inhibits facial recognition software... security risk...

a person with nefarious intentions could be underneath... security risk...

remember a few years back the woman who wanted her florida drivers license photo wearing a hajib??? state refused to do it... big fuss at the time... security risk...

everything that is clothing can be labeled a security risk if pushed to the limit including exploding sneakers which begs the question... if you get athletes foot from TSA due to shoe rules, why can't we bill TSA or homeland insecurity for the doctor and rx bill???

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

In Iran in 1953, after CIA-British intelligence sponsored a coup to overthrow the elected leader of Iran and install the Shah, the new dictator wanted to "modernize" Iranian culture (meaning "Westernize"). One of the things he did was to ban Burqas for women.

After 20+ years of brutal, murderous rule under the Shah. the people of Iran revolted and overthrew him. Suddenly, Burqas and head-scarves were everywhere. Muslim women saw it as a source of religious and nationalist pride that they were "allowed" to wear whatever they wanted to.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I've seen women in the city wearing layers of black, faces covered and just a slit for their eyes. They cannot be identified. The regular head covering and long garment is fine but no one can be allowed to walk the streets completely covered and impossible to identify. Nuns do not cover their faces. This has been an issue in France for some time and I can understand their concern. It's not anti-anything. Just common sense. Anyone can disguise themselves to look the way they do and someone probably will. I guess when you relocate to a new country it's a nice gesture to abide by their laws. The average French woman moving to or even visiting their country would be "REQUIRED" to cover up. Part of the way we communicate in the Western World includes looking at each other's faces. That's just the way we are. People smile at complete strangers, even their dogs, what's wrong with that? I think they might learn to like it. Thanks, ANNA

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I think we should pass a bill here in the states and call it "No Behind Left In Sight" and force young men to pull up their pants.

Just say no to CRACK!!!

Stupid effort on the Frogs part. Offer a private room for their photo's and if they need to have their face scanned for security reasons.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

If you're going to pick on one religion, you should pick on all of them. This is just Muslim bashing under the guise of security.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

allowing women (or men) to wear clothing that their religion, their culture, or their fashion sense makes them feel comfortable. No government should be allowed to dictate what can or cannot be worn within reason. National Security is just an excuse for expressing anti-Muslim sentiments and thus encourages the lowest form of discrimination. Rejoice in diversity!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This ban is just anti-Muslim bigotry. Nothing more. The French are simply appealing to the lowest common denominator.

"Freedom" fries, anyone?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is the United States. If you want to hide your face, stay in your own country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

... is taking away their ability to make their own choices, whether in the name of religion, decency, or of protecting them from themselves and their choices.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Would you accept a passport picture with a burqa? Behind the claim for rights to religion there is a power play to push islamic laws, norms and habits into the West. Of course the West is doing the same with them. Some women even defend the custom, usually those with a political agenda. I doubt Muslim women are free considering family and social pressures and a religion that punishes apostasy (religious freedom) with death.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I know from the experience of friends and colleagues here in UK that a woman wearing a hijab or other form of veil, is not always making a free choice, often she's responding to pressure from her family. France is right in considering banning the burqa; the existing ban on religious symbols in schools is well supported by girls from Muslim families, many of whom see it as freedom from something that is not their choice. Comparing wearing a burqa with a yarmulka is inappropriate for obvious reasons.

France's 18th century revolution was against the oppression of the Catholic church; very many people died because the Church took everything they had in tithes, telling them they would get their reward in heaven. Try visiting graveyards in rural France, especially in the south, and see memorials to three or even four generations of the same family who died at the same time, of starvation. This is the context in which you have to set France's view of, and opposition to, repressive religious practices. Possible limitations on women's freedom of movement caused by not wearing a burqa can be addressed by other means, not by allowing such repression and pretending it's always her free choice.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The Quran doesnt say anything abut the specifics of women clothing, just requires modesty, both from men and women. That modesty took different forms in every country, usually directly from pre-islamic traditions. That sense of "modesty" was also commonplace in southern europe. Elderly rural spanish or portuguese women can still be seen wearing garments much like north african hiyabs, and less than 50 years ago, young women wore them too. What changed? Did the goverment issued a law forbidding those clothes? Of course not, industrialization, mass media and secularization slowly changed the position of women in society and the value of that "modesty". But no one forced anyone to do anything.

