The representatives in support of religious symbols in schools of the state of Columbia believe the decision for implementing a law to ban headscarves and other religious symbols should not be enforced. This is because this decision will violate most rights from the International human rights treaties including the right to religious freedom and practice, the right to education as well as the right to privacy of the individual. Religious symbols are not all required to be worn by all religions, however the head scarf is extremely important for Islamic women. Unlike other religious symbols such as the cross that can be taken off, the head scarf is part of what it means to be a Muslim woman and it is essential for it to be worn in public spaces. …show more content…
However, these limitations would not be necessary when it comes to ban of religious symbols in schools. Article 18 (3) states the limitations are only applied when this right interferes with the public safety and health of others or limits their freedom in any way. In most countries, the headscarf can be considered a threat because of fundamental religious groups who use it as a mean of furthering acts that go against the rights of women. Only then can such a limitation be accepted. However, in a school environment such threats are not likely, there is no danger to public order when a girl wears a head scarf to school. There may be other issues associated with bullying but the solution will not come from banning the head scarf. In addition, political issues from other countries are not reason enough to constitute a ban of this religious symbol from schools (McGoldrick, Dominic), Therefore, because the head scarf is no cause of threat or coercion in schools, it does not infringe on the freedom of other non- Muslims or Muslims who choose not to wear …show more content…
The ban will be violating numerous rights mentioned that are essential for every human being and therefore undermine the human rights framework. If we want to be able to incorporate multiculturalism in European countries then we must let religious persons be free to practice their faith. We must not allow negative stereotypes to prohibit young girls as well as women from being comfortable in their own skin. As a secular state, we understand that there are rules to maintain secularism by not letting religion interfere with governmental procedures, however, the same should be applied to government’s interference with religious practices. The state should not in any circumstances be the one that influences what a woman chooses to do with her body. Banning religious symbols from schools will automatically advance secular beliefs over religious ones. Columbia as a secular state should be careful in imposing secular values that limit religious ones. It must remain neutral so as to allow both sides to exist peacefully. Lastly, we must remember that human rights are adopted for people of all ages, races, gender and religious
In the article, Chesler uses several persuasive appeals in an attempt to convince readers to support France’s ban on head coverings. While some may argue that banning religious clothing infringes on Islamic law, Chesler points out that “many eloquent, equally educated Muslim religious… women insist that the Koran does not mandate that women cover their faces… Leading Islamic scholars agree with them.” In an appeal to logos, Chesler uses facts, gathered from educated Muslim women and Islamic scholars, to show that this argument is illogical because the burqa is not required. Chesler continues logos appeals by citing the Sheikh of al-Azhat University as saying “The niqab is tradition. It has no connection to religion.” This passage demonstrates ethos as well, but carries on the idea that burqas and niqabs are not required by Islamic law, making the ban perfectly logical. The idea is that, since these garments are not mandatory in the Koran’s broad requisite of “modest dress,” the ban does not infringe on religious rights, making the ban a logical choice. Chesler takes the argument one step further by insisting that the burqa is not only optional, it is detrimental to wearers. The argument that “it is a human rights violation and constitutes both a health hazard and is a form of torture” to women who wear burqa exhibits both logos and pathos. By pointing out that burqas are a possible “health hazard,” Chesler uses unappealing syntax to make readers believe that burqas are unhealthy and i...
For some women wearing a veil is not something that is forced on them but rather a choice of their own. Martha Nussbaum and Maysan Haydar are both authors that try to explain their reasoning that veiling isn't an oppressive tool used against women. Martha Nussbaum's article “Veiled Threats”, is a political and philosophical take on why banning the burqa is a violation of human rights. On the other hand Maysan Haydar’s article “Don’t Judge a Muslim Girl by Her Covering”, is a more humorous and personal take on why veiling shouldn't be as judged or stereotyped. Though Nussbaum and Haydar have equal goals this essay is being used to understand the main argument, claims and whether or not each article has any weaknesses.
State secularism (Laïcit鬬 in France) is rooted in principles put forward by Enlightenment thinkers like John Locke and Voltaire—state neutrality in order to ensure the right to freely express oneself and the right to religious freedom. Contemporary movements to ban the Islamic veil on the grounds of its symbolic value represent a perversion of the original intent of state secularism and infringe upon these basic rights. Our western perception of the veil as a universal symbol of oppression is based in a long history of orientalism (stereotyping),
The documentary “Young, Muslim, and French” brings attention to the islamophobia that is going on in France. In September 2004, the French government passed a law banning religious paraphernalia in schools, especially targeting head scarfs. The government claims this was a way to “end extremism”. The school system believes that there is no place for religion in school, and around the young in their formative years. The veil is an expression of their devotion to Islam, not a symbol of terrorism. Not wearing it contradicts their religion and even jeopardizes their place in heaven, and puts a great amount of stress on Muslim students. Which results in the French education failing to properly teach and support these students. Muslim students are thrown off the education path and often study to become electricians and other technical careers. Girls are forced to choose between practicing their faith and receiving an education.
No Prayer in Public Schools Chapter three of Civil Liberties: Opposing Viewpoints inspired me to research today’s issues of school prayer. To understand how we got to where we are today, I first delved into our country's history of court cases pertaining to rulings on prayer in schools. Lastly, to update my audience on how our lives are being affected today, I directed my efforts toward finding current situations. By analyzing these situations, I gained knowledge for a better understanding of why society needs to be aware of these controversies. I don’t think there should be any form of organized prayer in today’s public schools.
