|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Adventurer

Joined: 28 Jan 2006
|
Posted: Mon Jul 19, 2010 11:12 pm Post subject: Syria bans full Islamic face veils at universities |
|
|
Syria bans full Islamic face veils at universities
Syria bans full Islamic face veils at universities as similar bans spark debate in Europe
ALBERT AJI and ELIZABETH A. KENNEDY
AP News
Jul 19, 2010 18:53 EDT
Syria has forbidden the country's students and teachers from wearing the niqab � the full Islamic veil that reveals only a woman's eyes � taking aim at a garment many see as political.
The ban shows a rare point of agreement between Syria's secular, authoritarian government and the democracies of Europe: Both view the niqab as a potentially destabilizing threat.
"We have given directives to all universities to ban niqab-wearing women from registering," a government official in Damascus told The Associated Press on Monday.
The order affects both public and private universities and aims to protect Syria's secular identity, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to speak publicly about the issue. Hundreds of primary school teachers who were wearing the niqab at government-run schools were transferred last month to administrative jobs, he added.
The ban, issued Sunday by the Education Ministry, does not affect the hijab, or headscarf, which is far more common in Syria than the niqab's billowing black robes.
Syria is the latest in a string of nations from Europe to the Middle East to weigh in on the veil, perhaps the most visible symbol of conservative Islam. Veils have spread in other secular-leaning Arab countries, such as Egypt, Jordan and Lebanon, with Jordan's government trying to discourage them by playing up reports of robbers who wear veils as masks.
Turkey bans Muslim headscarves in universities, with many saying attempts to allow them in schools amount to an attack on modern Turkey's secular laws.
The issue has been debated across Europe, where France, Spain, Belgium and the Netherlands are considering banning the niqab on the grounds it is degrading to women.
Last week, France's lower house of parliament overwhelmingly approved a ban on both the niqab and the burqa, which covers even a woman's eyes, in an effort to define and protect French values � a move that angered many in the country's large Muslim community.
The measure goes before the Senate in September; its biggest hurdle could come when France's constitutional watchdog scrutinizes it later. A controversial 2004 law in France earlier prohibited Muslim headscarves and other "ostentatious" religious symbols in the classrooms of French primary and secondary public schools.
Opponents say such bans violate freedom of religion and personal choice, and will stigmatize all Muslims.
In Damascus, a 19-year-old university student who would give only her first name, Duaa, said she hopes to continue wearing her niqab to classes when the next term begins in the fall, despite the ban.
Otherwise, she said, she will not be able to study.
"The niqab is a religious obligation," said the woman, who would not give her surname because she was uncomfortable speaking out against the ban. "I cannot go without it."
Nadia, a 44-year-old science teacher in Damascus who was reassigned last month because of her veil, said: "Wearing my niqab is a personal decision."
"It reflects my freedom," she said, also declining to give her full name.
In European countries, particularly France, the debate has turned on questions of how to integrate immigrants and balance a minority's rights with secular opinion that the garb is an affront to women.
But in the Middle East � particularly Syria and Egypt, where there have been efforts to ban the niqab in the dorms of public universities � experts say the issue underscores the gulf between the secular elite and largely impoverished lower classes who find solace in religion.
Some observers say the bans also stem in part from fear of dissent.
The niqab is not widespread in Syria, although it has become more common in recent years, a development that has not gone unnoticed by the authoritarian government.
"We are witnessing a rapid income gap growing in Syria � there is a wealthy ostentatious class of people who are making money and wearing European clothes," said Joshua Landis, an American professor and Syria expert who runs a blog called Syria Comment.
The lower classes are feeling the squeeze, he said.
"It's almost inevitable that there's going to be backlash. The worry is that it's going to find its expression in greater Islamic radicalism," Landis said.
Four decades of secular rule under the Baath Party have largely muted sectarian differences in Syria, although the state is quick to quash any dissent. In the 1980s, Syria crushed a bloody campaign by Sunni militants to topple the regime of then-President Hafez Assad.
The veil is linked to Salafism, a movement that models itself on early Islam with a doctrine that is similar to Saudi Arabia's. In the broad spectrum of Islamic thought, Salafism is on the extreme conservative end.
In Gaza, radical Muslim groups encourage women to cover their faces and even conceal the shape of their shoulders by using layers of drapes.
It's a mistake to view the niqab as a "personal freedom," Bassam Qadhi, a Syrian women's rights activist, told local media recently.
"It is rather a declaration of extremism," Qadhi said.
http://wire.antiwar.com/2010/07/19/syria-bans-full-islamic-face-veils-at-universities-6/ |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 12:36 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ban is unconstitutional and all the arguments for the ban are terrible at best. Having said that, I personally don't like seeing wearing them, but that's just my preference. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 1:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
recessiontime wrote: |
The ban is unconstitutional |
In Syria? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:04 am Post subject: |
|
|
Fox wrote: |
recessiontime wrote: |
The ban is unconstitutional |
In Syria? |
If not by American standards it is by international law. Are you for or against the banning of the hijabe/burqa and what is your reasoning?
And btw your new avatar is making me gay. is that the same guy from the that new predators movie that just came out? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Fox

Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 2:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
recessiontime wrote: |
Are you for or against the banning of the hijabe/burqa and what is your reasoning? |
I oppose banning clothing, it has no benefit and many downsides.
recessiontime wrote: |
And btw your new avatar is making me gay. is that the same guy from the that new predators movie that just came out? |
No, Baruch Spinoza is not an actor in the new Predators movie. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
ED209
Joined: 17 Oct 2006
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Why are women wearing full face veils going to university in the first place? How many Islamic laws are these women breaking? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 3:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
ED209 wrote: |
Why are women wearing full face veils going to university in the first place? How many Islamic laws are these women breaking? |
You can say the same thing to Christian women. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:19 am Post subject: |
|
|
recessiontime wrote: |
ED209 wrote: |
Why are women wearing full face veils going to university in the first place? How many Islamic laws are these women breaking? |
You can say the same thing to Christian women. |
Yes, the answer would be zero ED.
In regards to the ban, I understand the reasons why not to ban it but then again one could argue one reason for Turkey's success is its millitant stance on secularism for the first 75 years of its existance. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne

