That outfit should be illegal
19th October 2010 by Shandri Brown
Should our government have a say in what we wear? Should our churches or our parents be allowed to control the outfits we wear in public? Whose choice is it anyway?
Last month a French senate approved a bill that would make it illegal to wear the Islamic burqa or other full face veils in public. Any women who choose to wear a veil in France can be required by police to show their face and refusal can result in a fine.
Legally Dressed
I am not convinced that a government has the right to force women to uncover their faces. Many women choose to wear a burqa for religious reasons and modesty. It is their choice who they reveal their beauty to.
It makes me nervous to think that because of culture and fear, laws can be created to dictate how women should dress.
Can you imagine if our government had originally decided all women should be bare-breasted to honour the aboriginal culture here when settlers arrived? Eek, no thank you.
Ultimate Hypocrisy?
I don't think it is right to make people wear less than they want to, but I am sure glad we have laws that mean you can't roam the streets naked.
If I am really honest, I reckon a good half of the outfits Lady Gaga wears could have a law written about them.
So, do I want our society to have any control in how we dress or not? Well, kind of.
I think I should be allowed to express myself through whatever fashion I choose as long as it is not offensive to anybody and isn't encouraging men to lust.
But then again, some people think mixing stripes and spots is offensive – so maybe the task is impossible!
The Christian Outfit
Nope, I am not talking about the "Jesus is my homeboy" t-shirt. 1 Timothy 2:9 says:
"I want women everywhere to dress modestly, with decency ...with good deeds, appropriate for women who profess to worship God".
Yep, it also says not to wear gold or pearls or expensive clothes (phew, lucky I can't afford them) but I think this is a real important bit.
If absolutely everybody dressed modestly and clothed themselves with their good deeds, I doubt we would need laws that dictate what we can and can't reveal.
"Ahh yes," you say. "But everybody has a different interpretation of what is modest." And so the debate goes on ...
For more info on the burqa law being passed see:
http://jurist.org/paperchase/2010/09/france-senate-approves-burqa-ban.php
By Shandri Brown
save. grow. serve.
save - noah rzeminski
Noah Rzeminski from Wollongong tells how his father was not happy with his decision to b... Read more
serve - nadine sorensen
Nadine Sorensen shares how God altered her persepctive while on mission in Kenya... Read more
Got your own story to share? Write to us today!
Comments
i'm not racist, but i think that you should atleast see ppls faces, its a massive safety issue, peoples identity should be established, how do we know that people walking down the street arent terriorists dressed up like that so we dont know who they are.
If they can do that whats to stop ppl wearing balaclavs why have double standards.
This is australia and unfortuantly safety is a issue. i know its a bit extreme but i dont agree that they should cover their whole face, we have to know what we are dealing with!
p.s. the government isnt telling ppl how to dress,
I think when we start to stop people dressing according to what they feel their beliefs permit, we open the door for what we wear to come under scrutiny.
I for one, am happy for every Muslim woman that feels she needs to wear a burqa, to wear one, because I wear a quasi-military uniform as an outward expression of my faith, and I dont want that taken away from me under the guise of 'national security'.
I have no problem with islam, and im not racist, but there has to be a issue when someones face cannot be seen.
It is unsafe, because you dont know who your dealing with.
I have many friends who wear the scarf and thats fine casue they are still able to be identifed.
And you cant say the government is wanting people to wear less then what they want to, and take it to the extreme. unfortuantly the government needs to take appropriate steps to deal with the more important matter of national security. In my career i would want to know who im dealing with, its just to easy to commit a crime and go about it un-noticed, its just to easy to get on a plane and have no idea who is on that plane.
Its not like the government is being dis-respectfull just safe.
Tim would you wear your quasi-military uniform in a country that has had the military rape them, kill them and take advantage of them? Dont you think it just refects that?
So wouldnt you give up your uniform for the more important matter of allowing people to feel safe..
I think it may be appropriate to ask someone acting suspicially in a burqa for ID.
Its easy to commit a crime unnoticed in a burqa, but its also easy to commit a crime in a Motorcycle helmet, or a balaclava, or a cap pulled low and a hood up and sunnies. I have seen heaps of CCTV footage on TV, where the guy / girl in the shot has the hoody, cap, sunnies combo happening, then its impossible to make a clear ID.
On your hypothetical, I probably would give up my uniform for that, but we're aren't talking about a country like that. We're talking about Australia, last time I checked there isn't an epidemic of people in burqa's raping or killing people. When has someone in a burqa EVER endangered NATIONAL SECURITY in its true sense?
