Alliot-Marie, the justice minister, said: "The full face veil dissolves the identity of a person in that of a community.

"It challenges the French model of integration based on the acceptance of the values of our society."

I meant mostly this part, which would seem to me that in order to be fair, you'd need to take a hard look at banning any other sort of clothing that serves as a uniform or covering. Police/Doctor outfits for example, masks of any kind, fursuits, etc etc :D

Well I have my own personal views about the subject that I will not get in on. On a more neutral standpoint I would like to say that if I was law enforcement I want to see someone's face no matter if they are a man woman or child.

If I were a police officer, I would also wish that all former prisoners be required to wear clothing that leaves their gang tattoos visible... sometimes freedom is more important than what an officer might desire, that's how I end up weighing it out personally anyways.

Based on what what you said here, I think the veil thing is geared towards people and religions who mandate that women hide their face every time they're public. official uniforms, costumes and the like could be exempt as they are easy to remove for verification and not worn all the time


But hey. Those crazy French, right?

how about a hockey mask then? :B Also the whole "oh those crazy French" thing kind of annoys me, I'd much rather learn and find the reasons behind things rather than just be dismissive or prejudiced..

"Ski masks" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Balacl.....%28clothing%29 are already forbidden in France.

When the pushed to vote that law affectim veil wearing women, the security aspect was put forward: Having one's face covered is not ok in France. But now it seems they stopped pretending and clearly say the law is to stop the veil.

:U you are an inspiration to us all

I'mma go fap to your arts nou!

They probably use it as an excuse to combat terrorism as it's hard to tell if a man is wearing that getup to avoid detection.

But I really think they just don't like that it's an unfair social Arab law.

Basically most people in France associate the veil with Suicide Bombers (Islamophobia, in other words). Either that or the politicians are fashion designers who think that looking like a Ninja was never hot on the catwalk.

You better come here and check by yourself.

Oh, and for bigoted...
He have more than 40% of people atheist or agnostic here.

Wherever you go you always have the odd fuckhead who likes the way Hitler ran things. We have them in the UK - most notably the British National Party and the English Defence League.

I think it might be pretty big safety risk while driving a car since it limits one's vision a fair deal. Oh and police want to be able to recognize people's faces in public I suppose.

-this- Along with plenty of other reasons

is the car accident thing common? I can't really seem to find any articles about that, and given the sensitive political atmosphere over this topic, I'd think there might be an article or two. Please share any information you have about that. The latter issue seems sort of reasonable from a practicallity standpoint, but there are many MANY other and better forms of social engineering that bad people use in order to commit a crime.

It's just one of the more 'reasonable' reasons I read in news few months back when this was first brought up. Actually I don't think there are any studies about how common such traffic accidents are because even gathering the base information to conduct such a study might spark an even greater shit-storm. ^^;

(info for example how many veil wearing women there actually are who regularly drive a car?)

if there's no data on that topic, then I argue it can't be used to prove the point one way or another <:3

It is however logical to assume at least that limiting one's vision doesn't make them a better driver which is the reason you have to wear your prescription glasses while driving if you have such.

Banning the wearing of a veil while driving could be an idea but might just lead to these women not being allowed to drive.

Having people with jobs/obligations suddenly banned from driving seems like a good way to mess up peoples lives, I would still suggest that some sort of study be done first before such a law was considered

They aren't banned from driving, they would just have to remove their veil(or part of it) for the duration of the travel or get a fine if they don't do it and police sees them. If anyone was banning them from driving after such a law it would be their husbands and community not the police.

Similarly you're fined for talking on your phone while driving in my country unless you use a hands-free application.

doing a google image search for a france style niqab shows a lot of pictures of garments with fully exposed eyes, Indeed the law specifically mentions that these garments only show the eyes and nothing else of the face. Wether or not we're comfortable with that is debatable, but I still haven't found much information about these clothings tied with accidents

There aren't any studies about cars without sidemirrors causing traffic accidents either.

The pictures about niqabs and burkhas show quite varying amount of eye exposure and concealment. With some of them I don't see any problem of limiting vision while with the others I surprised the women don't bonk their head regularly into telephone poles. Perhaps some sort of standardization would be in order? Or are the clothes already defined into hard-line islam and casual islam on terms of concealment?

To be honest I don't know the answers to these questions, but I'd like to hear some more information and perspectives on the matter certainly

I don't like their reason either.

As much as it sort of makes sense.

It still only.... sort of... makes sense.

