Religious Symbols and U.K. Response
This is an excerpt from the paper...
In early 2004, the government of France adopted a law prohibiting from public schools any clothing which would clearly indicate the religious affiliation of a pupil. While John R. Bowen (1) states that the law was "worded in a religion-neutral way, everyone understood the law to be aimed at keeping Muslim girls from wearing headscarves in schools." As the law was being debated in public hearings, media coverage of the issue indicated that there were grave dangers to French society and its tradition of secularism presented by Islamic radicalism, a trend toward consumerism, and the oppression of women in poor suburbs. Bowen (1) commented that while some Muslims "objected that the proposed law would violate their right to express religious beliefs and many observers doubted that a law banning scarves would seriously address the severe problems of integration in French society," the Stasi Commission and the French parliament which considered the law, voted with virtual unanimity for it and the measure was passed by large majorities in the National Assembly and the Senate, going into effect in September 2004 (Bowen, 1). The impact of this legislation was both immediate and significant. Bernhard Schmid (1) stated that for almost two decades, the French government had struggled to articulate a policy on the wearing of clothing or other outward symbols identifying the religious affiliation of its country's students. The headscarf worn by Muslim girls may well have been the
. . .
n organization known as the Assembly for the Protection of Hijab which holds that the right to wear the headscarf is a fundamental aspect of religious freedom.
Other reactions from prominent groups within the United Kingdom were described by John-Henry Westen (1), who said that the United Kingdom Evangelical Alliance views the French headscarf law as encroaching on religious freedom. This organization believes the French law restricts basic human freedoms and calls for Christian resistance to this and similar laws. Evangelical Christians recognize, according to Westen (1-2), that it is a short and slippery slope from banning one group's religious symbol to banning religious symbols worn by other groups. Should such a ban occur in the United Kingdom, it seems readily apparent that there would be strong opposition to such a move.
John Henley (1), writing from France before the headscarf law was passed, asserted that many people who supported the law view the hijab as a political symbol and not solely a religious one. Given the tensions that have developed in recent years between Muslims and European governments, the French law could be conceived of as an effort to diminish those tensions. Nevertheless, Henley (1) comme
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
United Kingdom, British Muslims, Headscarf Ban, House Lords, John Bowen, Christians Choudhury, Affaire Foulard, Muslim Headscarves, Muslim Asian, Bernhard Schmid, public schools, united kingdom, french law, online march, accessed online, accessed online march, muslim girls, online march 25, march 25, march 25 2008, 25 2008, headscarf ban, religious symbols, 25 2008 anonymous, q&a muslim headscarves,
Approximate Word count = 2681
Approximate Pages = 11 (250 words per page)
More Essays on Religious Symbols and U.K. Response
|
Customer Service
to Over
32,000 Professionally Written Papers!!!
