... but if you think that a large percent of the women that wear burqa are doing so of their own choice, you are either sadly mistaken or willfully hiding your head in the sand, so invoking personal choice is surely not as clear cut as you would like it to be. Since the French can't know, on a case by case basis, who chooses to wear a burqa and on whom it's being imposed and who may or may not be a security risk, it seems prudent to address what they can and to err on the side of public safety and have some sort of guidelines as proposed. While not ideally mentioned in a Politically Correctness-run-amuck world, it's naive to not acknowledge the security issues at hand.

I'll point out the parallel between this and the new full body scanners proposed at US airports. True, there is a certain loss of privacy, but there is also a hierarchy of issues to consider. It seems fair to place public safety and all the measures that might rationally address it above one's sense of embarrassment or comfort or preference, and the offended can always choose simply not to fly (which is a choice and not an entitlement).

For the record, per Lal's comments below, I actually would support the banning or restricting of sarees or whatever clothing that was proven to show an uptick in traffic accidents caused by said fashion choices. (go ahead, insert obvious jokes about beautiful women wearing skimpy clothing here)

Again, public safety has to trump personal choice most of the time...

I dont really care what the Euros do. However, you seem to have a interesting definition of equality. I know muslim women who dont wear any headgear, does that bother you? Also, based on your earlier posts, do you expect nothing from some countries, and much from others? In Afghanistan, its ok to murder family members who disobey, but Euro countries creating a dress code is unthinkable.

By the way, the French revolution was stupid. They were unwilling to work within reality to acheive freedom and equality. Thus, they inevitably collapsed into anarchy or oppression. Similar to what happened after every Marxist revolution.

Now now good commenter, islamophobia was never far away from Sarkozy's party.

First they target a very specific ethnicity, then they swing their cross hairs to one sex of that ethnicity, then they invoke equality, then they uncover the women.

A terrible cycle, only to be trumpeted and decorated further by such ignorant posts of some commenters.

The french revolution set the stage for equality between all, it overthrew crowns, smashed thrones and empowered people.

Undo that and ban the burqa, you will only marginalize these women even more, they will be forced to stay at home and never get out.

Come to your senses, and spread the universal right of humanity to equality and equity.
Its a personal choice folks, very simple

The guy who claims it is "ok to kill a family member in Afghanistan", are speaking from personally visiting Afghanistan and seeing this happen or are you a product of CNN like 90% of other westerner who have such strong opinions about Afghanistan and other Islamic countries and their laws?

I will also ask if you are in agreement that "Sisters" from your local French Church are told they can no longer wear their outfits which include a headscarf or "Fathers" can no longer wear their religious symbols such as the cross around their neck?

To clarify on your first topic, it is NOT ok to kill a family member or ANYONE for that matter in Afghanistan. As a matter of fact, laws against killing someone in Afghanistan are FAR more punishing than it is in the West, where you could get drunk, get behind the wheel of your car, run a whole family over and probably get less than 20 years for it. I live in Canada and have seen many instances of murderous drunks getting nothing more than a slap on the wrist. Is that considered "OK" to kill? Get your head out of the sand.

Not ALL women in Afghanistan wear burquas. As a matter of fact, there are far more women who don't wear it than those who do. Islamically speaking, a woman is NOT required to cover her entire face like women in Afghanistan and other Middle Eastern countries do. They are required however, to wear a hijab (headscarf), almost EXACTLY like practicing "Sisters" do at western churches. Are "sisters" oppressed? Covering your face has evolved from cultural beliefs and men, who force their wives or family members to wear it, need to learn more about the matter. My mother and sisters grew up not wearing burquas or headscarfs living in Afghanistan. They read, understood and CHOSE to wear hijabs because they wanted in Canada! That is choice and they deserve to have that choice, no government should ban them from doing it or ASSUME that they are oppressed women. My wife does not wear a headscarf but if she ever wanted to, it would be HER choice.

Don't support a cause you don't have much knowledge on or argue on the topic without facts. It's easy to point out one or two negative events and paint an entire culture with it, but is that really the right thing to do? 2 billion Muslims in the world and growing, is that because we kill family members or oppress our women? Think about it.

No one is saying that we should ban the Hijab. They are talking about banning Niqab and Burqa for the same reason that you are not allowed to walk with something that cover your face in the street: security reason. This is not related to religion, but only to security.
Plus I'd say it's rather dangerous to drive a car wearing a burqa...

... where is it saying that the hijab will also be banned ? Did I miss that part ?

The article was not an argument for or against the banning of religious veils. It only presented the laws and the arguments for and against the banning of veils in different nations. The laws of France, Germany and Turkey have banned hijabs in various buildings.

Before you comment, check your facts.