My personal beliefs are that you need a really good solid excuse to start messing around in someone's dressing habits, not vague unease

It makes about as much sense as not being allowed to wear a hat in a bank. My initial impression when I saw this on the BBC was that it was pretty messed up that they can ban an article of clothing, but the more I thought about it the more I agreed with it, I guess.

This is a law about what people are allowed to wear in COMMON PUBLIC AREAS, not a private institution.. I don't think you can ignore that

I'm kinda sick of the one-way demands for tolerance of Islam on the part of politicians, so I really don't mind this inversion. Yeah, it's dumb. There are lots of dumb laws. It's probably a violation of individual rights, too. However, it's nowhere near as horrifying a violation as the whole of Islamic law.

Thank you for saying what I believe as a whole.

I don't know a whole lot about the sort of laws that are being passed there that are concessions to muslims, can you give me some good examples to consider?

I was referring to Sharia law in general, not just France.

In France, not any law.

As the article say, then, this law doesn't talk about muslim.
In theory, catholic nuns who wear a veil are aimed too.

But none of them will be arrested. Wearing a piece of fabric on the hair isn't only for religious purposes.

As someone who is savagely and unbearably unattractive, I feel that it's for the good of the community that I hide my face. If the people who made the decision had been shown a photo of me, they may well have voted differently.

Aw you're being unreasonably hard on yourself or sarcastic and I can't honestly tell which x3

Burkas hide the face, no other clothing you'd be allowed to wear in banks, like if I went into a shop wearing a crash helmet, its suspicous and such.

Just a case of a religion not being allowed to enforce its laws in other countrys - its a good result for once.

Again, it's the difference between a store requiring shirt and shoes and requiring that certain clothing may NOT ever be worn in PUBLIC areas under penalty of a state enforced fine..

France has digged a pretty deep shithole for themselfes lately. Banishing Romani people, destroying their camps, the veil ban to name a few.

Damn France I used to like you, but now I dont know anymore.

Humanity's history and present seems so tragically recursive to me now.. that's really sad to hear :\

Don't worry, We French dilsilke our government.
But they do not want to heard anything about our complain.
Sarkozy's goverment cheat, lie, steal, etc... and they pretend we understand bad, that journalist are liards, that their political opponents are stupid and does nothing.

But, bck to the thread. We do not outlaw clothes.
WE outlawed the wear of a religious symbol, in PUBLIC PLACES only. THere was already a law about that, a law passed in 1905, but the actual governement like passing laws instead of applying one ones.
In France, you aren't allowed to wear a "ostensible" religious symbol in public places.

They made a special law for the burka and other clothes, but it means than wearing a cross, a kipa, or whataver is banned too.
And no one ever complained about.
And wearing a religious symbol is allowed outside, in the streets, at your home, in private places like restaurant.
Banks ban it for security reason. (and they're right, some month ago, two robbers came into a bank, wearing a full burka, hiding their face and their weapons too much easily...).

France is a laïc country. This law was uneened as it already exist, but it's just the expression of out principes of laïcité, and equality too.

First off, I must be clear that I am criticizing the law and not the French people, and I very much appreciate your contribution to this discussion!
"WE outlawed the wear of a religious symbol, in PUBLIC PLACES only. THere was already a law about that, a law passed in 1905, but the actual governement like passing laws instead of applying one ones." This reminds me very much of American politics, often our politicians create redundant laws in order to capitalize on political movement rather than seeking to help the public good.

I read more about the definition of Laïcité after you mentioned it, which differs quite a bit from my own usual expectation of how a country deals with freedom of religion issues.. I think I might need to rethink this a bit since this is definitely an old cultural value.

My viewpoint basically comes down to the observation that upwardly mobile people who are accepted into society instead of feared for being different can contribute much more positively than a population kept in a ghetto.. how one approaches this goal is something I'm thinking about lately.

"This reminds me very much of American politics, often our politicians create redundant laws in order to capitalize on political movement rather than seeking to help the public good."
Nicolas Sarkozy was nicknamed (and happy to be) "Sarkozy the American" it seems he follow the rule of the game, heh :p


"I read more about the definition of Laïcité after you mentioned it, which differs quite a bit from my own usual expectation of how a country deals with freedom of religion issues.. I think I might need to rethink this a bit since this is definitely an old cultural value."
It's older than 1905, and yeah, it's a cultural value that we like a lot.
It start to appears after the French Revolution of 1789, when we kicked the clergy out of the royal government. Another step done when Louis XVI was beheaded.
At this time, even if cathlic religion was the main and official religion, protestants, Jews and muslims were recognized and protected.

