Bye bye, Britain

[a completely inoffensive name]

"the French are wont to "go to the barricades" over anything they don't like - which makes the country rather harder to govern than the UK." Agree. That makes things more difficult to a French Government to impose laws restraining freedom than in UK. You tell a British striker the strike is illegal he goes home, you tell a French he just will tell it will be one more thing to negotiate.

The definition of lip service is a Frenchman talking about liberty.

When was the negotiation on whether Muslims could dress according to their will? I am eager to read the transcript on that.

[Brenus]

“When was the negotiation on whether Muslims could dress according to their will? I am eager to read the transcript on that.” No problem:
1st, the hijab is not an Islamic clothing (this was confirm by the French Muslim Council) and it is not in the Koran.
2nd, you cannot wear what you want where you want, as you cannot be naked in the street, or wear a helmet when coming in a bank.
3rd: In France there is no “Communities”, so you don’t negotiate with specific groups but you vote in an elected Parliament the laws for all citizens.
Perhaps this concept is not familiar to you, it is called Democracy. It is not without flaws, but it works.
You did notice it was not muslin exodus after this law, so apparently, the Muslim “community” is happy with this law.

In term of ideology, you can agree that there is a second class citizen (women) in a religion and they have to wear specific clothing, and walk behind men, and not allowed to open their mouth. However, in France, in the constitution is not an opinion, it is an offence to be against equality in front of the law. And don’t give me the “they agree to wear a portable jail” thing. It is not because you had happy slaves that slavery is acceptable. Masochism is not a reason to accept torture (hey, they agree to be tortured…).

[a completely inoffensive name]

“When was the negotiation on whether Muslims could dress according to their will? I am eager to read the transcript on that.” No problem:
1st, the hijab is not an Islamic clothing (this was confirm by the French Muslim Council) and it is not in the Koran.
2nd, you cannot wear what you want where you want, as you cannot be naked in the street, or wear a helmet when coming in a bank.
3rd: In France there is no “Communities”, so you don’t negotiate with specific groups but you vote in an elected Parliament the laws for all citizens.
Perhaps this concept is not familiar to you, it is called Democracy. It is not without flaws, but it works.
You did notice it was not muslin exodus after this law, so apparently, the Muslim “community” is happy with this law.

In term of ideology, you can agree that there is a second class citizen (women) in a religion and they have to wear specific clothing, and walk behind men, and not allowed to open their mouth. However, in France, in the constitution is not an opinion, it is an offence to be against equality in front of the law. And don’t give me the “they agree to wear a portable jail” thing. It is not because you had happy slaves that slavery is acceptable. Masochism is not a reason to accept torture (hey, they agree to be tortured…).

You can't say that the hijab is not a piece of Islamic clothing in order to deflect the religious component and then admit later on that Islamic customs dictate that women have to wear specific clothing. The hijab might not be uniquely Islamic per se, but obviously it's part of the dress code for it (for women), which bounds it up in religious expression.

My response to #2 is....why not? I would be mad if nude beaches were banned, because it's a form of expression as with anything else and the only reasons to deny nudity as expression is sexual puritanism.

#3 made me laugh, and it's a fair enough point. However, when you say that there has been no "muslim exodus" that is disingenuous. They left their home country to live in the West in the first place, I don't think they would be willing to give up the French standard of living despite their wives not covering their face. Complacency isn't the same as being happy with an outcome.

As to how women are typically treated, I agree. They are treated as second class citizens under Islamic society (typically). However, the fact is that the wives are not second class citizens under French law and it is up to them to decide to have such standards practiced at home. Here in the US, we don't make hate speech illegal because although it promotes a view of inequality, it is antithetical to liberty for government to pick "the right" opinion. You undermine the French Constitution's goal of equality when you single out and punish those who have a different opinion from the Constitution.

[Kagemusha]

The definition of lip service is a Frenchman talking about liberty.

When was the negotiation on whether Muslims could dress according to their will? I am eager to read the transcript on that.

And with this day and time why should an American comment about anything concerning liberty if we walk down that road? With passing of Patriot act you have pretty much given the finger for liberty in order to enhance security.

[a completely inoffensive name]

And with this day and time why should an American comment about anything concerning liberty if we walk down that road? With passing of Patriot act you have pretty much given the finger for liberty in order to enhance security.

And I completely agree with you. Doesn't detract from my original statement. Lots of disappointment all around.

[Brenus]

“You can't say that the hijab is not a piece of Islamic clothing in order to deflect the religious component and then admit later on that Islamic customs dictate that women have to wear specific clothing. The hijab might not be uniquely Islamic per se, but obviously it's part of the dress code for it (for women), which bounds it up in religious expression.”
I can. Hijab, according to the Doctors of the Islamic Faith in France, is not a part of a religious obligation. So, you can’t say it is part of a Religious Obligation (note that in France this wouldn’t be a valid point as we have a law separating State and Religions: we don’t swear oaths on a “holly” books in Court, we don’t pray in schools, uniforms are uniforms etc.) to put it on. So it is a political statement of a stream that promotes inequality in gender, inequality between religions and openly calls to slaughter the pagans (where Jews and Christians become dhimmis, or slaves, as you choose to translate it). This particular dress is design to highlight (at the moment) a practice of Islam that is against the values of the Republic, encourages segregation. In doing this these extremists break the law, so their symbols and flags can be banned, as Nazi symbols are. It might surprise you, but it is illegal in France to wear a Nazi Uniform (a part for Films and others entertainment as historical reconstructions).

