How do Catholics feel about whether countries should ban Niqab/Burka (full face covering) or not?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Rozellelily
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I think that it is ironic that we are arguing against some peoples idea of modesty.
 
Yes.Modesty doesn’t mean oppression,not by far.

The thread is only referring to the Niqab (face covered) and not just hair covered (whether hijab,nun habit,regular foulard,mantilla,Jewish tichel or any other head wear).

Even women who wear Niqab or similar I don’t think they are oppressed if they are choose it themselves.
Oppression isn’t the only issue.
It is the security issue,and separation from society issue etc.

Even in saudi non Muslim visitors are expected to wear what is modest according to saudi standards (long loose sleeve dress or skirt) which I think is fair enough so is it necessary a bad thing if countries such as Australia or Austria also have some sort of guidelines?
I understand it’s different because in country like Saudi religion + government are one,but in us/uk/aus/Europe the government is either already secular or is heading more that way (less religious influence).
Still,though in countries that are predominantly made up of non religious or Christians,maybe the Niqab is not compatible with society.
 
Last edited:
Maybe they shouldn’t be banned,but I still think it should be discussed openly because (here at least) the rarer woman who does wear it does appear to be quite insular,90 % in Sydney in predominantly Muslim communities in southwestern Sydney,crime there is bad,the young guys acting intimidating and antisocial in McDonald’s car parks standing on cars etc,housing prices are low in those area when they are very high in compatible towns with same distance to city etc…

The main concern would be with anti social behaviour or crime from the youth.
Parents can’t always be the “blame” for the youth behaviour but at the same time it seems that some of the youth are learning these mentalities from their parents.
Mothers (and fathers) are so important in young men’s lives and what mentalities they teach them.
Even though friends can influence youth,I find it hard to think that a youth could hold a negative or harassing behaviour to certain women without first learning it from their mothers.
If there mothers teach them to respect all women then these no issue but I think some of them are learning,directly or indirectly,from their niqab wearing mothers that girls in shorter skirts or beach wear are easy etc…

So when people say everyone should be free in societies to dress as they believe according to their religious belief (regardless if moderate or extreme) ,you are right,but what in the instances when those beliefs start having negative social effects (like thinking women with another form of dress are …) what then?
 
Last edited:
At the same time,can someone make a healthy informed choice for themselves if these things aren’t discussed openly and from a variety of perspectives?
Click to expand...
You mentioned “healthy informed choices” in this post. My analogy to Modern Orthodox women is on point.

Women in some ultra-Orthodox and Hasidic communities don’t have choices about the way they dress. In these communities, both men and women and are cut off from the outside world. They speak Yiddish. It’s hard for anyone to break out, because they aren’t educated.

Modern Orthodox women are well educated. Many of them hold professional jobs. They watch TV and read newspapers. There is a big difference.

Still, I see no need for the government to “liberate” people in closed communities.
 
I don’t know much about the lifestyle of ultra Orthodox Jews as there are not many here where I live but using your example isn’t it still the same thing that the women are not exposed to different viewpoints so really can’t make informed choices?

I read this article and if according to this girls experience,it seems that ultra Orthodox Jews are even more restrictive on rules for women’s lives then many muslims?

 
@Rozellelily

Thanks sharing that information. It a complicated issue, and you’ve given me lots to think about. God bless you.
 
Yup, that is what I was wondering, how it would be practical. I mean would the patient need to remove it right away, explain the situation and then put the mask back on? I mean that could defeat the purpose of wearing it. Unless the LEO let them explain while wearing it. Also would they be stopped everytime they were in public, or would most LEO not really enforce it if they saw it was a medical mask? Kinda curious. Things that make you go hmm… lol.
 
In the UK face coverings are legal, but there are restriction where they can be asked to be removed. Entering or leaving the country at ports, airports and railway stations, or entering controlled environments ie prisons. There is also a piece of public order legislation that mandates the removal of all face coverings in certain situations, it requires Gold level or higher authorisation to bring in and can only be used in a specific area for a specific amount of time. That seems a reasonably balanced approach.
 
