News French Senate Approves a Ban on Burqas

  • Thread starter Thread starter lisab
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
The French Senate has voted to ban face-covering clothing, including burqas and naqabs, reflecting strong public support, with 82% of surveyed citizens in favor. The ban is viewed by some as a symbolic measure against Islam rather than a practical solution, given that less than 1% of the Muslim population in France wears such garments. Critics argue that the legislation represents government overreach and question the justification for restricting religious practices. The discussion touches on broader themes of cultural integration and the implications of government regulation on personal freedoms. Ultimately, the ban raises significant questions about the balance between security, social norms, and religious expression in Western societies.
  • #61
zomgwtf said:
If the vast majority of French want this ban then who are we to say anything about it?
If the vast majority of Americans were to approve of torturing detainees, does that make the topic closed to any outsider? There have been gazillions of US political issues that have been open to debate at PF among the entirety of it's membership. Why shouldn't anyone who is not French not be able to debate this issue?

Besides debating the rationale, effectiveness, morality, repercussions, etc. of such an action, there are still the legal issues of constitutionality and International (or at least EU-based) human rights concerns to be addressed. I believe the latter has been answered, and found to be free of conflict, but the question of constitutionality is still under review.

And to take up your Texas argument ... until a few years ago, consensual sodomy was illegal in Texas. Most of the people of Texas approved of the ban, but it was eventually struck down because it was found to be unconstitutional. France is also a Constitutional Democracy. It can not expect to pass and enforce laws simply because the electorate wants something.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
The health effects of Burqas in northern climates:

In Ireland, which is experiencing a large influx of muslim immigrants at the moment, women wearing the burqa, doctors are warning, 'are at increased risk of pelvic fractures during childbirth because of vitamin D deficiency due to a lack of sunlight. "And babies born to women with vitamin D deficiency are also more prone to seizures in their first week of life," according to Dr Miriam Casey, expert in Medicine for the Elderly at the Osteoporosis Unit in St James’s hospital in Dublin. The burqa - an all-enveloping outer garment, does not allow enough sunlight through to give women sufficient vitamin D, she warns.

http://www.digitaljournal.com/article/272307
 
  • #63
zomgwtf said:
If the vast majority of French want this ban then who are we to say anything about it?

For those of you who are comparing this to govn't murder... L-O-L. I suppose the govn't telling you you can't go over 120km/h by a police officer is akin to govn't grand larcen. Or laws requiring you to not run around naked outside is govn't sponsored genocide. This is stupid burqa ban =/= murder what-so-ever. Give up the dramatic comparissons.

The people of France have spoken, they don't want people going aroudn theircountry in public wearing a burqa. SIMPLE. You want to wear this fabulous item of clothing go somewhere that cares. I for one don't support this:

And I think if an entire country is against this they have the democratic right to do away with it. They don't need any more rational support than the people of France do not want this here.

Just like the people of some American states don't need any more rational support than 'the people of Texas want this here.' You'd be hard pressed to find a credible source indicating it's supported for anything but rational reasons. A major one in my mind is culture. Alas 70% of Texans support the death penalty and it's their democratic right to do so. You don't like that? Don't commit a crime there. You scared you might be wrongly convicted being a bystander? Don't go there. Simple.

This is exactly how I see it. I don't consider murder equal to the burqa ban, but when I say "if the majority want it then do it", people immediately go to extremes. With all due respect, by asking "how far would you take this justification?", you are clearly looking at whether or not I would use it to justify murder or other extremes.

If the majority of people want something enough and you don't respond to it, then they'll simply switch political support to a party who will.

Constitutions can be amended.
 
  • #64
When Harry Truman integrated the armed forces, he conducted a survey of soldiers first. 93% didn't want to integrate.

That's the difference between the US and France.
 
  • #65
loseyourname said:
When Harry Truman integrated the armed forces, he conducted a survey of soldiers first. 93% didn't want to integrate.

That's the difference between the US and France.

Well, to their credit the french are very accepting of raw milk products... delicious!... they just don't extend the same courtesy to people. The public is a manipulated entity in any country, and progress in a republic often has to be the result of leadership. This, is poor leadership in my view, for all that I wouldn't want any woman I know to feel the need to wear a burqa.
 
  • #66
loseyourname said:
When Harry Truman integrated the armed forces, he conducted a survey of soldiers first. 93% didn't want to integrate.

That's the difference between the US and France.
Note that you do not know why they integrated.
 
  • #67
jarednjames said:
This is exactly how I see it. I don't consider murder equal to the burqa ban, but when I say "if the majority want it then do it", people immediately go to extremes. With all due respect, by asking "how far would you take this justification?", you are clearly looking at whether or not I would use it to justify murder or other extremes.

I don't know why you continue with this strawman. You brought it up, I don't think anyone is suggesting it.

But I do want to know if you have an explanation for the reasons this would differ from any other populist sentiment, lest it become (as Gokul suggests) a matter of taste.
 
  • #68
CRGreathouse said:
I don't know why you continue with this strawman. You brought it up, I don't think anyone is suggesting it.

But I do want to know if you have an explanation for the reasons this would differ from any other populist sentiment, lest it become (as Gokul suggests) a matter of taste.