When people here say "those women are not free to make that decission, they are captive of their families and communities", the amount of paternalism seeping from that statement is appaling. First, because it reduces those women to virtual infants, and most are not. I for one know of girls who on their own volition decided to start wearing the hiyab when they were teens or older, for the very same reasons my sister had a purple mohawk... because it pissed the man to no end.

And second, because most people is "captive" of their communities. Most people determine what modesty is from the ambience, from their family and their religion, if any. In our society women are free to expose their legs, shoulders, arms...but we all know women who dont feel confortable with that level of exposure... Would you force them to wear a miniskirt and a elastic top? Do western women bare their breasts when among tropical tribes? Some do, but most cling to their modesty standarts because they would feel unconfortable and overexposed.

The message is clear: we dont care how you feel about it, we know what's best for you. How does that differ from pashtun taliban forcing the burqua (wich, canonically, only applies to the afghan overall with a net for the eyes) to other ethnicities who tradtionally mantained modesty their own way?

And the security issues would have more weight if this wouldnt be just a new stage of a long time war on cultural assimilation. Right and Left in France has been courting xenophobic votes for over a decade, by adressing the perception of excesive inmigration by calling for an outright assimilation. There was a point when any girl could wear a russian style head cover to school, very trendy... except if you were muslim.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't care if men or women want to wear veils, big moomoos, etc. So what if they do?

What I DO care about is when specifically WOMEN'S FACES are required to be hidden by any dress code. When we hide women's faces in the public square, she is not a full human being. We cannot see if she approves of her surroundings, is terrified of her surroundings, if she is happy, or if she is scared to death.

Women's reactions to their society must be VISIBLE. We must know if women feel hurt or sorrow in the public square. Otherwise we cannot know what needs to be done to make the public square a safe place for women.

Red State Gal
RedStateFeminists

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is interesting since France wanted or did ban girls in schools from wearing head coverings. So where does it stop?

Grew up in a modest community dress wise and out of habit I cover my head when I leave the home. Yet, when I wanted to get a new photo for my California drivers license they made me remove my head covering which simply covered my hair. Fact is people don't recognize me sans my head covering.

So I think Mennonite women, Orthodox Jews, Observant Muslims and others whose culture requires or encourages the hair be covered, be allowed to do so even on their ID photos.

As far as the burqa, if it didn't cover the face but just the body, and allowed for the hair to be covered, then that should absolutely be allowed.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

the burqa because they want to, not because they have to. Banning it is very unwise. Giving women the right to wear or not to wear is what needs to be stressed. Does Islam have a dress code for women? If not, then this is something imposed upon women by their men. The women in the United States of America have had THE VOTE for less than a hundred years. Think of that! They had to fight to get the vote. Women in Great Britain did too. Remember the woman who threw herself under the hooves of race horses in Britain to become a martyr for women's rights? If Islamic women truly want more rights, I believe they themselves should work for them. Their men will eventually give in to keep the peace. It may be a long, hard struggle, but only if Muslim women do it themselves will it ever work. As for the USA--we need to tend to our own business and stop trying to impose our will on the world. There are plenty of problems here in the US that need solving--child abduction by child predators for one thing; rape of women for another.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

is someone covered from head to toe woth only eyes visible, coming into my hospital room to tell me that they will be performing my open heart surgery.

I would not do business with anyone whose face I could not see.

I these women want to live the lives of the oppressed, then they should in the good old repressive home country.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

may be it just aint women who are wearing the bhurka?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

The old aphorism still stands: "When in Rome do as the Romans do!"

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You ask the wrong question, whether burqas should be banned. We should ban the Islamic faith (along with Christeranity and Mosesism).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When people are debating what a person should or shouldn't be allowed to wear you know your listening to slaves.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]