DDSNAIK said it 100% correct. The hypocrisy that SSIDDIQUI refers to is unsubstaniated, because there are Muslim women who choose NOT to wear the hijab. The coercion that other Muslims put on independent thinking Muslim women for not wearing the hijab, or burgas, or coverings is 100% wrong. The ban of the dress is to protect all women from the abuse of slavery, that we women worked so hard to get out of. The women of Egypt up to the 1970s did not have to wear the hijab or any covering; the political ideology of men of the brotherhood wants control. Anyone who chooses to twist the words, and not educate themselves should go back to their mother country.

Another thing, the Wahhabis want to control. Religion is from the root word meaning 'bind'. Before the Prophet Mohammad (pbuh), the town charged money for people of all over to make pilgrimmage to come worship their own gods. Even today, it still cost money to make the pilgrimmage. I do not believe Allah (swt) would want the wahhabis to charge money. I do not believe Allah (swt) wants women to be slaves.

The entire of the M.E. except KSA which is a class apart, has women driving in burqas and niqabs (and without bombs to kill non-muslim residents). Check out the rate of them meeting with accidents. These women work, participate in meetings and much more despite the fact that they're very muslim. And they even get divorced when their husbands act funny. But they never give up their religion or their burqa.

I believe there's more to the issue than what meets the eye. Driving and independence isn't one of them.

... it's plain to see that the bulk of the article involves a ban on the burqa specifically and secondarily the niqab. Clearly, no one on this thread has expressed any support for suppression of any religious rights or specifically involving the hijab in any ban on veils/religious/clothing/etc.

SSIDDIQUI, I'm with you on freedom of religion principles and not trespassing on personal choices and not entertaining double standards in general, but please don't focus in on a factoid that is enforced in such limited locales (a hijab ban in 2 countries, in some buildings ?) and paint it with the same brush as the more applicable point of contention (wider countrywide bans on burquas and niqabs) - and then levy charges of inattentiveness.

I do thank you, my friend (as we all here should theoretically be), for pointing out the hijab ban in Germany and Turkey, but the conversation here is clearly and overwhelmingly in respect directly to a burqa and niqab ban.

... then I guess everything would be fair.

People should be free to wear whatever they want, if they want to wear a burqa or not wear a burqa its up to them.

Nobody has a right to tell others what to wear or not to wear. Only bullies tell tell others what to do and that is certainly not right.

I know many young Western women in Europe and America who have started to wear a hijab; this is something new; neither their mothers or grandmothers wore such hijabs; and I think these young women should be allowed to wear whatever they want.

What about the other way around? You mentioned the belt thing. Shouldnt women in ANY country be allowed to wear whatever they want. Actually, I think you did answer, by omission.

Ashok, Hindoos, Jews or Christians should not ask Muslims to change their religion or their traditions.

Muslims don't ask Ashok, Hindoos, Jews or Christians to change their ways either.

Live and let live.

....and yet you can't build churches in islamic countries like Saudia Arabia. In Malaysia christian houses of worship are fire-bombed, in Iraq there are now death squads targeting christians and in Egypt the Copts have been relentlessly attacked for generations. Non-muslims in Northen Africa are killed, raped, enslaved and tortured to this very day.

The historical record is even worse. Go read the history of the Turkish empires and how they treated non-muslims. Or talk to a Greek, Serb or Armenian.

So actually, you are wrong, and muslims states do make life very difficult for non-muslims.

You serious? Christianity today is a far cry of the Christianity that was practiced in Muslim ruled countries where Christians and Muslims even prayed at the same building. Now, you have an accepting and politically correct religion that even boasts a "GAY" version of the bible and proudly displays idols of Jesus, which makes you no different than the Hindus. Which Islamic country would you like to allow for a religion that is completely lost it's way and not even sure which bible is the right one? Let's not even get into the topic of growing number of priests in Churches molesting little kids, Christianity needs to find it's own identity before they start building Churches in Muslim countries for others to follow.

Sounds like a very educated thing to say. Ashok sounds like an Indian name and you might be an Indian or at least Hindu. What are you complaining about? If you are indeed from India or Hindu, you have nothing to bitch about because Hindus regularly kill Muslims with swords, boiled water and other creative ways in the name of religion in India. You also torch and burn your women if her family doesn't give you enough money to marry your sons. You also kill baby girls because it considered bad luck. So what is your beef with the Muslims? You got your work cut out in your own religion/country, come back when you have abolished slavery and oppression of women in your country.

Many young women choose to wear a hijab or a nikab. They are doing it by their own CHOICE and many are born and bred in Europe and America.

I know many young Western women in Europe and America who have started to wear a hijab; this is something new; neither their mothers or grandmothers wore such hijabs; and I think these young women should be allowed to wear whatever they want.