Ok then, when i was asked "how far would you take this justification", what do you think it was reffering to?
 
  • #69
jarednjames said:
Ok then, when i was asked "how far would you take this justification", what do you think it was reffering to?

I asked the question, so I know it wasn't referring to murder. (I'm not even sure how that would work.) I just wanted the justification so that I could understand why you thought that it should apply in that case, if there was some case that (presumably) you would not apply that reasoning to.
 
  • #70
Gokul43201 said:
Besides debating the rationale, effectiveness, morality, repercussions, etc. of such an action, there are still the legal issues of constitutionality and International (or at least EU-based) human rights concerns to be addressed. I believe the latter has been answered, and found to be free of conflict, but the question of constitutionality is still under review.

I've looked but haven't found where the (ECHR?) human rights concerns have been adressed and found free of conflict. I'd be interested to know the reasons given.
 
  • #71
Take proposition 8 in California; the fact that it's "the will of the people" is meaningless because 'the people' are still bound by the constitution. Equal protection can't be circumvented because people aren't scholars or lawyers, and that's the rub. Unless France allows for a truly democratic vote of the populace to overrule everything else, then it's just a matter people making a choice that may violate fundamental principles.
 
  • #72
fuzzyfelt said:
I've looked but haven't found where the (ECHR?) human rights concerns have been adressed and found free of conflict. I'd be interested to know the reasons given.
I heard it on the radio just the day before yesterday. I will try to dig up a reference in case I misheard/misremembered.
 
  • #73
loseyourname said:
Stupid policy. They're throwing out BS justifications but the reality is the French don't appreciate the influx of Muslim culture even though they invite it with their guest-worker program.

No comment on whether it's a stupid policy, but I agree. The French don't appreciate the influx of Muslim culture. And it's their right, I suppose. As right as a Muslim culture not appreciating the influx of some other culture, and preventing such influx.
 
  • #74
alt said:
No comment on whether it's a stupid policy, but I agree. The French don't appreciate the influx of Muslim culture. And it's their right, I suppose. As right as a Muslim culture not appreciating the influx of some other culture, and preventing such influx.
Yes. It would be exactly as right as a Muslim culture that does that, and no better.
 
  • #75


The above vid is interesting. I wonder what folk here think about the population figures stated therein (hopefully, disregarding the spooky music and the religious bits at the end).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #76
Gokul43201 said:
Yes. It would be exactly as right as a Muslim culture that does that, and no better.

So you agree that a Muslim culture has a right to prevent influx into it by another culture ?
 
  • #77
I neither stated nor implied it before, but I will now. Sure, any culture is free to make its rules about who can join the club and who can't.
 
Last edited:
  • #78
Gokul43201 said:
I neither stated or implied it before, but I will now. Sure, any culture is free to make its rules about who can join the club and who can't.

Your post #74 confused (me) thus my '?' at the end of my sentence in reply.

Anyhow, I agree with your above.
 
  • #79
What a quagmire!

The best post I've seen here yet, however, is from https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2884039&postcount=60". Seriously! It's one of two key reasons why I decided to retire from the military where I am today. The other was family. Don't assume that was the overriding factor, though, as I have immediate family in California, as well, with whom I am very close.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #80
mugaliens said:
What a quagmire!

The best post I've seen here yet, however, is from https://www.physicsforums.com/showpost.php?p=2884039&postcount=60". Seriously! It's one of two key reasons why I decided to retire from the military where I am today. The other was family. Don't assume that was the overriding factor, though, as I have immediate family in California, as well, with whom I am very close.

Hadn't seen that one (zomgwtf post). Now have, and agree with it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #81
alt said:
Your post #74 confused (me) thus my '?' at the end of my sentence in reply.
I don't know where the source of the confusion is, so can't comment on that

alt said:
Anyhow, I agree with your above.
I hope you also agree that:

1. If the burqa ban is an act aimed at stopping or slowing the influx of certain cultures, then it would be more honest to admit that rather than call it a humanitarian issue, and

2. You can't have your cake and eat it too: if you've joined the EU, for instance, you need to abide by the rules it has for immigration, etc.
 
  • #82
Gokul43201 said:
I don't know where the source of the confusion is, so can't comment on that

I hope you also agree that:

1. If the burqa ban is an act aimed at stopping or slowing the influx of certain cultures, then it would be more honest to admit that rather than call it a humanitarian issue, and

2. You can't have your cake and eat it too: if you've joined the EU, for instance, you need to abide by the rules it has for immigration, etc.

I never called it humanitarian. I agree it's a culture issue more than anything. Does a Muslim country have the right to prevent it's Muslim culture and religion from being swamped by, say, Christian or Jewish culture and religion ?

Joining the EU has been seen as a sordid boon by many Europeans.

Did you have a look at the Utube link I posted several up ? Did you see the part about France ? What do you think of it in general, and the France part in particular ? (I know, the music is spooky, and there's a pro Christian bit at the end, but aside from that).
 
