veiled references
Nov. 1st, 2006 01:01 pmI caught the beginning of the Diane Rehm Show this morning, but didn't hear the bulk of it. Her first segement was on the wearing by Muslim women of the full-face veil (the niqab, cf. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Niqab) in Western countries and Western reaction to it, particularly in light of controversies arising in the UK and US over non-Mulsims' perceptions and reactions to it.
I have somewhat mixed feelings about the issues involved; I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts. Do you feel the suggestion by MP Jack Straw that constituents visiting his office remove their niqab to be reasonable or unreasonable? Do you think that the PM was wrong to say that the veil is a sign of separation? Do you believe that niqabis ought not to be required to bare their face to teach, or to identify themselves to police?
I'll use my Pakistan icon, as it's the only Islamic one I have.
I have somewhat mixed feelings about the issues involved; I'd be interested to hear other people's thoughts. Do you feel the suggestion by MP Jack Straw that constituents visiting his office remove their niqab to be reasonable or unreasonable? Do you think that the PM was wrong to say that the veil is a sign of separation? Do you believe that niqabis ought not to be required to bare their face to teach, or to identify themselves to police?
I'll use my Pakistan icon, as it's the only Islamic one I have.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-01 06:13 pm (UTC)http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/23/AR2006102300976.html
I believe that the veil is a sign of separation - though I have no issue with someone choosing to do so. I do believe that niqabis remove their veils to teach. Why would you separate from those you are attempting to connect with to teach? And yes, I do believe they should have to unveil for the police.
no subject
Date: 2006-11-01 06:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-11-01 06:57 pm (UTC)