USA Today had a substantial story this morning about the move to ban burqas in France that is spreading around Europe as Europeans react to the burgeoning Muslim population by banning public expressions of religion (it is already illegal to wear large crosses and head scarves like the one my wife wears in public schools and certain other places in France). What concerns me (other than wondering when we will follow suit in America) is that there is a dangerous double-standard at work here.
When it comes to Islam we are all too willing to set aside our cherished beliefs about religious tolerance and freedom. Arguments that would never fly if applied to Christian groups are taken as perfectly fine when applied to Muslims. For example, what if France decided to ban the habit worn by nuns? It doesn’t cover their face but it does cover everything else.
The traditional habit covers women up from head to toe, covering even the neck with only the face visible. A woman dressed as a nun could as easily smuggle explosives under the habit as a woman wearing a burqa. Why is the habit not a problem but the burqa is? It is not a matter of principle, it is a matter of prejudice. Some ask what about photo ID, how can that be accomplished? There are Christian groups like the Amish that forbid the taking of photographs and that has not led to an outbreak of Amish terrorism. There is an incredible double-standard here that is based not in fact nor in logic nor in consistency.
Case in point was the girl who ran away from her Muslim parents in Ohio and went to live with a Christian couple in Florida, Rifqa Berry. Christians were by and large very supportive of her running away but had the situation been reversed and if a girl with Christian parents had fled to a Muslim home, I can imagine that the majority of Christians would have been outraged and demanded the girl be returned to her parents, citing religious freedom and parental rights.
This is not really about women’s right or security or anything else noble sounding. It is a reaction to Islam. I understand in part why people have such a visceral reaction. Since 9/11/2001 terrorism carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam and the resulting two wars and various terror attacks since then have dominated the news. Having said that, Europe has created an atmosphere where very low birth rates and an increasingly entitled populace have led to the need to import cheap labor and that cheap labor is coming from predominately Muslim nations. The influx of adherents to Islam are changing the complexion of Europe but the only people to blame for that are Europeans themselves.
I think this whole effort is misguided. It flies in the face of the idea of a liberal democracy, singling out a specific and fairly rare religious practice. As the article points out, wearing burqas is not all that common in Europe:
The Muslim Executive of Belgium, an association of Muslims, estimates that between 30 and 100 women there wear a burqa. In France, fewer than 2,000 cover their faces, according to the Interior Ministry.
So what we have is an excessive and heavy-handed overreaction to a fairly uncommon phenomena. In other words, the solution outweighs the “problem”. As someone else quoted in the article points out, banning burqas is not going to lead to women not wearing them. They will continue to wear them and force the police to either ignore the law or arrest women or even worse it will mean that these women will simply not leave the house. Someone who is willing to wear a burqa is not going to just stop because a law says so. There are women who wear a burqa that shop in our local grocery store and they somehow manage to function in society without showing their faces.
Extremism in response to perceived extremism is a breeding ground for…even more extremism. I am no defender of Islam, a faith that leads people away from God into a false belief system that leads to eternal damnation. That is true of not just Islam but every religion not centered in faith in Jesus Christ alone, whether Islam or Buddhism or Mormonism. Nor am I a fan of the burqa. Having said that, I am also not a fan of governments telling people how to dress or how to practice their faith. It amazes me how many small government defenders of individual liberty will set those principles aside to cheer on a socialist government banning the burqa because it only impacts Muslims.
When it comes to Islam we are all too willing to set aside our cherished beliefs about religious tolerance and freedom. Arguments that would never fly if applied to Christian groups are taken as perfectly fine when applied to Muslims. For example, what if France decided to ban the habit worn by nuns? It doesn’t cover their face but it does cover everything else.
The traditional habit covers women up from head to toe, covering even the neck with only the face visible. A woman dressed as a nun could as easily smuggle explosives under the habit as a woman wearing a burqa. Why is the habit not a problem but the burqa is? It is not a matter of principle, it is a matter of prejudice. Some ask what about photo ID, how can that be accomplished? There are Christian groups like the Amish that forbid the taking of photographs and that has not led to an outbreak of Amish terrorism. There is an incredible double-standard here that is based not in fact nor in logic nor in consistency.Case in point was the girl who ran away from her Muslim parents in Ohio and went to live with a Christian couple in Florida, Rifqa Berry. Christians were by and large very supportive of her running away but had the situation been reversed and if a girl with Christian parents had fled to a Muslim home, I can imagine that the majority of Christians would have been outraged and demanded the girl be returned to her parents, citing religious freedom and parental rights.