Rozellelily said:
I am referring to the full face coverings
Click to expand...
I think that the right of children to safety and to their life would take precedence over the right of a terrorist to wear clothing which would cover his whole body and face. If the full face covering and long dress is allowed to be worn in schools, banks, Christian Churches or other public places, it will facilitate terrorists’ job of killing innocent people and of stealing money from a bank without being identified. A terrorist dressed in long garments and completely covering his face could hide automatic weapons under his garment and the security cameras would not be able to identify the criminal.
however, I do think that women should be able to wear headcovering such as a kerchief etc., as that would not present any type of security risk base on inability to identify the face.
 
Last edited:
I think that all women are beautiful. Women being beautiful is a natural calling set by God. Himself. Grown woman has a right to choose how to dress herself, just as a grown man has the right to choose how to dress himself

When woman being presented with safety issue as argument to compell her to dress a certain way, the question is this: Why women being presented to such danger? Is it really about safety or inequality being perpetuated in a systemic manner?
 
Last edited:
At what point should a woman’s right though be balanced with the cultural norms of the “hosting” country/s?
Eg:a woman doesn’t have the right to dress as she feels to in a country like Iran or Saudi and she is expected to dress accordingly to that countries view on modesty.

I’m not suggesting that’s a bad thing,just where does individual rights end and countries societal norms expectations begin?
 
Wearing a head scarf, or a more extreme burqa, is also a political statement. This goes for all countries–for example in Iran, how much you cover up shows how much you agree with the current government. In Western countries, it almost always has a political element–“I’m not going to assimilate,” “You Western women are sluts,” etc. etc.

Obviously there may well be some Muslim women who have 100% religious reasons and some who have 100% political reasons. But I suspect 90%+ are in between, with some mixture. It is currently a “fad” if I can use that term. Another poster rightly pointed out that in the 50s-80s most women (at least educated, urban women) didn’t wear head coverings at all in Islamic countries. It was a bit akin to travelling in Italy and seeing peasant women in the fields with a head scarf vs. Italian teens in the cities. I would place money on it dying out in the next decade or two. Until then, should Western countries make it illegal in more extreme forms? Only if it is legitimately a problem–passport photos, ID cards, etc.
 
If a country compells women to take off their burqua, then it is just similar to those countries which compell them to wear it.

it is more important to get each woman to know their right to choose her own dress according to the local community standard too. A standard decided by women themselves, not by politicians or by gender prejudicial teaching.

I think education is the most important: to allow critical thinking in schools, and not merely receive teachings from male clerics (or even female teacher) who teach gender prejudice in the name of religion
 
If other countries want to ban face coverings, burkas, etc., I don’t have a problem with it. I would not want to see that ban implemented in the U.S., though; and a flat-out ban probably wouldn’t pass muster under the 1st Amendment anyway. As others have mentioned above, I think it is reasonable for the government to mandate that people remove face-coverings for photo IDs, picking up children from school, and so forth. I think it would also be reasonable to mandate that face-coverings not be worn while driving.

An interesting question that could come up as a side issue, though, is whether a private business could refuse to hire anyone who wears face-covering–would it be considered religious discrimination? I don’t think it would be, though; many private businesses require uniforms and dress codes of all kinds. Not to mention that in many jobs, a facecovering would be a safety hazard.
 
Last edited:
EnglishTeacher said:
As others have mentioned above, I think it is reasonable for the government to mandate that people remove face-coverings for photo IDs, picking up children from school, and so forth. I think it would also be reasonable to mandate that face-coverings not be worn while driving.
Click to expand...
I agree that there are occasions in which its reasonable to mandate a person to remove face cover for various reasons.

