Australian MP backs headscarf ban

Locke

Active member
Taken from The Age Online

Liberal backbencher Bronwyn Bishop has backed a push to ban Muslim girls from wearing headscarves at public schools, describing their use as an iconic act of defiance.

Ms Bishop backed the view of outspoken Liberal MP Sophie Panopoulos, who last week said she was concerned about Muslim women not showing their faces when they posed for photographic identification.

Ms Bishop today said the issue had been forced upon Australia, which was experiencing a clash of cultures.

"In an ideal society you don't ban anything," she told the Seven Network.

"But this has really been forced on us because what we're really seeing in our country is a clash of cultures and indeed, the headscarf is being used as a sort of iconic item of defiance," she told Channel Seven.

"I'm talking about in state schools. If people are in Islamic schools and that's their uniform, that's fine. In private life, that's fine."

But Muslim Women's Association president Maha Krayem Abdo said such a ban was dangerous, and that girls should be free to follow their religious beliefs at any Australian school.
AdvertisementAdvertisement

She agreed that in an ideal society nothing would be banned and said Australia had a leadership role to play on such issues.

"I think it's so dangerous to go down that path if we think ... that in an ideal society we would not ban anything," she said.

"And I think Australia takes on a leadership role in the world, that it is a fair-go society.

"I don't see anything contravening that fair go and equality that Australia strives for - so the hijab, no way would it in any shape or form, contravene that."

Ms Krayem Abdo said she found it difficult to comprehend the government's stated support for the freedom of Iraq, yet Ms Bishop's proposition was to prevent Australian Muslims from exercising freedom of religious rights.

Last year France's parliament voted overwhelmingly to outlaw the wearing of Islamic headscarves in state schools, although concerns remain over whether that decision merely deepened divisions within French society.

Education Minister Brendan Nelson said last week that he did not support a ban on headscarves.

The Australian Democrats leader Senator Lyn Allison said a push to ban Muslim girls from wearing headscarves at state schools was "deliberately divisive".

Senator Allison said Ms Bishop's comments encouraged religious and cultural separation.

"I think BB is being deliberately divisive. I think that it is insensitive that young women for religious reasons who chose to wear a headscarf are somehow provoking a response from others," she said.

"It seems to me that by saying that young people who go to state schools wish to wear a head scarf they can't but they can wear a head scarf if they go to a religious school.

"What that says is that we want to be separated. It doesn't say we want integration and that we want to improve relations between cultural groups and religious groups.

"It says if you are religious, you should go to a religious school.

"I would argue that it's time to examine, not that they are wearing headscarf or not, but examine whether the curriculum is the same, whether girls are being given the same opportunities as boys in those schools."

i know france has a ban like the one and i would hate to see the same thing introduced here. i would like to think we were more accepting and multicultural than that. its a sad state of affairs. the news has been reporting about the problem with the Muslim community and how there needs to be more understanding between muslims and "australians", whatever that means. basically its small minded journos trying to create a rift by picking on the whole religion issue. i mean, its like you can be australian, or you can be muslim, but they wont let you be an australian muslim. but no comment is ever made about being catholic and australian. and why is that, because they have been here for longer? i dont think so? is it because there are any less problems with people of that religion in the world? no, look at how Ireland with the IRA
narrowmindedness, it will be the end of us all
 
easy...ban pupils in state schools from wearing ANY and ALL forms of religous symbols, headscarves...crosses...star of david etc etc


make it fair (or unfair) on everyone
 
Thats exactly the way it is here in France.

They called it a 'headscarf ban', but in fact it banned all religous items in schools such as exposed crosses (smaller ones out of sight are OK) Jewish skullcap, muslim headwear. So it doesnt just pick on muslims. Intergration in the public sector is law here.

Oh one last thing. Since the law went into effect things are quiet here. The law is mostly obeyed and havent been any further demonstrations.
 
Hi,

:?

young-sikh-boy.jpg


:shock:


Peace
-=SF_13=-
 
They called it a 'headscarf ban', but in fact it banned all religous items in schools such as exposed crosses (smaller ones out of sight are OK) Jewish skullcap, muslim headwear. So it doesnt just pick on muslims. Intergration in the public sector is law here.

I think theres a big diffrence between covering your face to the point of being unrecognizable and wearing a cross around your kneck. All hell will break loose if we try to say students cant wear crosses here in America.
 
Actually I support the idea of banning overt religious symbols in schools for a number of reasons:

First, and I know there has been some discussion on this forum about the separation of church and state, I think that state schools fall into this category. They are meant to be secular schools and the only significant display of a person's religion appears to be muslim women's headscarves. (Generally, people wearing a cross around their neck tends to be covered &/or discreet.) One of the reasons that we have school uniforms is that it helps to promote egalitarianism within a school year - there is a sameness or equality about each student that attends the school. In addition, there is a vast number of parents who send their children to state schools because of their secularism.

