[Bobboau]

http://rss.cnn.com/~r/rss/cnn_topstories/~3/01f4imSOMEs/index.html

this and the Roma stuff, it's like France is trying to win some sort of Godwin award.

how are they planning on enforcing this?

oh, this is how

The law imposes a fine of 150 euros ($190) and/or a citizenship course as punishment for wearing a face-covering veil. Forcing a woman to wear a niqab or a burqa will be punishable by a year in prison or a 15,000-euro ($19,000) fine

[BlackDove]

I gotta say, I kinda agree, and wish the rest of the developed world would follow suit.

Simply the fact that it hinders communication is reason enough to abolish it.

[Qent]

They should ban skirts too.

[The E]

It is not the job of the state to mandate its citizens' clothing. Any state that does such a thing, on such a scale, is not really worth living in.

[Mars]

On one hand, I can totally see your point, on the other - the United States doesn't allow you to run around naked. Isn't that a mandate on clothing of sorts?

[The E]

Yes, it is.

But consider the reasons for this particular ban. What threat does someone wishing to wear "concealing clothing" pose? How does it affect you?

Note that the only thing I really disagree with is that potential fine. The second part, about the fine for "forcing someone to wear a niqab or a burqa will be punishable by a year in prison or a 15,000-euro ($19,000) fine", that's just ridiculous, and unenforceable. If you are following a religious mandate, who would be the one "forcing" you?

[Sushi]

What it comes down to is this: a sacrifice of general liberty in order to protect the freedom of oppressed muslim women. Is it worth the cost? Hard to judge, especially from another culture and continent. I do think that if a similar ban came up for vote where I live in the US, I would vote against it.

[General Battuta]

What it comes down to is this: a sacrifice of general liberty in order to protect the freedom of oppressed muslim women.

If they're even oppressed. Many Muslim women would make the argument that they wear veils of their own volition, for reasons disentangled from control of women.

[Crazy_Ivan80]

What it comes down to is this: a sacrifice of general liberty in order to protect the freedom of oppressed muslim women.

If they're even oppressed. Many Muslim women would make the argument that they wear veils of their own volition, for reasons disentangled from control of women.

and few people would believe them, due to the rather correct belief that much of compulsion is through threats or social pressure. Which also leads these women to say that it is out of their own volition that they wear this, knowing that if they say otherwise a beating (or worse) is awaiting them.

The ban is good and people who can't accept it are free to leave france.

[General Battuta]

What it comes down to is this: a sacrifice of general liberty in order to protect the freedom of oppressed muslim women.

If they're even oppressed. Many Muslim women would make the argument that they wear veils of their own volition, for reasons disentangled from control of women.

and few people would believe them, due to the rather correct belief that much of compulsion is through threats or social pressure. Which also leads these women to say that it is out of their own volition that they wear this, knowing that if they say otherwise a beating (or worse) is awaiting them.

I agree that many women are probably socially coerced either with or without their knowledge...but at the same time, I'm not sure the law should make the assumption that all women would never want to wear the veil voluntarily. There may be many women, maybe even most, who believe that wearing the veil has meaning that they value independent of the threat of force.

From a human rights standpoint it qualifies as an infringement on the rights of individuals to select a cultural context of choice, as well as (maybe?) freedom of expression.

[Rodo]

Their piece of world, their rules.

Abide or get out of the way.
That's what rules are made for, right?... in all countries... in all kinds of governments.

[Mars]

The only rule that should be completely off limits is disallowing people to leave.

See North Korea and Iran.

[watsisname]

I agree that many women are probably socially coerced either with or without their knowledge...but at the same time, I'm not sure the law should make the assumption that all women would never want to wear the veil voluntarily. There may be many women, maybe even most, who believe that wearing the veil has meaning that they value independent of the threat of force.

From a human rights standpoint it qualifies as an infringement on the rights of individuals to select a cultural context of choice, as well as (maybe?) freedom of expression.

Agreed.  And I know several women whom (I believe -- I don't think it's possible to say definitively) would wear the veil entirely of their own volition.  But I don't even think that's a strong enough issue to justify this ban.

I will ask this... should Monks be banned from wearing their concealing robes?

[Bobboau]

If you are following a religious mandate, who would be the one "forcing" you?

maybe your husband or father? this was actually the only part of it I thought was OK cause it makes it a crime to force your religion on others.

The only rule that should be completely off limits is disallowing people to leave.

I do more or less agree with this. as long as people are freely allowed to leave then it's their own fault if they stay in the country.

[General Battuta]

If you are following a religious mandate, who would be the one "forcing" you?

maybe your husband or father? this was actually the only part of it I thought was OK cause it makes it a crime to force your religion on others.

Yeah I do agree with this.

[watsisname]

The only rule that should be completely off limits is disallowing people to leave.

I do more or less agree with this. as long as people are freely allowed to leave then it's their own fault if they stay in the country.

I don't agree.  Many people are incapable, or at best, not properly equipped, to leave their country in a feasible manner and strike out a new life elsewhere.  What do you say to those people?  Tough luck?

The mindset of "Hey these are the new rules, if you don't like it you can get the **** out" troubles me.  It vaguely reminds me of people who blame those who died in Katrina for not getting out in time.

[Bobboau]

hence "more or less agree" and not "completely".

[Locutus of Borg]

I think the real issue arises when people wearing veils want to get drivers licenses and IDs.

It's unrealistic to expect that someone will take your picture for an ID if you're covering your face.

[MR_T3D]

how do you know who exactly is behind the veil?
maybe its the serial rapist with the strength of 10 men but with womanly eyes.
the slackest I'd say ot go with this is its okay to wear it, BUT you must show face for ID and then remove the veil in situations where you have to show ID such as border crossing or possibly bars.

[Topgun]

how do you know who exactly is behind the veil?
maybe its the serial rapist with the strength of 10 men but with womanly eyes.
the slackest I'd say ot go with this is its okay to wear it, BUT you must show face for ID and then remove the veil in situations where you have to show ID such as border crossing or possibly bars.

this.