But despite being in line wit hthat, it's clear that this law is made to please the most extremist part of the French population. Even if I think tat something must be done about the radicalism of some religious people (this include Christine Boutin and her damned Bible in the Assembly...) I think this isn't the best way.

Thank you very much again for your explanation, and I'd say I very much agree with your view on it. From our cultural extremists (such as the Fred Phelps family) it seems best to pay little mind to the extreme views and to engage respectfully with moderates of all types. I'm learning much from this journal, I'm glad for the educational responses especially <3

My pleasure.
Obviously from America's point of view, France can appears as very intelorant.
On the other hand, we have the largest Muslim population of Europe, so obviously you'll find more extremists and they'll complain more, too.

On the other hand, we allow the build of "cultural centers" which are, in fact, mosques with a museum or like, and so they get an help (in €€€ :p ) from the governement to build it.

You can see that only an half of the French population believe in a God or "surnatural force", according to polls made by various sources, including the CIA (but not the French authorities, as it is illegal for a public institution to collect data on people's belief)

Personally I am alarmed by what I see as growing acceptance of fascist ideas and social feelings in both the USA and in some countries in Europe (although I don't know as much about the latter.) I think it's impossible to fight fascism with fascism, and that making a law that's designed to punish and not unite different cultures will hurt the public good.

Here a large amount of the frustration is directed at our own largest immigrant demographic group, Mexicans. It especially frustrates me when I see privileged people who have never done hard labor complain that the immigrant has a free ride, especially here where there are less social programs.

That's an interesting way around to collect the religious belief data in France, and that actually sounds quite nice, being an Atheist myself :3

Same for me.
I felt shameful when at the 2002 Presidential elections, the two chosen canditates for the second turn was Jacques Chirac and Jean Marie Le Pen (fascist; know for violences against Algerian immigrres and to say that Nazi crematoriums were a "detail of History" )

Well even Sarkozy use facists theme to attract people, as he know that he can't really get the voices of the right center and left voters.

Same thing here. Before the crisis, poeple complaining about the money wasted in social programs. Now that companies fire them, they complain they didn't get help.
Heh, who approved happily when it was decided to supress the law protecting the workers to get fired for no reasons?

For religion,the amusing thing is that almost half of the catholic are part of those "non believer". and a small part say they're atheist and just follow some part of christian feast by tradition.

Oh and we're also the Western country with the largest Jew population.

You can still think that this governement is racist, but France, or the French republic isn't ;3

Well I'm going to put this out front, the Mexicans... I don't mind the legal ones one bit because they can speak english and what not just fine as required to get a work visa and/or to become citizen though I never understood why they never had to pay taxes since they do live/work here *shruges* It is the illegal (which so many are) that bug me since they use to at one time just marry some white person then come here, now days they discovered they can just hop the "fence" (hard to call ti that since there isn't one in alot of places) and just drop a kid and we can't get rid of them. Oh and they expect us now to learn spanish, it is actually required in school now days

Anywho as far as the whole bit concerning the law it seems extreme to a degree though I imagine it is ment more for public safety I'm sure but the US right now is the worst for something like this right now like the whole "mosque" thing going on and it being built two blocks from "ground zero" which people are pissing themselves over saying it is hallowed ground....... Though if I remember in New York two blocks is like half a mile away almost.

People now days are just getting stupidly silly over the whole muslim thing, a few people do something stupid and now everyone is against the whole religion... it is sad to see them persecute so easily. Perhaps I should bring up all the things so many Christians have done in the name of god (no seriously, you think 9/11 was bad HA!) and start complaining about Churches being built and what not *rolls her eyes*

Anywho to all people is all I can say.

Of course, they can't officially disclose this or they'll be called racist, but alot of Muslim men have been committing robberies using Burqas, the full body clothing items.

Should we ban pantyhose also?

They're seethrough though. And yes, you should ban wearing panty hose on your head.

"The measure is called 'Forbidding the Dissimulation(To disguise under a feigned appearance) of the Face in the Public Space,'" so that takes care of the pantyhose on head thing...

I know, I'm Belgian.

It seems intolerant (and perhaps it is influenced by intolerance), but the law does have one good thing, imho: women who choose to wear a burka despite it being forbidden will 'only' have to pay up to 150 Euros, but men who force women to wear them can be sentenced to up to one year jail time and 30,000 Euros, or up to double that if the women are underage.

