Posted on 07/18/2008 1:40:23 AM PDT by bruinbirdman
A Muslim member of the French Government has attacked the head-to-toe Islamic dress as a prison, applauding a court decision to deny citizenship to a Moroccan woman who wore it.
The burka is a prison, a strait-jacket, Fadela Amara, the Minister for Urban Affairs and a longstanding women's rights campaigner, said yesterday. It is not religious. It is the insignia of a totalitarian political project for sexual inequality.
The court decision denying Faiza Mabchour, 32, French citizenship has drawn approval from both Left and Right, highlighting a rejection of Muslim customs that conflict with the values of the secular French republic.
The affair of the burka, as it has become known, began in late June when the Council of State, the highest civil court, endorsed a decision to refuse nationality to Ms Mabchour because her practices conflicted with French society and especially sexual equality.
In the first ruling of its type Ms Mabchour's application was rejected because she had failed to integrate. Emmanuelle Prada-Bordenave, the state commissioner who decided the appeal, noted that Ms Mabchour had appeared for interviews clothed from head to toe in the clothing of women from the Arabian peninsula, with a veil covering her hair, forehead and chin and a piece of cloth over her face. Her eyes could only be seen through a small slit.
The decision was the latest episode in France's struggle to balance the laïcité principle with the religious practices of Europe's largest Muslim community.
It follows a popular 2005 ban on religious head-covering in state schools and rising concern over demands from some Muslims for sexual segregation in public swimming pools and sports grounds.....
(Excerpt) Read more at timesonline.co.uk ...
Nicely done, France.
I agree with the substance of the decision, but these arguments about is or is not religious are pointless. What one believes is one’s religion; if a woman thinks that her religion requires her to wear a burqa, then it does. We have to bite the bullet and say plainly that there are beliefs incompatible with citizenship of a free country.
While the US Constitution is precluded from establishing a state religion, etc., does this mean that religion cannot be used as an evaluating factor for new citizenship?
My personal point of view is that religion DOES matter and it is fair game as a qualifying factor, especially with Islam.
In the first ruling of its type Ms Mabchour’s application was rejected because she had failed to integrate.
.
See it in the African folks around here, the Democrats and their Jesse Jackson ideals have a terrible influence on integration, though some do get over it.
C’est incroyable...
Good. Finally a country with courage.
Good for you France, now follow through no matter how many cars get burned up over this and STAND YOUR GROUND!
Fine by me.
In this particular case of the aspiring ‘French’ citizen, her acceptance of the garb doesn’t indicate a compatibility of Islam with ‘freedom’. It smacks of beligerance in the face of assimilation with her ‘to-be-adopted’ country, and the government was right to deny her citizenship.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.