Covering the body is an instruction in Islam but not the face, hands and feet. I have no problem with the hijab but the rest are forced on women to keep them invisible although many are so socialised that they see it as a choice.

My view is that, if they want to live in Europe, they make a choice to join the society. If they want to wear full body covering, then live in an Islamic country.

i wish 2 b always grate.

the point is one of anonymity in the streets

we mistrust hoodies and balaclavas - the burqa of hiqab allow citizens absolute invisibility

i'm caught on cctv hundreds of times a day and could be identified that way - but citizens who hide their faces? we unfortunately live in a world of mistrust

it won't be long before the burqa bomber strikes

wat is tis all about????
cmeon...i dnt understand y the french govt. or al these non muslims bothered about niqaab and hijab?
In christianity,u have the nuns wearing a kind f dress which is very similar to a muslim women's dress...n they r considerd to be pious n v muslims hu wear hijab' the oppressd'????WHY IS IT SO????IN ISLAM,EVERY GIRL HAS A VALUE EQUAL TO A NUN.
tis shows that ppl want 2 insult islam in whichever they can...this all has been given in quran long back that a muslim wil have 2 strive to live lyk a muslim n it seems so. As TIMMY said, women are given full freedom to walk around naked n if they cover, its the 'OPPRESSION'!!!!! i dont uundrstand wher s tis crazy world goin 2????

Allah will show His power in different ways...we humans r not big enuf to overtake His comments and orders. If he has askd us to wear hijab, u have 2 observe it. and Allah will show to thos who went against it. For eg: The french govt. banned the use of niqaab by women. And soon after tis law was passed, there came the H1N1/SWINE FLU.Then evn non-muslims and evry1 strted 2 cover their face!!!!so ppl, thinkk..think...think....this is a kind f answer from Allah.Allah has said:To those who search for truth, there are truths in the nature. Truth always stands out from error.

n being a muslim gal,i dnt feel ny oppression wearing the hijab...in fact im very very happy and glad tht im observing it.Believe me, the protection i get by wearing it is unexplainable.
and smeo1 above said that all men are not sex-mad that y women r so scared......that question seems so funny to me....nt all bt atleaast sme f them wd b ter, n v do nt kno which all wud b tat amng the lot. n moreover, if gals dnt remain on their guard, by wearing immodest dress and all tat, evn a decent guy wud b sex-mad......!!!!

but i dnt understand y ppl r so bothered about tis burqa???no women is ever forced 2 wear it....its by her own will n desire....so plsssss.......
MAY THE TRUTH WIN...AMEEN.....

Hello everybody!
Spring has come at last.
With it all the juices of Nature are going up & up in all living things, from trees to cats & dogs & human beings.
For this reason I suggest that everybody -men as well as women- should wear the burqa/niqab; this would protect the poor women from men, those awful predators as we all know...

But how do those burqa advocates (for women) know that we -women- can be trusted to control our sexual urges?
When I see a man sporting one of these marvellously unkempt beards spread on his chest I can't help getting my knickers in a twist & I have a hard job stopping myself from raping the poor soul.
Because if a woman's hair or a woman's face is such a powerful sexual sign that it can turn a perfectly innocent man into a rapist, why do these fanatical salafist theologians can't imagine that a beard -a very powerful sexual masculine sign- can't do the same for us, women?
Or why can men flaunt their number 1 sexual sign -long dirty unkempt beards- in the public sphere while women can't do the same, can't even show their faces?
Religion is no reason at all for such flagrant discrimination, nor is culture, traditions, whatever.

When a human being is in front of a bizarre tradition (only among some particularly patriarchal reactionary fanatical Muslim sects is woman considered unworthy of being seen in the public sphere) the duty of said human being is to examine this tradition with the help of his/her reason to see whether it can be accepted or not.
If the tradition of the burqa/niqab is examined that way, it can go only one way: down the drain.

Islam asserts equal rights for muslim women....let see.DOES SHE HAVE THE RIGHT TO CONTROL HER OWN BODY?

Muhammad said: "If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning" (Bukhari 4.54.460).

He also said: "By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel's saddle" (Ibn Majah 1854).

Under Shariah a women is obligated to satisfy her husband’s sexual demands: “It is obligatory for a wife to obey her husband as is customary in allowing him full lawful [there are times when Shariah prohibits marital sex—e.g., relating to menstrual cycle] sexual enjoyment of her person.” (See, e.g., Reliance of the Traveler, Marriage, m10.12 and commentary from Jordanian Mufti, Sheikh Nuh ali Salman, at N(3).)
An obligation or wajib is the highest order or rubric of affirmative Shariah dictate (there are the less affirmative duties, which fall under the category of ‘praiseworthy’ and the Shariah-neutral rubric of ‘permissive’ as well as the prohibitive rubrics of ‘forbidden’ and ‘disliked/abhorred’). Insofar as the woman has a wajib/obligation to satisfy her husband, the resulting ruling follows per Shariah’s fiqh (jurisprudential rules): a wife is “rebellious” if she refuses her husband’s sexual demands (because she refuses to comply with a wajib) if she if physically able and there are no Shariah-based impediments. The next step in the Shariah rulings also flows logically from the antecedent ruling that a wife must obey her husband even to the point that a wife may leave the home only with the husband’s permission (Reliance, Marriage, m.10.3-10.4). Finally, Shariah’s fiqh combines the two concepts (the wife’s wajib and the man’s control over her) into one by providing a husband some leeway if not encouragement to beat his “rebellious wife” to bring her into compliance (note that neither the husband nor court may force a wife to “service” her husband through cooking and cleaning; only SEX is obligatory). (Reliance, Marriage, m.10.12 (commentary N [Jordanian Mufti Nuh] (4)(c)))
In fact that there is no explicit source in Shariah for “permitting” a husband to force sex on his wife (at least not one I can find—although there are some individual fatawa [Shariah rulings from individual imams] that permit it—but there is nothing approaching ijma or consensus so these fatawa are just individual rulings that the Shariah faithful can accept or not). However, it is clear that there is no penalty for it which of course is the source of authority for the fatawa I have seen permitting marital rape.
Bottom line, there is no penalty for marital rape. (The IOL answer is presented as a “good Shariah marriage should never come to this” but in truth the answer remains, NO. A man cannot be punished for raping or otherwise sexually assaulting his wife as long as it is “permissible sex” under Shariah [e.g., not during menses].)
Shariah permits a husband to beat his wife and even to rape her with impunity.