actually, I think it is rather unfair for “a non-local” tradition and community standard to push towards local tradition and community standard. So, yes, a person who wear burqua in an area where it’s unusual, adaptation based on common sense and reasonable application should be acceptable.
An interesting question that could come up as a side issue, though, is whether a private business could refuse to hire anyone who wears face-covering–would it be considered religious discrimination?
Click to expand...
This is actually the essence of it: even in the area where burqua is seen as community standard, it is just a fact of live that women there has less job opportunity compared to men.
I don’t think it would be, though; many private businesses require uniforms and dress codes of all kinds. Not to mention that in many jobs, a facecovering would be a safety hazard.
Click to expand...
It is a fact of live that some jobs just cannot allow burqua. For example a television anchor, police, internatinal hotel reception, nurse medical doctor, stwardess these jobs becomes inaccessable for these women regardless how great their grades at her education certs, how smart they are. They are not allowed to be in any forms of contact with men. So yes, there are lots of jobs becomes unavailable for them, and it is because of the burqua philosophy in itself, and not because any gov necessarily making any discriminating policy.

Which makes it more make sense to teach these women to know their rights than to ban the clothes.
 
Last edited:
francisca.chapter3 said:
They are not allowed to be in any forms of contact with men
Click to expand...
Doesn’t living this way,where everything is “taboo” etc in a way make everything about sex?
It’s like they couldn’t just have a normal interaction without sex feelings/thoughts brought into it…
An “innocent” touch of a nurse or doctor instead gets misconstrued as potentially sexual/near occasion of sin…
That’s why I think the Niqab/Burka is in a way counterproductive.
Ie:they think it’s beneficial because then a man can’t see you and therefor not have lust but -and sorry if this sounds controversial -the irony is that being “socialized this way” has not caused their men to be less lusty and more in control.
I see men from Saudi etc make inappropriate comments on YouTube and Instagram etc so their “solution” clearly isn’t working.

Some people say “it’s just the way they practice their religion”,yes religious instruction in holy books is from God (depending on what you believe in) but I don’t think religion can be separated from social so I don’t think can just be said they are wearing this simply because of wanting to be obedient to God but it also had a “social purpose” -to help with lust-(but while many men from Middle East and Muslim African countries are good people) there are also many who are still pervy/lusty so…

To me Hijab is religious and covers modesty but choosing to wear the “extreme attires” of Niqab,Burka etc are often coming from an unbalanced place.
 
Last edited:
I was born in a place where women have their colorful elegant beautiful traditional clothes. Women used to wear traditional hair bun adorned with traditional accessories/ flower wreaths for impotant occasions. I feel sad to see these traditional clothes being replaced with dull colors and women is pushed to wear clothes that is not of their own tradition. As if our tradition somewhat immodest. In fact, our traditional men behaved better than our men nowadays, even as the women wore their beautiful traditional clothes.

Even flowers in the field are created with uncomparable beauty says Jesus. There isn’t one woman in the world who is not called to her natural beauty. Even men nowadays pay attention to their look. It is a paradox if freedom of religion is used to push woman to wear burqua. Because burqua takeaway womans freedom to choose their own clothes and deprive them equal opportunities. The correct way should be the opposite: freedom of religion should mean women are allowed to choose their own modest clothes according to the tradition they hold dear in their own local community.
 
Last edited:
Having said it all in the above post, I’d like to add that I still think we should not ban burqua or any form of clothes. Because the more important principle is to uphold womans freedom to choose their own modest clothes.

Our individual freedom to choose our own clothes does not override companies’ attire standards. All employees has to follow it. This is common. So there isn’t anything like special gov policy or anything like that. It’s just common sense. Just because I prefer to wear shirt & shorts, it doesn’t mean I have the right to wear that to office, for example. So the same with burqua or any other personal preference does not override any company policy on office attire.

So ban on burqua is unnecessary. Company policy decides office / work attire to make sure people wont come in shorts neither in burqua. Is this considered ban on burqua? Nah.
 
Last edited:
Based on recent events, I double down on my call to ban face coverings in public (with minor circumstantial, not personal, exceptions), especially in the state of Oregon, or at least the city of Portland. Having people running around hiding their identities and committing assault has just become too big of a public safety risk. And this risk is NOT just limited to airports.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top