“is....why not?” Not the subject. You are saying that clothing is up to individuals and I am showing you that it is not, and that each society has its own codes and habits. So, in most of the countries, you are not allowed to walk naked, painted in red or not, in front of a school or in public spaces. So, why the hijab should be exempt of it?

“Complacency isn't the same as being happy with an outcome.” I think you don’t understand. They are happy with the law. The girls are happy that the State protects them from the abuses of the extremists and to be able to wear really what they want (not big black bags). The men are happy that they can drink, eat and smoke and looking the girls without a big black bag during the Ramadan, without being subject to insult and threats. I had a lot of Muslim friends when in University (not all from France). Yes, this law is a protection from the extremists abuses, not a restrain of freedom, how to get freedom. A county where a Muslim can be atheist, THE dream comes true for most of them, no “community leaders” but a real and individual choice.

[Tuuvi]

Are we talking about the burqa or the hijab? Banning the burqa I can understand. The hijab not so much.

[Brenus]

Burqa. Veil on hairs were never a problem...

[Seamus Fermanagh]

““Complacency isn't the same as being happy with an outcome.” I think you don’t understand. They are happy with the law. The girls are happy that the State protects them from the abuses of the extremists and to be able to wear really what they want (not big black bags). The men are happy that they can drink, eat and smoke and looking the girls without a big black bag during the Ramadan, without being subject to insult and threats. I had a lot of Muslim friends when in University (not all from France). Yes, this law is a protection from the extremists abuses, not a restrain of freedom, how to get freedom. A county where a Muslim can be atheist, THE dream comes true for most of them, no “community leaders” but a real and individual choice.

This is, actually, a profound statement regarding culture and human freedom.

[a completely inoffensive name]

“Complacency isn't the same as being happy with an outcome.” I think you don’t understand. They are happy with the law. The girls are happy that the State protects them from the abuses of the extremists and to be able to wear really what they want (not big black bags). The men are happy that they can drink, eat and smoke and looking the girls without a big black bag during the Ramadan, without being subject to insult and threats. I had a lot of Muslim friends when in University (not all from France). Yes, this law is a protection from the extremists abuses, not a restrain of freedom, how to get freedom. A county where a Muslim can be atheist, THE dream comes true for most of them, no “community leaders” but a real and individual choice.

The poor in the US are unhealthy because the cheapest food is the most unhealthy. We should make them happy and liberate them from this socio-economic tyranny by banning junk food.

Those muslims could have done everything you have pointed out without a ban on type of clothing, they just choose not to because they are too afraid to challenge their parents culture. You have taken away their individual responsibility to demand better conditions for women in Islamic culture and instead have allowed nanny France to become the scape goat. Of course you have made lot of Muslims happy, you have given them an excuse to tell their relatives back home and have killed any chance of a real cultural upheaval among the Islamic world. They are not moderate muslims by choice but by law.

[Brenus]

“Those muslims could have done everything you have pointed out without a ban on type of clothing, they just choose not to because they are too afraid to challenge their parents culture.”
You still don’t get it. It is not part of the “Muslim” culture, or from the Maghrebian Culture… You are probably aware that the other side of the Mediterranean Sea was part of the French second Colonial Empire, and that Algeria was even considered as part of France (department) before its independence. So, the French have really, really, a good idea of what is genuine cultural clothing and a political statement. The parents of those “too afraid” were French, or under French rules. Their parents choose to come to France for a better life (some just after having fighting France for Independence) and knew what France is. If they came, it was as well to enjoy the French way of life as they knew it and the freedom from Religious totalitarism.
In the 80’-90’s it was even to escape from death from it, when some Algerian Former Independence Fighters (females mostly but not exclusively) came to find shelter in a Country they fought years ago.

You still think that the burquas’ wearers are the expression on Islam. They are the terror of Islam. They are the fascist of Islam. They want (and partially succeeded before the law) to impose their Islam to some parts of the French Territory by fear and intimidation (and rapes). Now, they can’t. We have taken back from them the right for individual to wear and to do what they want. And, again, there were NO big demonstration of the “Muslims” in France against this law. Few individuals got in trouble in order to challenge the law, failed, paid the fine, and done.
Burquas are the uniform by which the Muslim Extremists want to send a message: submit to our view of inequality, racism and discrimination.
The French law against Burqua just tell them: No, we won’t. You will not subject the French Muslim to terror; you will not part the French Population following Religious Borders.

[a completely inoffensive name]

Hmmm. Well, while I still disagree with the method, obviously there is a lot I don't know about France's relationship with it's former territories. I guess it ultimately comes down to the results, which have been positive. So I will think about what you have said some more and reevaluate my position.