Banning face coverings

[robvalue]

This is a general discussion about whether or not banning face coverings in public is a good thing. This obviously is primarily concerned with the veil worn over the face by some Muslim women, although I would hope that any law would be across the board about face coverings in general.

France has banned this, and recently Denmark has too. (My wife informed me, I don't watch the news very much.) I used to be of the opinion that it should just have a blanket ban here in England, but I've come to realize the issue is much more complex.

It's clear to me that no women ends up wearing this of her own free choice. It just doesn't happen. I appreciate many women feel they are making a free choice, and would find me saying this hugely patronizing. I understand that. But since we're on an atheist forum here, us atheists probably agree that almost every case is going to be the result of indoctrination into Islam. Virtually no non-Muslims decide it would be a good idea to cover their faces up, and we know that Muslims are going to be coerced, if not downright forced, into wearing them. If you're told about how God wants you to from an early age and this is drilled into the programming of your brain, the idea that you're freely choosing to wear it is quite ridiculous.

Of course, I see such women as victims. Sometimes, they are going to be part of communities where they will be punished for not wearing it. Sometimes, it will be more liberal, but they'll still face some sort of dishonor if they don't comply. Sometimes there may be no external pressure left at all, but we all know that the "choice" to continue has been implanted in the first place.

A ban would make including this in indoctrination harder. This would, I hope, be a benefit to all women yet to be born into Islam. But the price would probably be heavy for all the women currently wearing them. My wife pointed out to me that even in England, there are some extreme Muslim subcommunities that the police are frightened to enter. Enforcing such a ban here would be very hard, and if it was done, it could result in women becoming prisoners in their home. They might not be let out in public at all.

I'll be curious to see how it works out in Denmark, and if anyone has any experience or information about how it's all played out in France, I'd be interested to hear. I certainly think that when there are laws already in place for security measures, such as in airports, there should be no religious exemption. But pushing a ban further than that is an issue I'm much divided on. On one hand, I want people to be free to do whatever they want, as long as they don't hurt people. On the other, I'm all too aware it is a result of religious oppression, and it can put up barriers.

[Fake Messiah]

What about when men cover their face like Janists



I mean that actually looks good and I wish all religious people would tie their mouths like that because they don't have anything smart to say.

[Minimalist]

Let's compromise and just gag them all.

[Aegon]

You know, back when women were protesting their right to vote, a significant number of women polled claimed that they did not want that right. It's something called internalized oppression. I would agree that a similar phenomenon is present with those who say they want to wear headdresses and the like.

But is it fair to ban them outright? It would certainly seem to go against freedom of religion and expression that US protects under the First Amendment. On that basis alone I wouldn't agree with a ban.

[Sterben]

Banning it outright I disagree with, restricting it in certain circumstances such has a court house or a airport I can support.

[SteelCurtain]

Yeah, in the US, banning an expression of religion would be simply unconstitutional. I would not support that at all.

I don't think there is a situation where banning them in any context would make anyone safer. It may make people feel less uncomfortable, but you'd have to show me something that would prove something like that.

I don't like them and I think they're a part of a system of oppression. But if it doesn't hurt others and women aren't required to wear them I don't see any good reason to outlaw them.

EDIT: to be clear---the reason France and Denmark ban face coverings is because of xenophobia---to deter immigration. Europe is in the middle of an immigration crisis, and populism responds predictably.

[Rev. Rye]

Virtually no non-Muslims decide it would be a good idea to cover their faces up,

Pussy Riot would beg to differ.





Also, there was a brief stage when I used to go out with a full face covering, but that was mostly because A) I was forced to use my bike because I didn't yet have my drivers' license and I needed to go to class, and B) Chicago's winters are fucking brutal. I managed to miss exactly three classes (out of about 32) that semester: one because the school declared a snow day, another because I injured my coccyx and, if it's painful to switch between standing and sitting, it's not practical to go to class, and the third because I was in Vegas (with the teacher). At the time, I learned about the laws against face covering in France. Fortunately, it looks like the climate in Paris or even Copenhagen doesn't really necessitate such dramatic necessities.

In addition, on occasion, I go out wearing a surgical mask, but that's only when I'm under the weather and have to go somewhere. Earlier in the year, I had ulcers on my tonsils, and the same day I went to the doctor's office, I needed to turn in my midterm for my Income Tax Accounting class. I ended up wearing the mask and the teacher congratulated me for at least being considerate.

[brewer]

This wasn't banned.



Or this.



How much of the proposed ban is based in fear?

[Minimalist]

Fuck all religions.

[The Grand Nudger]

They'll have to take my keffiyeh out of my cold dead hands.