Not so long ago Jack Straw's blog post on the wearing of burkas and the prevalance of other religious symbols in society was the subject of a debate in my GCSE Geography class. Our class largely came down in favour of laws such as the one imposed by the French for a number of reasons:
The burka is open to widespread abuse where security is concerned - one of the posts above suggested that if newshound had indeed had a burka clad figure call at his door they would have posed no threat to him? How would he have been supposed to know if the figure outside his house was indeed a Muslim woman or instead someone to whom he would never open his front door if he had recgonised them? I think it's also unacceptable that if someone were to enter a bank wearing a helmet etc. they would immediately attract attention (and possibly suspicion) yet a burka wearer would not. How do these people regonise each other anyway, and how can anyone else?! I don't see any benefits for the wearer!
As far as the arguments for a free society go, I see no problem with imposing laws that affect one area of society more than another - British Airways staff are made to change to Muslim dress before landing at certain airports and if I were to show affection to anyone while in a public place in Dubai I'd find my holiday extended somewhat (see recent news stories for just such a case!) so why should these people be allowed to dictate anything when in the UK or any other country outside of their own? Refer to the "Winter Festival" vs. Christmas debacle in Birmingham I think it was to see what I mean.
PS. The welding mask point was hardly valid - I far as I was aware these are worn for the sole purpose of welding and are not yet a common item of everyday clothing...!!
|
|