Speak Up

If a certain population of the world has the right to live its lifestyle in whichever manner suits them, then so does the remainder of the world's population. For example, Hindus in Middle Eastern countries should be able to celebrate religious festivals, including reciting the Ramayan and Gita, in public and not behind closed doors. They should not be denied permission to hold such public events.

If a woman has the right to choose whether or not to wear the burqa, then it is best left to her to decide. The burqa must be treated as a garment worn by women, detached from its religious meaning and what the Muslim clergy thinks; still the decision to wear the burqa must be left to women. Men must have no say in what a woman chooses to wear or must wear.

Sarkozy is 100% correct. If all men are pious, what do women have to fear? Actually, women are more pious than men. Muslim men need to wear the burqa.

Burqa is not a religious garment, not insisted upon by religion but by society, particularly in Asia and the Middle East. All religions call upon women to protect and preserve their dignity. This is a cultural method. France should not ban it but allow its minorities to follow their traditions.

Yes it is derogatory to the women and offensive to their identity. Us men are left with no such bindings, but women have to live like an appliance. Allah is watching.

Yes, I agree with Sarkozy.

Wearing a burqa may be a symbol of backwardness, suppression or oppression, but flaunting your sexuality in the skimpiest and most revealing of clothes certainly does not mean freedom in any culture, be it Western, European, or West-influenced Indian.

I'll tell you what a symbol of subservience is. Asking a woman to dance nude on a pole for a few dollars is a symbol of subservience. Killing the girl child inside the womb or dumping her in the bin like how millions of Hindus do is a symbol of subservience. Asking a woman not to enter the kitchen when she's bleeding is a symbol of subservience.

Women are precious and it's man's innate nature to protect precious things. So when a woman covers herself, it's just an innate nature of human beings.

We totally disagree with Sarkozy or anybody who says that covering up is a symbol of women's subservience and debasement. In fact, exposing women is a symbol of debasement and degradation in the name of so-called freedom. An opinion poll should be conducted for women who are silently suffering in the name of so-called freedom.

The Muslims on this forum appear to be vehemently opposing Sarkozy. I would say, let Muslim women cover their heads if necessary, provided they are doing it of their own free will. (In many cases, the dress requirement is imposed.) But covering your face and going about in public is definitely not something to be encouraged. A woman with a covered face will put others to inconvenience in professions such as medicine, teaching, or counselling. They can even indulge in robbery and escape being caught because of the veil. Humans are known by their faces, and not showing your face to another person, or not being allowed to show it, definitely is regressive. Covering up (or not) is personal choice, but having veils over faces is definitely not something a civilized society should encourage.

Yes. The burqa is a symbol of subservience. What president Sarkozy says is correct. It is high time to stop this practice. This is only a social custom necessitated by the then prevailing conditions in the Arab region. No need to mix it up with religion.

The burqa is a symbol of subservience. Men are forcing women into subservience in the name of religion. The latter cannot object to it because the women are dependent on men. There are groups which threaten to throw acid on women who don't wear the burqa. This is plain terrorism.

Purdah enhances women's self-esteem. Women are more confident in purdah than in any other dress.

A woman in a burqa is a million times better than those shameless, vulgar women who sell their modesty for money and fame.

For Mr Sarkozy: If a woman in a burqa is a symbol of debasement, then what about the nuns and sisters in churches who cover themselves from head to toe?

A women who chooses to cover herself is telling the world to judge her by her intellect instead of her appearance. Also, what happened to freedom of choice? Freedom of religion?

Though I was born a Hindu Brahmin, I do NOT practise any religion. But I firmly believe that the burqa is one of the reasons for the backwardness of Muslim women. In this modern era, body language, the expression on one's face, etc, are very important for successful communication with others. Sadly, a woman covering her face (whether Muslim or Hindu -- Hindu women cover their faces in some communities) cannot do this and will have to remain in her cocoon for life.

I have heard some Muslim friends saying how they miss modern and cute dresses such as jeans, T-shirts, sleeveless vests, etc as they are not allowed to wear them. Just government reservation or dole will not help our Muslim sisters to catch up with other communities. They should unveil themselves.

Who is Sarkozy to decide what one should wear? If anyone asks him to wear a priest's dress, will he do that? It's an individual's decision what to wear. Anyway, according to me, it won't affect the Muslim world what he says as he is an elected president and not a monarch.

I think French President Nicolas Sarkozy has not visited a convent of late. If he had, he would have noticed nuns in wimples and robes. Would he call the dress worn by nuns "a sign of subservience, a sign of debasement"?

In the first presidential address to the French parliament in 136 years, Sarkozy chose to call a dress willingly adopted by many Muslim women all over the world as a sign of subservience and degradation.

The burqa or abaya, as it is known in Arabic, is a body robe. What covers the head and face is called niqab. But it is not a question of semantics, because Sarkozy meant a head-to-toe dress when he referred to the burqa.

Sarkozy was right when he said the burqa -- the particular type of dress -- was not a religious issue. Islam asks its followers -- men and women -- to dress modestly, and so do all religions. The Islamic concept of hijab is not only physical, but also moral. It tells men to lower their gaze in front of women other than their wives and close relatives. It tells women to be mindful of their gait and garments.

The debate here is on two counts: the issue of morality and the freedom of choice. Who is indecent and spoils public morals: a burqa-clad woman or one in a bikini? Those who are brought up on moral values which teach respect for women and to not think of them as mere objects of desire or enticement and mannequins for public display will say a woman in a bikini is indecent. But those who have grown up seeing scantily clad women around them will find a woman in a burqa objectionable.

So it all boils down to your perception, which is a result of your moral values. There is no point praising a Picasso painting in front of a visually challenged person.

However, we can discuss the issue of a person's freedom of choice. France is a liberal country. Liberté, égalité, fraternité (Liberty, equality, fraternity) is the national motto. So how can a country which prides itself on protecting liberty and equality discuss in its parliament an issue which is an infringement on one's freedom? If a woman in a miniskirt is not an issue of debate in France, then why is a woman in a burqa objectionable so long as she does not affect public order?

Ask any woman covered head-to-toe in the black robe whether the dress has been forced on her or she is wearing it by choice. The answer in all cases will be the latter. Women of high moral values prefer to cover their modesty.

In his speech Sarkozy said: "In our country, we cannot accept that women be prisoners behind a screen, cut off from all social life, deprived of all identity."

How can Sarkozy pass judgement on others? The burqa does not curb freedom. Covered women do go about daily chores unhindered. Hindered are those who look at the burqa as a symbol of subservience.

The burqa does not deprive a woman of her identity. On the contrary, it gives her an identity: an identity of being modest in an indecent crowd, an identity of boldly following her choice amidst a howl of protests, an identity of being true to her faith and culture.

It is strange that something which is moral is being looked down upon while immorality and indecency are being promoted!

I totally agree with Sarkozy that because of peer and family pressure we (young, modern UK Muslim girls) are forced to wear the hijab or burqa. It is dangerous to defy the diktats of the elders (mostly male) and use logic with regards to our religion.

I entirely agree with President Sarkozy. Societies that hide women behind burqas are backward looking. Women need to be educated and emancipated, not oppressed.

Viewed

Emailed

Speak Up »

Other sections »

Speak Up »

Other sections »