This is not really about women’s right or security or anything else noble sounding. It is a reaction to Islam. I understand in part why people have such a visceral reaction. Since 9/11/2001 terrorism carried out by Muslims in the name of Islam and the resulting two wars and various terror attacks since then have dominated the news. Having said that, Europe has created an atmosphere where very low birth rates and an increasingly entitled populace have led to the need to import cheap labor and that cheap labor is coming from predominately Muslim nations. The influx of adherents to Islam are changing the complexion of Europe but the only people to blame for that are Europeans themselves.
I think this whole effort is misguided. It flies in the face of the idea of a liberal democracy, singling out a specific and fairly rare religious practice. As the article points out, wearing burqas is not all that common in Europe:
The Muslim Executive of Belgium, an association of Muslims, estimates that between 30 and 100 women there wear a burqa. In France, fewer than 2,000 cover their faces, according to the Interior Ministry.
So what we have is an excessive and heavy-handed overreaction to a fairly uncommon phenomena. In other words, the solution outweighs the “problem”. As someone else quoted in the article points out, banning burqas is not going to lead to women not wearing them. They will continue to wear them and force the police to either ignore the law or arrest women or even worse it will mean that these women will simply not leave the house. Someone who is willing to wear a burqa is not going to just stop because a law says so. There are women who wear a burqa that shop in our local grocery store and they somehow manage to function in society without showing their faces.
Extremism in response to perceived extremism is a breeding ground for…even more extremism. I am no defender of Islam, a faith that leads people away from God into a false belief system that leads to eternal damnation. That is true of not just Islam but every religion not centered in faith in Jesus Christ alone, whether Islam or Buddhism or Mormonism. Nor am I a fan of the burqa. Having said that, I am also not a fan of governments telling people how to dress or how to practice their faith. It amazes me how many small government defenders of individual liberty will set those principles aside to cheer on a socialist government banning the burqa because it only impacts Muslims.
5 comments:
"Case in point was the girl who ran away from her Muslim parents in Ohio ..."
Are you completely unaware of the common Muslim practice of honor killing children or relatives if they convert? Should we all just wink at this in light of our freedoms? (Maker her go back to her parents. No Christian would want the law to allow our children to run away...) Are you trying to pull some kind of moral equivalent with this ongoing situation and our rights? The Muslim faith and it's killing tendencies have no correlation in our freedom based culture. Our laws can acknowledge the horrendous Islamic behaviors and provide justice and protection for all here. Religious laws of Islam do not give freedom for parents to kill their children here and be protected.
Tim,
You are missing the point I am making. I am in no way defending Islam. Having said that, how many “honor killings” have happened in the United States or in Western Europe? Last time I checked it was illegal to kill someone in America, regardless of the motivation, and I am not at all convinced that this young lady was in any danger from her parents. My point was that if the situation was reversed, many Christians would have no qualms at all about the state grabbing this girl and returning her to her Christian parents. The point of the post was that we don’t apply the same standards of religious liberty to Muslims that we do to any other religion. A basic tenant of religious liberty is that it is liberty for all religions, or none at all. My argument is that banning burqas is a trampling of religious liberty that Christians applaud but if it something similar were enacted against Christians we would be outraged.
" how many “honor killings” have happened in the United States or in Western Europe? " Why do you only include this part of the world? It is a well known fact any where in the world. Do think just because the media does not mention it often that it does not happen often? I would say it has happened thousands of times.
"I am not at all convinced that this young lady was in any danger from her parents."
Wow, I am not sure what facts you base this conclusion on. Do you have an impression that the girl is lying?
"A basic tenant of religious liberty is that it is liberty for all religions, or none at all."
The freedom to threaten your daughters life should not be considered a freedom of religion. Muslims would like you to think it should. Muslims should have freedom of religion but not for everything they believe. They would like you to think they should.
Linking burka prohibitions in Europe to converted daughter threats of killing in the US to make your point is a bad link.
There are sad situations in our country where religious freedom is trampled by our government - federal or local. Use these situations, not the ones you are using.
Tim,
What do you base your conviction that she is telling the truth upon? Investigators looked into the case and found no threat to her life.
Regardless, the point is still valid. Many Christian get outraged over any perceived violation of our religious liberty but not only ignore but applaud restrictions against Islam.
As Christians we have to separate ourselves from this situation, and see this from a neutral, non-religious perspective. America is not a Christian nation, and never was, in my opinion, God's favored nation, as we've believed for so long. Arthur is right. Religious freedom is religious freedom, unless the religious act goes against existing laws (honor killing, so to speak). Sometimes government gives special religious exemptions (like to the Amish or Mennonites), but no one is suggesting this be done for the Muslims in this scenario. I have had exposure to Muslims in the US, and the ones I have known would not have killed a loved one who converted. The truth, from my experience, is that the "peace loving muslims" of the world, and there are many, have no idea about, or choose to ignore, the violent aspects of Islam. Like arthur I am not defending Islam, but we have to be honest with ourselves, and not rely on worldly means to frustrate the expression of other religions.
Post a Comment