My first inclination was to cheer “Way to go, France!” as Tommy did here. But then on the other hand I also had some second thoughts that if the woman chooses this life for herself, and keeps it to herself, is this fair to deny her citizenship based on extreme religious practices? Some would say yes, if there is a possible threat to the society in which the person wants to live but not assimilate. Many consider radical Islam a threat, as do I (just as I consider any other radical religious beliefs threatening to peace and well-being of a peace-loving society).
I have problems with the burqa or hijab in a free society because in the general public and schools, the veils makes it difficult to identify a person. The Amish dress funny and keep to themselves, but they do not disguise themselves so not to be recognized. Same for the whackadoo Mormon cult that has been in the news recently. These religious fantatics are already living here though, and citizens by birth. But what if they are coming from another country with such radical beliefs? Should we deny them citizenship on grounds of being extreme in their religious beliefs or if they are of cultures radically different from our own?
When a woman to is forced to submit to the oppression of her husband and male relatives, IMO that is absolutely not be acceptable. But, what if the woman chooses this sort of life for herself? Even though we object, should we have the right to intervene or discriminate if this is what she freely chooses this life for herself?
Chuck A sent me a link to Acharya S’s article France: “No Woman Enslavement Allowed”
Of course, we can expect to hear from those who believe that women should have the “right” to dress and live in this inhumane and oppressive manner. These “liberal” cries appear to be based entirely on the blatant bigotry which supposes that anything done in the name of religion - no matter how vile - is just peachy keen. If, however, a Western, non-Muslim woman were living in a totally submissive state and forced to cover herself from head to toe not in the name of religion, would not the same people be yelling for intervention, to help this woman free herself of her abusive husband and this patent imprisonment? The woman in this current story would be freed and sent to a domestic violence shelter, with protection from the law against her husband - if she were not imprisoned by so-called religious ideology.
What truly “religious” ideology is based on the mistreatment and enslavement of women? How can there possibly be any good, decent and merciful god behind such egregious abuse of human rights? Millions of women around the world are suffering horribly because of manmade cults seemingly designed specifically for the purpose of enslaving them - yet, where is the outcry from the “bleeding heart” segment of society? “Religion” is not an excuse and should never have been an excuse for the abuse of women and the denial of basic human rights. If one is truly a “bleeding heart” one will feel the pain of these women in their daily enslavement in the name of Islam - and one will demand an end to it NOW, no “ifs,” “ands” or “buts” about it. This enslavement of women is EVIL, period.
Fortunately, France has finally grown a backbone and made this moral decision that could open the door to ending this vile abuse in the name of God. No god who demands abusing women is worthy of the name or of any sort of worship. No ideology that believes women to be inferior or mere sexual objects in need of being enslaved and covered up should be deemed a “religion” and be given special status. Any such ideology must either change or die.
What is your opinion on this issue?