This makes the whole law sort of understandable... after all, that is one big step towards the equal treatment of men and women. And don't tell me that's a bad thing :)

Generally, though, I don't approve of constantly banning and regulating things. This is just one such thing where I see more good than bad coming from.

But that's exactly my point... it's a bad law, badly thought out and badly defined. I think much of the problem with legislation is that we swallow the bad with the good, rather than insist on something that makes sense

Ah... I don't know why, but making laws where the good part only slightly outweighs the bad part seems to have become the preferred way of passing them for governments around the world during the last few years. If there are any good parts at all :x

Yeah.. it depresses me xD

this law is silly. while on one hand i can see it's reasoning, the law basically throws out religious freedom. granted this part of the religion can be oppressive. for cars i can understand yes, any mobile vehicle needs peripheral vision, which even with eyes clear burkas can block. even banks i can understand, considering that banks also ban wearing sunglasses and hats.

the view of 'officers wanting to see a persons face at all times' is not that valid, considering that you would be assuming these people are guilty before assuming innocence. and honestly, it's not like by wearing a burka a criminal is going to be stealthy or anything, in western society they stick out like a sore thumb.

in my opinion, while there are some points for it, and i can see how banning it could be seen as attempts at forcing to preserve a person's freedoms, the people who wear them are, as stated in the article, more likely to either stay in doors of their own accord while wearing them, or be forced to stay inside by husbands, fathers, etc.

*nods* thanks for the input, I'd say for the most part I agree with you, and it's always good to hear another perspective or viewpoint when considering your own! Our own situation in America with racial profiling and racially disparate laws is also a major political concern of mine

"this law is silly. while on one hand i can see it's reasoning, the law basically throws out religious freedom."

Religious freedom is limited in France to private places and streets.
Since 1905, wearing any ostensible religious sign is prohibited into public (state) places like schools, city halls.
It applies also to cross necklaces, kipahs, any any sign like this. Veil and burkas ARE religious signs.
It's considered as promoting your religion and it's illegal (yeah, there is no ads for religion, or with religious purpose in France)

Except that, you're free to do what you like (in the limits of normal laws)

"in my opinion, while there are some points for it, and i can see how banning it could be seen as attempts at forcing to preserve a person's freedoms, the people who wear them are, as stated in the article, more likely to either stay in doors of their own accord while wearing them, or be forced to stay inside by husbands, fathers, etc."There isn't much extremist in France, and they all have to ask for French nationality to be French.

There was a huge debate some time ago, when a woman come to ask to become French... wearing her veil, and refusing to put it off!
She was refused.
The debate was on the same thing, knowing that this woman may never get the chance to free herself if she cann't be French, but on the other hand, everyone agreed on the fact that her attitude was clearly against the values of the French Republic (and it come out after hours discussing with her, don't think it was done in 5 minute to refuse her).

On my side, I can't understand this attitude, too.
When I go in a church, I get my hat off.
When I go in a mosque, I pull my shoes off.
When you go in a school, you get your religions signs off.

In a way, you can consider that "laicité" is the French religion and that public places are our churches (yuck...). If this can help you seeing our point.

Though think of it the other way around if a Western woman were to go to the Middle East wearing casual everyday clothing shed be arrested or publicly stoned =P

IMO as long as the burkah is kept on in public these people will never be fully trusted or accepted by the general public its just to much of a stigmata and social barrier.

Well I think the latter example would be a horrible and terrible event, but I don't think you should make policy based on mirroring bad policy.. it doesn't automatically create the best answer.

I'm used to western Europe being less racist than America...

it's hard for me to make comparisons since I've only ever been in some parts of America as reference. Personally I think racism is a universal human problem that we all need to be aware of and try our hardest to combat with knowledge and understanding, and hopefully we can all live in a better world~

Take a look at my answers ;3

I can't hide the fact that there is racists though that led to this law, but there isn't anything racist in it.
If not, the Senate, the Assemblée Nationale, or at least, the Constitutional Council, which check every law to see if it fit with the Constitution.
And as most members of the Council are hostile to Sarkozy, they will not let pass that law if it was racist...

I remember reading Egypt has a ban on full faced veils or clothing that conceals the face. The reasoning behind it was not for cultural reasons or integration, but the act of concealing the identity of the person. There was an incident where some guy dressed himself in a full veiled burka and sat near a beach spying on less clothed women there.

I would find a ban on full faced veils or other concealing clothing in public quite reasonable on security grounds, but for anything else it doesn't quite add up so well. Hell, I would think it should be only used in certain public areas like banks and airports where identity is important. Everywhere else should be treated with some common sense (unfortunately not quite as prevalent now).

