Question I am an atheist fully in favour of a secular society. However I have recently been alarmed by the burka ban recently put in place by the French government. This to me seems at best to be a draconian, knee jerk reaction to something that effects a very small number of people (apparently 1,900 women in France) and at worst thinly veiled racism. I am in no way in favour of the burka or any form of religious dress, but a carpet ban seems to me to be wrong. Surely it is better to live in a society in which such things are allowed, in the hope that one day the people wearing the burka feel they no longer need to. It is often cited as a reason for the ban that it stops oppression of muslim women, but it seems that taking away the option to wear something is a form of oppression also. As an atheist who wishes for as secular a society as possible, am I justified to be concerned about such a law and people lobbying for a similar ban in Britain?

Accepted:
July 22, 2010

Comments

You might find this recent opinion piece by Martha Nussbaum, a philosopher at Chicago, to be of interest.

haven't read the nussbaum piece alexander suggests; but i believe one of the motivations of the french law is a security one -- though not many french women wear them, there already have been incidents of men criminals/or terrorists wearing them to escape detection ... (there certainly have been many such in the mid-east where burks are more common) .... and there you have the public interest in security weighed against the individual 'right' to obscure oneself .... I can also see a case made that genuine participation in the civic life of a free society requiers being visible -- identifiable -- sure there's an important role for anonymity, but people's whose opinions are only expressed anonymously when they have nothign to fear from expressing them non-anonymously seem to me to be worth less ... (maybe) ... so that might be a second reason to reject such a ban (though weighs less heavily against the religious desire to wear one, I suppose) ....

just some thoughts

Andrew

It should be noted, first, that there is considerable disagreement even in the French Parliament regarding the ban on the wearing of the burqa; it has been suggested that the ban is a political ploy on the part of French President Nicolas Sarkozy. (For more on the internal disagreement regarding the law, see a recent article in The New York Times.) Despite the disagreement in the French Parliament, as noted in the Times article, it is likely that the bill will be passed by the French Senate in September and then become law. Does France thus risk, as Daniel Garrigue, the legislator who cast the sole vote against the law, said, slipping into totalitarianism? I think not; indeed, I think that the law is very much in keeping with France's secularism. The basic rationale for the law, which I think is untouched by the considerations advanced by Nussbaum and differs greatly from those considered by Andy in his response--although, to be sure, issues about security and the public space have been raised in debates about the issue in France and elsewhere--is that the burka itself violates the French conception of the dignity of the human being, which is essential to the French state. "Very simply," Sarkozy said, "we ought to affirm...the dignity of each person, regardless of their gender or the color of their skin or even their religious affiliation. It goes without saying that the wearing of the burqa is completely incompatible with such a conception of freedom." It surely doesn't go without saying. However, it seems to me very much in keeping with the spirit of France's constitution, and thereby reflects French law, with which Nussbaum herself fails to engage. (It is, of course, a further question whether the legislators have interpreted the French Constitution correctly; and yet another question whether this interpretation is morally correct.) As for whether there is reason to be concerned about lobbying for such a ban in Britain, the Times article referred to above cites a recent poll showing that 62% of British voters support such a ban. The question, however, is whether there are legal grounds for such a ban in Britain, and that I do not know.