I think it's really important to define exactly what we're talking about here. Rather than the full burqa, we're actually talking about the Niqab, right? From what I understand (and I could be wrong), The Burqa is made up of the Niqab (what covers the face) and the Jilbab (the actual dress/body-covering part of the outfit).
Jake, coming from a Counter-Terrorism perspective, I agree, there are security issues surrounding not being able to see a person's face. And I can totally understand you being concerned about that in your line of work. It concerns me too.
Can I ask, out of interest, does the Jilbab concern you as much as the Niqab bit? I only ask because to me, any form of loose-fitting clothing, whether it be a Niqab or some other long/loose dress/shirt, is just as worrying as not being able to see someone's face! Maybe I'm paranoid.
I also think it's important to bring some perspective, in that Australia (and indeed France) is definitely not the first country to have to deal with this. We'd do well to look at how other countries, namely Muslim countries, address the security side of it. To be honest, in my view, they've handled these things well - developing systems where identities can be checked routinely and safely without offense to the woman wearing the Burqa. It worries me that it's a bit western-centric of us (us being the European/Western world) to be bringing up the whole debate again, when it's already been dealt with on a much larger scale in some other countries.
It's really important for the government to take measures that make its citizens safe - and I guess I come from a hard perspective as that will (hopefully) be my job in a few years time. However, in light of the fact that other countries have proved that this can be done without 'banning' religious dress, I think it is a bit disrespectful for a government to do it - when there are alternative methods available.
Also, just as a side-note... something to think about maybe... the 911 Hijackers weren't wearing any form of traditional/covering-up dress. They were in jeans and shirts. Sure, the media would have us tihnk differently to that, but it's just something to think about.
I don't have a problem with the hijab, which just covers the hair.. I have a lot of Muslim friends that wear that.. In response to tim however, people are suspicious of those wearing hoods I'm fully aware of that! But I wouldn't want ppl to have their faces covered when enterting any type of money area.. I think it's also appropriate to ask anyone acting suspicous for I'd.. But the I'd should also show the face!
When it comes to 'money areas', if the government doesn't ban hoodies, sunnies and caps, I don't see how they can even think about banning religious headress.
In Australia I think to get ID you have to show your face in the photo.
http://www.rta.nsw.gov.au/licensing/takingyourphoto.html
Above is a link to the RTA website which states:
"Head coverings worn for religious reasons may be worn, but must be adjusted so that your whole face is visible, ie from the bottom of your chin to the top of your forehead and both edges of your face."
So, ID isn't an issue. I ask you again, when has someone in a burqa EVER endangered NATIONAL SECURITY in its true sense?
There was an article recently on the Sydney Morning Herald website about a young girl who was effectively suspended from school in the Northern Territory because she reacted to bullying on the school bus.
One of her class mates, a 7yr old boy, was teasing her about her head scarf and trying to make her take it off. I think that this had been happening for a while and was not an isolated incident. Eventually she retaliated by dacking the boy to prove her point that if she was to take of her headscarf, this is how it would feel for her. She'd be naked and humiliated without it.
Due to her retaliation the bus company banned her from travel for a number of days and because the trip in to the school was an incredibly long way away, her parents couldn't get her to school for those days.
Now, for some Muslim women I'm sure that the same sentiment is extended to showing their face to men who are not close family or their husband. It would be mortifying to have to walk around in public with their face unveiled.
As Casey said, there are ways to check ID and still be respectful of the cultural beliefs of these women as it has been implemented in other countries.
France is possibly the most religiously insensitive nation at present. They have banned the wearing of crosses and crucifixes in schools as well as Muslim coverings for girls. If you are wearing something that is religiously centered, you are not allowed to wear it no matter what religion it represents.
So am I surprised they have extended this anti-religious ban to all women who practice modesty as a cultural/religious show of faith? No. I'm really not.
Will this possibly soon extend to the wearing of The Salvation Army uniform? Well, possibly. Will we be more outraged then? Or will we agree that in "the nations interest of security" it should be so.
Well said Pixie.
meh not worth arguing with you's anymore! faces should be seen...
whether walking into pubs or servos or around the town, safety issue hands down.
If i hadnt already have given up my uniform, i would definatly give it up if the thought of me and uniform somehow was a safety risk then i would give it up hands down
This is my last comment, we aint gonna agree but thats cool