Much agreed about the common sense approach to legislation, and it would be my argument that banning things that are ancillary to crimes never really does much to help.. criminals are usually unfortunately quite determined and resourceful as to how they achieve their goals, and they will always live in the cracks of our legislation.. making laws more convoluted doesn't seem to be the right answer.

All is simple: keep your islamic traditions in YOUR country. If you want to wear a hidjaab or veil or whatever else - go home. France is a secular country.

But allow religion in private.
Wear it in France, but at home or in the streets ;3

Allowance of religion is subject to discuss. Islam is very aggressive and intolerant religion, so it should be prohibited like a fashizm.

So are the christian and jewish religions.

My uncle is mulsim. He does not eat ham, but apart that? If he pray, it's in secrat and when he can. He does't rellay dislike a glass (or two :p) of wine, or a good beer.
His daughter doesn't wear a veil or anything and except for the ham, isn't forced to do anything related to islam.
Most mulsim in France are open and practice their religion in a tolerant and "secular compliant" way.

indeed, many Muslims in America act much the same way, and it's always when I see racism or bigotry threatening our productive and positive Muslim citizens. The question is I suppose is the best way to promote healthy cultural acceptance and integration.. as a societal problem using negative or restrictive laws always seem to create a negative and polarizing reaction and hurts our overall progress

er, fragmented the sentence above " and it's always terribly disheartening and regrettable when I see racism or bigotry threatening our productive and positive Muslim citizens"

isn't that terribly hypocritical? In the end everyone on earth has to live much the same as other humans, we eat, bathe, go about our business, and raise and love our families. Forced religious conversions are always wrong in my opinion, and I support the promotion of more humanitarian values through societal understanding I guess.

*For values of secular approaching catholicism...

pretty much my view when I made the post, certainly x3

Forcing a woman to wear a burka isn't?

Showing ostensibles signs of faith in public places is illegal in France since 1905.
It applie to crosses and kipahs too. Ans any other sign you can think of.
This law reinforce it because some extremists force their wives to wear burka everywhere.

Alright, the answer is stupid but it's not like it's something new.
Also almost every muslims respect our secular tradition, so, at the end, who's gonna be annoyed?

So there isn't any conutry in the world where you get all human rights.

france dont need a reason it dont give a fuck. It told all the gypsies to gtfo regardless if tits were present or not.

yeah I'm reading about that too now... depressing :\

On this point, they gonna get a big slap on their face.

Brice Hortefeux defends himself by pretending those camps are illegal (and they are) and he just apply the law.

But The law doesn't say the squatters have to be sent away.
Alos Roms being from Romania, which is part or the European Union and of the Shenghen space, they have the right to be in France, like any citizen of the EU.
Ans this is were they get wrong.
On more than the legal and European side.
They though they'll gain popularity on French people... They get a whole rejection.

On this point, they gonna get a big slap on their face.

Brice Hortefeux defends himself by pretending those camps are illegal (and they are) and he just apply the law.

But The law doesn't say the squatters have to be sent away.
Alos Roms being from Romania, which is part or the European Union and of the Shenghen space, they have the right to be in France, like any citizen of the EU.
Ans this is were they get wrong.
On more than the legal and European side.
They though they'll gain popularity on French people... They get a whole rejection.

They don't have a 'right' to be in France more than few months though. You can travel freely in EU but actually moving and starting to live in another country has a fair bit more baggage than just buying a ticket.

And at least the ones we get up here in north come as 'refugees'. Now as you yourself said Romania is a part of the EU and thus should have pretty standard living conditions and social structure regulated by the union's laws. As far as I know Romania isn't in any kind of military, natural or economical crisis that mandates seeking refuge in other countries either.

I really hope the laws for quick turning back in cases of 'refugees' coming from other union countries will pass sooner rather than later around here. Currently they get free lodging, food and various good not to mention money for months until they can be properly turned back on grounds that were apparent the moment they stepped into the country. This "refugee tourism" is really hurting the refugee centers and takes up space from actual refugees...

The greatest tragedy is that The Spy may never return to his native homeland.

( I had started on a great rant ... but I think enough fear has been spread, time for some humor on the subject. )

Yeah, this topic is starting to bum me out too x3

Something you don't hear about in the media a lot since nothing serious happened yet, or is known, but there are some side effects towards woman in general with Islam dictating they have to wear a scarf, hidjab or bourqa.