Muslims, Sikhs, and many other religious affiliations have often been targeted for hate crimes, racial slurs, and misfortunate events. We are all different in our own ways some are good and some are bad yet one event changes everything for everyone affiliated with the group. The book The Politics of the Veil by Joan Scott a renowned pioneer in gender studies gives a detailed and analytical book of about the French views towards the Muslim females in France during 2004. The author talks about why the French governments official embargo of wearing conspicuous signs is mainly towards the headscarves for Muslim girls under the age of eighteen in public schools. The main themes of book are gender inequality, sexism, and cultural inequality historical schools used in the book are history of below, woman’s history, cultural history, and political history. In this essay, I will talk about why Joan Scotts argument on why the French government’s ban on wearing conspicuous signs was
The author of this essay thinks it is ridiculous that women cannot wear their hijab in certain places around the world. Many people think the hijab is not necessary. However, it is part of what Muslim women believe. She explains in her essay, "So next time you hear about a hijab ban think about your best pair of jeans or your faded t-shirt with the logo of your favorite band" (Fakhraie 461). A hijab is just like every other piece of clothing that covers up the body. It can be part of their religion, or they can wear a hijab just because they like how it
Freedom of religion is a right that is granted to all citizens under the First Amendment of United States Constitution (U.S. Const. amend I). This gives individuals the freedom to express their religious views however they may please. Controversy arises when the topic of religion is brought up in schools. A great example scenario is when a student submits an assignment representing Jesus Christ when asked to come up with a paper and drawing of their hero. It is important to understand what rights students have when it comes to incorporating religion in their schoolwork. This paper will examine the legal issues regarding the grading and display of the assignment containing religious expression that is submitted by a student and how the First Amendment applies to classroom assignments in schools.
There are many different views towards Muslim choice of clothing especially wearing the veil. “I wear it believing it is necessary, but someone else can be wearing it believing that she is doing something extra” said Hamna Ahmed. One of the many reasons a Muslim can be wearing the veil are their own personal decisions too. Hamna has been wearing it for seven years now, despite her mother and three of her four sisters staying uncovered. Socially this causes an issue with the meaning of the veil and conflict with other groups. With many different consumptions of religion, what it means, what is considered to be practicing and what is not can lead to negative misunderstandings. Ultimately the decisions are up to the individuals although; there is likely to be misinterpretation between the meaningfulness of religion to family and society. On an even bigger scale of things this could also impact society and it...
International human rights standards protect the rights of persons to be able to choose what they wish to wear, and in particular to be able to manifest their religious belief. Thus, Human Rights Watch in their report, focusing on the hijab ban for state officials in Germany, said that: “Restrictions should only be implemented where fully justified by the state, and be the least restrictive necessary”.1 Proclamation of wearing the hijab in public institutions as illegal is undermining the autonomy of individuals, their right to choose, their right to privacy and intimacy, and their self-determination. In addition to this, several European countries such as Germany and France directly prevent women wearing hijab to work or attend school in the public state institutions, which further intensified already negative attitude of Western public towards wearing hijab.
The hijab is a very important and powerful Muslim symbol that is worn by billions of Muslim women all over the world. Many wear the hijab as a symbol of faith, while others wear it to protect themselves from society’s expectations of women. Some people think that banning the use of the hijab in public is a violation of freedom of religion and freedom of expression. However, others think the banning of the hijab is a necessary precaution. The wearing of the Muslim hijab should be banned in public because it is impractical, Muslims use it to separate themselves from society, and it is a security risk.
While students are attending public schools they should be aware of their religion options. The student should have the right to practice their religion as they please, just on the own time. Yes, religion plays a huge part in molding a person but, should be practiced when the time is available, not in a classroom setting. The government should have the ability to control the protection of the students that just want to learn. The capability to regulate the religious practices while attending public educational institutions should be left to the government. Faith, religion and belief, usually are three words that are used to describe one situation, although these words have three different meanings. To have faith in something or someone you must first believe in it and also accept it as well, but have a belief without evidence. Religion is a belief in a heavenly superhuman power or principle, such as the almighty or creator to all things. Everyone has faith and belief, but not all believers believe in the almighty. Allowing religion into public schools while everyone attending not having the same belief is unfair, unconstitutional and is complicated to teach to a verity of students.
To have prayer in the public school system is against the idea of separation of church and state. The state should not institute school prayer because the public schools are for education, not a place where religion should be taught (Gaylor, 1995, p. 1). The state should not force every child to say a prayer in the classroom because not everyone believes...
Davis, Derek H. “Reacting to France’s Ban: headscarves and other Religious Attire in American Public Schools.” Journal of Church and State. Spring 2004. EBSCO. Online. Feb 28 2010.
“Women’s rights in Islam” is great controversial topic going on nowadays. The world is colored with different cultures and religions. Most people come up with different thoughts for other religion’s people by just having one look on them. Veil is obsession for some people, whereas, being bald is freedom in some people’s point of view. There are lots of misconceptions about women’s rights in Islam among non muslims. If women are covering their body or if they like to stay at home, people think that they don’t have any freedom in this religion and women are obsessed. But this is not reality. A person cannot point out anything wrong and blame other’s religion just because of his own confusion. He needs to study thoroughly and then come up with opposing viewpoints. Therefore, the misconception about women’s rights in Islam should be removed because women have equal rights, veil is for their protection, and they have freedom of speech and expression.