Second, there is a big difference between multi-culturalism and religious orthodoxy. Multi-culturalism is the celebration and acceptance of people's heritage and national culture - but not necessarily their religious customs. If that were so, then we might accept vaginal circumcision for girls, the cutting off of a thief's hand or burning heretics at the stake. OK they are extreme examples but at least two of them are commonly practiced in other parts of the world.

Third, the state allows for schools that wish to practice orthodox teachings (provided that the curriculum does not include some of the radical hate teachings we have heard about recently). If parents feel strongly about their children wearing a headscarf, skullcap or whatnot, then there are schools that cater for them. It's the parents responsibility to choose the school for their children, and not the state's obligation to mould schools according to the wishes of a minority.

Finally, we have had more controversy over the flying of our nation's flag and singing the national anthem at state schools. It seems a lot of people felt this was inappropriate - and I still don't get why. We even banned Xmas pageants but it seems the same people who were behind that seem to feel that banning headscarves is over the top. Hypocrisy at its worst if you ask me.
 
Rabs said:
They called it a 'headscarf ban', but in fact it banned all religous items in schools such as exposed crosses (smaller ones out of sight are OK) Jewish skullcap, muslim headwear. So it doesnt just pick on muslims. Intergration in the public sector is law here.

I think theres a big diffrence between covering your face to the point of being unrecognizable and wearing a cross around your kneck. All hell will break loose if we try to say students cant wear crosses here in America.

we aren't talking about full facial scarves here....we're a talking about the normal headscarves that are much more common. i'm just saying that if you are going to ban one form of religious symbol....ban them all.

i wasn't aware that that was exactly what france had done....good on them it makes sense

of course people would get rowdy if they were told they couldn't wear a cross...why is it strange/not OK for muslims to get upset when they're told a symbol of their religion is not ok?
 
I was under the confusion that it was a full head scarf and stuff were you couldt tell who the person was. But in the case of banning head scarfs that dont cover the face, thats pointless and then banning the rest of relgeious symbols...sigh.
 
I feel very uneasy about the idea in general. I don't see how religion and culture are so wildly different from each other. I just don't know....
 
Rabs said:
I was under the confusion that it was a full head scarf and stuff were you couldt tell who the person was. But in the case of banning head scarfs that dont cover the face, thats pointless and then banning the rest of relgeious symbols...sigh.

well i speak from my own experience...most muslims here in NZ are from malaysia and pakistan...ie more moderate places. not EVERY interpration of islam requires burka.

the main point is headscarves is modesty

The Qur'anic verses which address the interaction of men and women in the social context include:

"Tell the believing men to lower their gaze and to be mindful of their chastity: this will be most conducive to their purity - (and,) verily, God is aware of all that they do. And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and to be mindful of their chastity, and not to display their charms (in public) beyond what may (decently) be apparent thereof; hence let them draw their head-coverings over their bosoms.(24:30-31)"
and

"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters, as well as all (other) believing women, that they should draw over themselves some of their outer garments (when in public): this will be more conducive to their being recognized (as decent women) and not annoyed.(33:59)"

The emphasis in the Quran and the Sunnah is thus not on total segregation but on minimizing factors that promote physical attractiveness or may lead to the unlawful. Thus Islam requires believers to:

Treat one another with respect at all times in all situations.
Behave modestly.
Avoid situations of seclusion (khalwa).
Dress modestly (by covering ones body and (for females) hair).

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_segregation#Segregation_of_the_Sexes_in_Islam


The Qur'an also places a dress code upon its followers. For women, it emphasizes modesty. Allah says in the Qur'an, "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and guard their private parts and not to display their adornment (interpreted as the hair and body-shape) except that which ordinarily appears thereof (interpreted as the face and hands) and to draw their headcovers over their chests and not to display their adornment except to their husbands, their fathers, their husbands fathers, their sons, . . . ." (24:31).

All those in whose presence a woman is not obliged to practice the dress code are known to be her mahrams. Men have a dress code which is more relaxed: the loins must be covered from knee to waist. The rationale given for these rules is that men and women are not to be viewed as sexual objects.

Turkey and Tunisia, though predominantly Muslim, have laws against these dress codes in schools and work places. After Ataturk's declaration of the Republic in 1923, a European dress code was encouraged. It is against the law to attend class or parliament with a head scarf in Turkey.

