veiled references

[winterbadger]

I 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.

Comments

[flyingwolf.livejournal.com]

Yes, it's a sign of separation, but so are a lot of things. Nothing wrong with signs of sparation (except when they are violence related - i.e. gang colors.

MP Straw - what's the point of meeting with someone if you can't see facial expression or often even have eye contact. If he takes phone calls instead fine. There are safety issues involved.

They should be required to identify themselves to police - would be a great costume otherwise to hid in. (maybe there should be some kind of accomidations.. but I'm not sure if techology is up to that in areas where this is more of an issue.

Teachers - depends. I can see their point about teaching young children a different language. See the person's mouth could help the kids with pronunciation. If they are teaching kids that arn't used to that garb then it could be scarey to the kids.
but for a lot of other things, it shouldn't matter.