Joined: 12 May 2004
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 4:46 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
If not by American standards it is by international law. |
International law (a vague notion anyway) is concerned with issues such as sovereignty, nuclear proliferation and genocide, not dress code regulations. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
bigverne wrote: |
Quote: |
If not by American standards it is by international law. |
International law (a vague notion anyway) is concerned with issues such as sovereignty, nuclear proliferation and genocide, not dress code regulations. |
it is concerned about religious freedom as well as minority rights. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 5:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
recessiontime wrote: |
bigverne wrote: |
Quote: |
If not by American standards it is by international law. |
International law (a vague notion anyway) is concerned with issues such as sovereignty, nuclear proliferation and genocide, not dress code regulations. |
it is concerned about religious freedom as well as minority rights. |
How does either play a role in this law? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:01 am Post subject: |
|
|
bucheon bum wrote: |
recessiontime wrote: |
bigverne wrote: |
Quote: |
If not by American standards it is by international law. |
International law (a vague notion anyway) is concerned with issues such as sovereignty, nuclear proliferation and genocide, not dress code regulations. |
it is concerned about religious freedom as well as minority rights. |
How does either play a role in this law? |
In America there is the bill of rights, the 1st amendment being the rights of freedom of religion. International law also has something similar.
religious freedom is concerned with an individual's right to practice or not practice their religion.
Minority rights is concerned with the rights of minority. Just because it's a democracy does not mean the majority of people can enact policy that tramples over the rights of minorities. This is how a democratic system is structured.
In this case, the religious rights of Muslim women are being trampled on. Their freedom of religion, and freedom of expression is being taken away from them. Therefore it is unconstitutional. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:15 am Post subject: |
|
|
You're going all over the place. And you didn't even answer my question. My goodness. What does the US constitution have anything to do with Syria? Nothing whatsoever.
Quote: |
Minority rights is concerned with the rights of minority. Just because it's a democracy does not mean the majority of people can enact policy that tramples over the rights of minorities. This is how a democratic system is structured. |
Yes, but a Muslim woman is a minority in Syria? Interesting.
Quote: |
religious freedom is concerned with an individual's right to practice or not practice their religion. |
A Muslim woman can most certainly practice Islam in Syria. She can pray, fast, give alms, and go to Mecca (in short, she can follow the 5 pillars with no problems whatsoever). I'm sure there are plenty of other Muslim practices she's free to do too.
There is nothing in the Koran or hadiths that state "A woman must go out with her face covered when she goes to class at a university". In fact hardly any Syrian women did this until 10-20 years ago, so it isn't exactly a local cultural practice. Thank you Saudi and Iran for spreading this dumb ass idea.
That being said, one argument certainly can be made: certain women may no longer feel comfortable going to university if they can't cover their faces. That will hold those women back. Fair enough. Question is: how many are in that position? And if this wasn't made illegal, how much faster would this backwards practice spread?
And yes, I stand by being a judgmental ass on this subject. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
recessiontime

Joined: 21 Jun 2010 Location: Got avatar privileges nyahahaha
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 6:30 am Post subject: |
|
|
bucheon bum wrote: |
You're going all over the place. And you didn't even answer my question. My goodness. What does the US constitution have anything to do with Syria? Nothing whatsoever.
Quote: |
Minority rights is concerned with the rights of minority. Just because it's a democracy does not mean the majority of people can enact policy that tramples over the rights of minorities. This is how a democratic system is structured. |
Yes, but a Muslim woman is a minority in Syria? Interesting.
Quote: |
religious freedom is concerned with an individual's right to practice or not practice their religion. |
A Muslim woman can most certainly practice Islam in Syria. She can pray, fast, give alms, and go to Mecca (in short, she can follow the 5 pillars with no problems whatsoever). I'm sure there are plenty of other Muslim practices she's free to do too.
There is nothing in the Koran or hadiths that state "A woman must go out with her face covered when she goes to class at a university". In fact hardly any Syrian women did this until 10-20 years ago, so it isn't exactly a local cultural practice. Thank you Saudi and Iran for spreading this dumb ass idea.
That being said, one argument certainly can be made: certain women may no longer feel comfortable going to university if they can't cover their faces. That will hold those women back. Fair enough. Question is: how many are in that position? And if this wasn't made illegal, how much faster would this backwards practice spread?
And yes, I stand by being a judgmental ass on this subject. |
it's clear you selectively ignored that I mentioned international law.
International law has to do with the protection of religious rights. Syria is limiting the religious rights of Muslim women to wear their head dress. It seems you agree on this.
I understand your gut reaction to this is "I don't like it" but try to think it through before coming up with any reason to disagree with it. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
bigverne

Joined: 12 May 2004
|
Posted: Tue Jul 20, 2010 7:00 am Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
International law has to do with the protection of religious rights. |
No, 'religious rights' are not a primary concern of 'international law'. The cultural and religious spheres are a matter for domestic legislation, not international law. Hence, the almost total lack of minority religious rights in places like Saudi, and the complete impotence of 'international law' to do anything about it.
The banning of the burkha is an attack on extremist Islam, something that can only be good for the status of women, and civilized attitudes in general. This is why it is far better to be a woman in Turkey, than say Oman. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|