Ian Randall is an educator, artist and author at Cambridge University Press.
You can view examples of artworks or obtain further information here.


Tuesday, July 20, 2010

HSC Studies of Religion

French lawmakers approve ban on full veil

1. Read the following article - click here
2. Post a comment on the following questions. . .
What are the issues that the article raises?
What are the arguments for/against?
Place a link to another article you have found on the topic.

A reactionist response to the new laws - click here
Here is a helpful overview written from an Islamic perspective - click here


Riahta said...

Issues raised in the article are a) people feel threatened by women wearing a full-face veil, or niqab, as if they'd be hiding something, b) doubts of religious freedom and equality, c) Even though users of the underground and metro avoid looking each other in the eye, but no law is made to ban the wearing of sunglasses indoors because it poses a threat.

Anonymous said...

What are the issues that the articles raise?
What are the arguments for/against?

The issues raised in the article is the wearing on the niqab in france, a practice done by Muslim women. The lower parliament house has passed a law making this practice illegal. The parliament sees that the wearing of the veil is degrading to ones person. The parliament sees that wear the veil is a challenge to public order, that police can't identify them easily, and they might just be terrorists.

Mr Randall's Classroom said...

The article raises two issues which law makers needs to further consider.
1. Whether the law is compatible with religious freedom and equality.
2. Whether the niqab demeans women / is inherently Islamic.

- The Law may be against religious freedom and equality.
- The Law only effects 2,000 people out of 64 Million, so what is the threat to society as a whole?
- There is no law of wearing of sunglasses, which obscure ones appearance.
- Spreading a message of fear about the Islamic community.
- Historically such a law has created unrest and protest.

- The niqab is demeaning to women
- Not inherently Islamic
- Public order: harder to identify people
- Advocates want the public to believe that people wearing the niqabi have something to hide.

Rebecca said...

People feel threatened by the women that were the niqab of full-face veil, makes it harder to identify the woman under the niqab. They feel it's degrading to women.

The law only affects 2,000 people out of 64 million.
It no illegal to were sunglasses, which obscure ones appearance.

Anonymous said...

against the law: its too small of a group to be focussing a law on. its there own right to cover there faces. people cover there faces in other ways, what wrong with covering it with a niqab?

for the law: there identity is being hidden from the world, which makes the rest of society feel threatened. The police also have issues identifying them, if they were, say reviewing a surveillance video, not being able to identify them.

Riahta said...

Arguments Against the Law: a) You don't see people being banned from wearing sunglasses indoors. b) What's so challenging about the invisibility of a woman's face? What values, exactly, are being protected? The European Enlightenment was made to liberate public space as a place where different cultural identities could interact with the community.

Arguments For the Law: a) Many agreed that the wearing of the veil is degrading women, b) The generalisation that someone wearing headgear is suspicious c) Gender equality.

Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...

A story of religious confrontation in america


Anonymous said...


Anonymous said...