Re: [asa] Dawkins, religion, and children

Dave, you seem to be conflating two different things: (1) a law in a
liberal democracy that restricts the wearing of the Burka or head scarf in
some public settings, such as public schools; and (2) a law in Islamic
theocracies that requires the wearing of a Burka. I do not favor (2) under
any circumstances.

As to (1), you ask:

*How far are you willing to go in allowing a Burka:
-Identification pictures like drivers liscence or passport
-Dealing with officials, police, voting, border crossings
-Sports
-Entry to restricted buildings eg the US embassy, the legislature
-Health care, do all of our emergency rooms need to be staffed with
female Islamic doctors? How about ambulance and fire crews?*
**
I would agree that there *may* be legitimate reasons to require temporary
removal of a covering that limits personal identification or that might
facilitate concealment of a weapon, based on security concerns, as with
entry to a restricted government building. However, I think those
circumstances are relatively rare, and that very often other technology
(such as retinal scans, etc.) and/or the use of security staff with an
appropriate religious and/or gender background (e.g., a female police
officer in a room out of public view) can usually provide less intrusive
means of personal identification.

I don't see any reason why an athlete or health care provider should be
required to remove a religious covering. Nor do I see any reason why a
religious covering that does not materially interfere with a peace officer's
duties should have to be removed (e.g., a Sikh police officer wearing a
turban).

You also said you find the Burka *"an abohorent practice that is demeaning
to females." *I think this sentiment is a bit parochial. As I understand
it, there are Muslim women who find the Burka liberating and sensual within
the context of their culture. And there's plenty of demeaning of women in
western culture when it comes to dress -- some of the college kids I teach
basically dress like hookers, no doubt because the men in their life like it
that way. We might want to consider whether the women of the Bible who are
heroes of the Christian faith -- say, the Mary's of the Gospels -- would
today be more comfortable in something like a Burka or in a belly shirt and
mini skirt.

OTOH, I agree completely that women in any culture should not be compelled
by law to wear a Burka or other religious garb. The principle works both
ways, which is another key think Dawkins just doesn't get when he jabbers
about restrictions on family religious instruction: religious
authorites should not run the state, but likewise, the state should not
restrict religious freedom.

On 4/30/07, Dave Wallace <wdwllace@sympatico.ca> wrote:
>
> David Opderbeck wrote:
>
> > I think the policies against wearing the Burka in public are hideous,
> > discriminatory, and just plain stupid. The religious riots in Europe
> > are fueled by this kind of hateful policy.
> >
> David
>
> How far are you willing to go in allowing a Burka:
> -Identification pictures like drivers liscence or passport
> -Dealing with officials, police, voting, border crossings
> -Sports
> -Entry to restricted buildings eg the US embassy, the legislature
> -Health care, do all of our emergency rooms need to be staffed with
> female Islamic doctors? How about ambulance and fire crews?
>
> All except the health care point have come up here or at least I have
> not heard of that being raised but it has come up elsewhere when females
> have needed to be treated.
>
> Forcing someone to wear a Burka against their will, especially a child
> seems like (child) abuse to me. I also find it a very abhorant practice
> that is demeaning to females. Should the UN rule against the Burka in
> Iran or Iraq, no that does not seem appropriate.
>
> Some limits in Western societies appear appropriate to me, although I
> feel uncomfortable with such limits.
>
> I think that France stopped (or tried to) even the wearing of head
> scarves. That definitely seems to go too far.
>
> If the rest of the cultural and religious practice of having a male
> relative always accompany the women when out in public, then I find
> wearing of the Burka less offensive as one is dealing with at least one
> identifiable person.
>
> In the winter time when the temp is -25F, if one were to walk into a
> bank wearing a balaclava and not remove it, I suspect there is a good
> chance the cops would get called and that the individual could be
> injured to some extent at least. I see no difference if someone wears a
> Burka into a bank and would not hold the cops accountable in either
> case, assuming reasonable force was used.
>
> Living in the down town core, I probably have a different perspective on
> this kind of thing than lots of people would and tend toward a different
> trade off of rights vrs public security. It is not rare to see drugs
> being dealt or to be accosted by a hooker on the corner. Adding totally
> anonymous people to an already very difficult mix would not help.
>
> I know some might say I am prejudiced against Islam, however, consider.
> Probably on Sept 11 as the office closed about noon, I was alone
> during the afternoon (except for a drunk) in the nearby park with my 12
> lb dog. The whole situation was unbelievable and numbing. An obviously
> middle eastern, probably Islamic, male and female couple tried to walk
> thro the park. The drunk smashed a beer or wine bottle and came after
> them. I quietly picked up the dog and escorted the couple thro the
> park. With two males present the drunk continued to taunt them but did
> not do anything.
>
> Dave W
>
>
>
>
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Mon Apr 30 22:55:19 2007