  • #83
I don't believe France is attempting to stop/slow the influx of muslims so much as it is trying to force muslim immigrants to acknowledge the hegemony of at least certain aspects of Western culture (in the West) as a condition of immigration to the West, a goal with which I agree if not these means. Sarkozy's statement, that the burqa is "a sign of enslavement and debasement" to women seems to me in keeping with that goal.

BTW, anyone see the 1999 film East is East, a dramatic comedy staged around Pakistani muslim immigration in England? Great 90mins that I recommend.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/East_Is_East_(film )
Hilarious when it was released, but that was several million immigrants ago in England.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #84
alt said:
I never called it humanitarian.
Not you, but the French govt.

Did you have a look at the Utube link I posted several up ? Did you see the part about France ? What do you think of it in general, and the France part in particular ?
I can't say I put very much weight in the numbers, but I agree qualitatively with it, and it has been something I've found troubling for a long time now. More generally, I recall reading that there is an inverse relationship between fertility and some measure of productivity (can't recall which), which suggests that perhaps humanity might reproduce its way towards lower and lower productivity.
 
Last edited:
  • #85
Gokul43201 said:
I can't say I put very much weight in the numbers, but I agree qualitatively with it, and it has been something I've found troubling for a long time now.
Yes that You Tube flick cited US fertility (I assume they mean native) at 1.6. I'm fairly sure its closer to 1.9 before immigration, without checking.
 
  • #86
humanino said:
Note that you do not know why they integrated.
Humanino - As I recall you are from/in France? Any comment on either the muslim immigration issue there, or the recent actions of the French government?
 
  • #87
Gokul43201 said:
I heard it on the radio just the day before yesterday. I will try to dig up a reference in case I misheard/misremembered.

Thanks, but no matter, I was just curious. From what I’ve read of the Belgian ban the reasons are probably along the lines of health and safety for the wearer, and for public security.
 
  • #88
mheslep said:
Humanino - As I recall you are from/in France? Any comment on either the muslim immigration issue there, or the recent actions of the French government?
Thank you for asking, I tried to comment a few times, but every time I end up not posting. I am currently quite mad at the government, if you have heard of the crisis between the european level and the french government, you probably understand my being uncomfortable (there is something rotten in the French kingdom), especially in the context of this discussion.

It may be that 80% of the people support this law, but that does not tell me how they feel about it. From the statements of elected members of the senate and parliament, I think a number of them across the political spectrum voted by "pacte républicain" with unease. One can loosely take "pacte républicain" to mean "I do not disagree enough to loose everybody's time with that". About 2k women are concerned by this law apparently. I do not buy the justification of the law by "80% of the people support it". This government does whatever they please. Of course, if it helps with their electorate, it's even better. But take another law recently voted : moving the minimal retirement age from 60 to 62 years old. In this case, I personally think the majority of people can not be retired for 30 years, it simply does not make any sense. So in this case, I support the law ! Of course, there are more subtle adjustments to be made, and I would have written some details differently. It remains that the majority of people oppose this law in France, and the government had it passed because they (Sarkozy) already decided it would pass (some steps did not respect our constitution).

My comment on the recent actions of the French government : I do not remember growing up in this country.
 
  • #89
humanino said:
Thank you for asking, I tried to comment a few times, but every time I end up not posting. I am currently quite mad at the government, if you have heard of the crisis between the european level and the french government, you probably understand my being uncomfortable (there is something rotten in the French kingdom), especially in the context of this discussion.

It may be that 80% of the people support this law, but that does not tell me how they feel about it. From the statements of elected members of the senate and parliament, I think a number of them across the political spectrum voted by "pacte républicain" with unease. One can loosely take "pacte républicain" to mean "I do not disagree enough to loose everybody's time with that". About 2k women are concerned by this law apparently. I do not buy the justification of the law by "80% of the people support it". This government does whatever they please. Of course, if it helps with their electorate, it's even better. But take another law recently voted : moving the minimal retirement age from 60 to 62 years old. In this case, I personally think the majority of people can not be retired for 30 years, it simply does not make any sense. So in this case, I support the law ! Of course, there are more subtle adjustments to be made, and I would have written some details differently. It remains that the majority of people oppose this law in France, and the government had it passed because they (Sarkozy) already decided it would pass (some steps did not respect our constitution).

My comment on the recent actions of the French government : I do not remember growing up in this country.

I for one, am glad to hear from a Frenchman that this is not something all are comfortable.
 
  • #90
Considering Sarkozy's statement, that the burqa is "a sign of enslavement and debasement”… Seriously! What did he left for the “prostitution industry”!? [I’d like to know his knowledge/background about the religion/culture involved, or is he relying on gossips and think he’s really aware of it] This statement is clearly veering into religion or culture, either way such a statement declared by a formal person who suppose to represent a country, IMO, is stupid and irresponsible. He should be mastering politics!

Why is it that the number of people who’ve polled not revealed?



Health reasons, heh, guess they should ban high heels!

:biggrin:
 

Similar threads

News How long until the left labels Zell Miller a traitor?
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
5K
News Patriot Act 2: Summarized by Alex Jones
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
News Bush Honest & Trustworthy Until How Many Lies?
  • · Replies 65 ·
3
Replies
65
Views
11K