There is an increase in violence of Islamic males towards in general woman that don't wear such clothing. Going form verbal to physical violence. And this in not from hearsay alone I've seen it as well a couple of times.

If so, doesn't that already break established harassment laws?

Not according to their interpretation of the Quran or the Sharia. There are some places in major cities like parts of Brussels-North or Antwerp's Borgerhout, also called Borgerokko, where police, fire department or ambulances are quite hesitant to go especially at night and some neighborhoods even during the day.

I should also mention that from what I've seen so far Arabs in the states are quite docile compared to those here in the European cities. Ever experienced a Moroccan multiplier?

I can't speak for specifics since I don't have any of my own observations there, but that's sad to hear, hopefully everyone can learn to be more chill with each other even if we're wearing different clothes etc :T

The clothes are a side effect and are even a point of concern for the more worldly Arabs. Heard stories of first generation immigrants about the time they still lived in their birth country and that up to the early 80's few people actually wared those types of clothes. What is known is that for some reason the modern extremist movement started in Saudi Arabia in a renowned Quran school there. Basically all Mullah's need to go there if they want to be one.

Those extremists basically want to pick up the conquest where Mehmed II left it but without the religious freedom or cultural and scientific development.

Helping people integrate is not enough.
Gotta force them to, or kick them out.
I guess this is the reasoning.

I mean, they plan to strip people of their French nationality if they commit certain crimes (against the police, for instance), because nationality is something you have to earn, sacrebleu!

Also, against juvenile delinquency, Sarkozy plans to have the parents face charges too should their kid end up the wrong way.
I wonder if it'll combine with the nationality removal if the crime fits the bill.

It's clear the man has a vision. Black and white vision. Mostly white.

Yeah, I've never really read about a policy decision that joker made that I thought was good

The whole muslim side of the debate is dildoes anyhow. Their holy book has no mention what so ever about women having to wear full body and face concealing clothes in public. There's only recommendation that women and men dress decently.

The full cover thing? Just a decision made by their religious leaders rather recently(given the age of islam) which doesn't have/shouldn't have any religious sanctification being just an interpretation made by man and not the word of god. But you know how these things work out with powerful leaders and people not actually reading the book just repeating the words.

that being said, the veil predates Islam itself, it's a very established cultural tradition from what I've read.

It's bacisally France saying "fuck you" to fundamentalist Muslims.

yeah, I just think that's a really bad idea if your goal is peace among citizens

I'm certain fundamentalists don't make up a very large portion of the French Muslim community.

I never said they did :o I still think it's divisive policy, personally

See, this is kinda a good thing. Next they'll ban long-sleeved shirts so we can better identify a person's arms, then long pants for their lower legs, then shirts altogether because it's often hard to tell if someone's pregnant or just fat, then pants altogether because that's where people like to hide weapons. Eventually, they ban underwear as well because some people will start stuffing them to make themselves look bigger in certain areas.

Then the entire nation will be nakkid! =D (except for socks and shoes because I forgot to mention them XP)

In the land of the pantsless, the girl in long stripey socks is king.

>_>; hot

Hrf. I don't have any answers or possibly anything of note to add.
When I was in France in the early 90s Algerian terrorists were blowing various things up, which produced a fairly uncomfortable feeling in me to say the least.

I recognize that the ban is an unperfect solution to a perfect problem, although I suppourt it here under the feeling that anything that seeks to deprecate or limit an item of clothing that is a part of a systematic marginalization of women is a good thing. Culturally enforced sexual inequalities make me see red, though in the long term such a system might be thankfully self-limiting through various factors. Doesn't do much for one's genotype.

Or in another fashion for me, France and most of the Western countries with their post-enlightenment governments operate with a basic set of concepts of equality and freedom, and seek to advance in those lines. While all of them generally protect your rights to believe in whatever, when you are conducting yourself in the public open, you may not act against that spirit of equality. Thusly laws such as this.

I think a large source of terrorism is the product of helpless frustration with imposed policy, and therefore I think that this approach to the legislation might cause more harm than good in the end

France is installing face scanning ads, like in Minority Report.

no its not >:T

As a defender of religious freedom (and freedom from religion), I say let people wear whatever silly garb their mad system dictates. Just give those who don't agree the right to giggle.

~ Kaori

Pretty much my general attitude towards religion, although I'm finding there are established cultural differences in Europe that make me need to expand my definition of religious freedom and what it means in different countries

As a defender of religious freedom (and freedom from religion), I say let people wear whatever silly garb their mad system dictates. Just give those who don't agree the right to giggle.

~ Kaori