In practice, society dictates what women are allowed to wear in many culturally Islamic countries. Infringement of these rules in some Muslim nations may result in beatings. Some view Islamic women as being oppressed by the men in their communities because of the required dress codes. However, in more moderate nations, where these dress codes are not obligatory, there are still many Muslim women who practice it, where most of them choose to follow it because they believe it is the will of Allah. One of the garments women are required to wear is the hijab (of which the headscarf is one component). The word hijab is derived from the Arabic word hajaba which means 'to hide from sight or view', 'to conceal'. Hijab means to cover the head as well as the body.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women_in_Islam#Dress_codes


hope this helps
 
*SIGH* call me narrow minded very narrow minded but i think they should ban this muslim headscarf in christian countries
 
Hey Chewie, its not like me to quote the bible but here's something interesting in 1 Corithians 14.

Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak; but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church.

Sounds pretty archaic today...

When Vatican II came in (for the Catholic church), plenty of nuns refused to stop wearing the full habit and I bet some women were horrified when other women began doing the readings in church.

The headscarf is a religious symbol but also a symbol of oppression. As mentioned, many women, even in western society, are forced to wear the headscarf by fathers, brothers, husbands or boyfriends. Is that out of fear or true choice. Some women do choose to wear it, which is up them, but just becuase something is written in the Bible, Koran or Torah does not mean that it must be taken at its most literal sense (although I'm sure a lot of fundamentalists may disagree). By making the headscarf more optional in society, perhaps society provides muslim women more freedom to choose, without fear, what their religious identity is.

btw - I also think that there is a very strong connection between the burka and the headscarf - only women have to wear them!!!
 
If i wans't allowed to wear a baseball cap at school girls shouldn't be allowed to wear head scarfs.

On a more serious note, the comparison between head scarfs and chains with a cross is stupid. If i wore a big hat that said i love jesus it would be different. Or if i tattooed it on my forehead.
 
chewie_nz said:
easy...ban pupils in state schools from wearing ANY and ALL forms of religous symbols, headscarves...crosses...star of david etc etc


make it fair (or unfair) on everyone

I hear you Chewie!

I also support that MP! Good Work! ban all religious symbols once and forever!
 
Actully Ms Bishop wants to only ban Musilm Headcrafs. Apparently showing other religious symbols, present a different message.
This women went on TV, to say to a Muslim women, that she shouldn't wear her headscraf. Said it practically to her face, and the women was clearly offended deeply. But Ms Bishop had the courage to say it to her over a video link.
It's great to offer muslim "freedom" and that, but it's another thing to sit in the same room as one.
 
if they are going to ban the hajib, then they should ban all religious symbols. i think the most equal thing is making Nuns give up thier habits,as this is exactly the same sort of thing.
good to see that the idea was shot down by other Pollies tho
 
Rabs said:
They called it a 'headscarf ban', but in fact it banned all religous items in schools such as exposed crosses (smaller ones out of sight are OK) Jewish skullcap, muslim headwear. So it doesnt just pick on muslims. Intergration in the public sector is law here.

I think theres a big diffrence between covering your face to the point of being unrecognizable and wearing a cross around your kneck. All hell will break loose if we try to say students cant wear crosses here in America.

1. The ban only applies to public schools in France, anywhere else religous symbols are permitted. France like the US, support freedom of religon.

2. Thats a major difference between France and the USA. Secularism and Intergration are law. You are not permitted to create a community within a community such as in the UK (as someone said last week the UK are beginning to adopt the French system). This sounds harsh, but the reality is unlike the USA European countries have throngs of immigrants from the ME, Africa, Asia who are not that far away trying to get in. if we didnt have this intergration policy it would be French culture that would be washed away. That thought frightens people here.
 
Although in Muslim places like Egypt it is an offence for Christians to repair their churches; and in Saudi Arabia it is an offence to wear a cross in public; and in west Papua New Guinea it is an offence for a Christian to breath, I do not believe Muslim head-scarffes should be banned. Religious freedom for all. :angel:
 
Yeah right unless it's justified by security and identification reasons. I don't agree with the French ban law at all.
 
It is my opinion that if this is a religious thing then yes, it should be banned from schools. People are saying that the word "God" and all that it implies should be removed from schools. Religious holidays should not be celebrated in schools etc etc. If this is to be called a part of their religion then it has no place in a public school since most of the rest of any "christian" based religion is oppressed in schools.

If it is a part of their culture rather than religion, they need to be reminded that they are in a different country that does not have those same cultural values. Emphasis being placed on the identification aspect rather than cultural or religious persecution makes it a fair practice in my opinion.

Now let us take into consideration a dress code, if there is to be no headwear worn indoors then the "head scarf" should not be worn indoors.

Any way you slice it or dice it, it all comes down to how you view the topic. I for am all for banning anything that hides someone's face or facial expressions in a public school or on identification papers. I am all for banning headwear indoors in public schools. I am against someone defying a law or a rule on the basis of religious or cultural freedoms just because they feel they should be an exception.
 
Back
Top