One more question:
Why is discrimination acceptable when it is done in the name of religion or culture?
Conversely: why did not this principle (the supreme importance of culture/religion over everything else)did not apply to slavery? why don't our good souls always ready to vindicate the worst fanatical islamists & burqa-promoters cry over the way the culture & traditions of the slave-owners were stamped out?
Oppressing women is good as long as it is done in the name of religion/culture? Is that the supreme principle of the British left?

Wear a clown suit for all I care, people should have a right to wear what they want, with the exception of their birthday suit, of course :P...just wish everyone with a religious streak could just shut up about their stupid superstitions and stop confusing it with their culture- that goes for ALL religions.

No more fat days, bad hair days, bad face days.... wear your pjamas underneath if one does not feel the need to put clothes on underneath...

why are women being discriminated against because they want to cover themselves up? i can list so many girls, i can't count on one hand that should take a leaf out of the beautiful and moral islamic women and COVER UP! why not keep some mystery from a man? no one reads a whole book in the bookstore then buys the book to take home!

Cloth Coffins - ban em.

Great!
I totally agree with Roxy. She does have the true knowledge of the distinction between the three terms. Also, that the airport security system is strong enough to avoid such niqabs.
Then again sh is right about personal freedom and the proverb,"live and let live"

First I do not hate Islam, & I have nothing against the hidjab (Islamic scarf whereby the face is shown).
I am against radical Islam & it is the people practicing this kind of fanatical islam that insist on covering their women's faces; this is the kind of islam that comes straight from Saudi Arabia, the puritan, woman-hating, wahhabite sort of islam that imams educated, sent & paid by Saudi Arabia want to introduce & spread in Europe.

A very nice lady said to me "think"; well I'm returning the compliment: why can't she "think" about the meaning of hiding one's face from other people's view? Is it only because 'god" told me to? The truth was explained in many posts, but she refuses to "think", she believes that one has got to be "nice" with everybody, fanatics included, & god will sort out the good from the bad.

In France there are many women of Arab origin who are extremely afraid of the importance & power taken by these radical islamists,& they do fight against them alongside women like me, & they urge the left & even the gvt to roll back the progression of these fanatics - by banning all kinds of face-covering garments, to begin with.

Recently in Paris an Algerian woman who had written a play criticising islam & the patriarchal way of life that still exists in Algeria was attacked by a bearded fanatic who tried to burn her alive, she got away unscathed but she was also insulted with nice words like "apostate", "miscreant" & "whore". It is this type of fanatics that want their women covered from head to foot, face included, mainstream muslims never exacted it. We never saw that in France until radical imams from Saudi Arabia started colonizing the muslim communities.
I think the Wahhabite kind of islam is very dangerous because it preaches a religion that is in fundamental contradiction with everything we, the progressives, have been fighting for since the Enlightenment, like equality between men & women, which entails a society in which said men & women can mix freely without getting death threats or acid thrown into their faces; and the fights of the French progressives is at the root of a society in which freedom from religion is as important as freedom of religion. Can you imagine this in wahhabite Saudi Arabia? The radical imams who come from this country don't hide their contempt, even their hate, for all the democratic values of Europe.
I feel quite comfortable with mainstream islam (hidjab included) but wahhabism & its demands (niqab/burqa)has no place in France.

I don't believe in bending over backwards to accomodate any silly idea that claims to be "religious",
one should use one's head even in front of vociferous clerics, whatever the religion, by the way...
Clerics of all religion are often wrong, & often exact unreasonable behaviour from the faithful.

ban it.....all i hear is men telling others what it stand for, and if another idiot tell me when Sharia law takes over, I'll bloody laugh out loud.

And another thing: I do not hate anybody, I'm just trying to argue a point. Reasoning is not the same as hating. I'm trying to show that the arguments of the niqab/burqa wearers/promoters don't hold water; the trouble with all religious arguments is that none holds water & I suppose that's why the "tolerance" brigade is so stressed when somebody refuses the "god told me to" umbrella & tries to analyze & -let's use the word- deconstruct the religious arguments used by theologians & clerics to justify the unjustifiable.
And persuading/forcing women to hide their faces & look like indistinguishable ghosts when men don't have to & can flaunt their faces & even their long dirty unkempt beards (a very powerful sexual sign if ever there was one), well, this attitude is totally unjustifiable when you look at it rationally.
The only argument of the "tolerance" brigade is "this is religion, so shut up"; I won't.
Soon they'll demand a blasphemy law like in Ireland!

"melies when something is done to show disrespect to someones beliefs and traditions then it does become painful" this wonderful argument should have been used to protect the beliefs & traditions of the slave-owners...

we really need to sort this one out because it will be useful when we forcibly convert Mecca and Medina to a multicultural UN. platform

Whoops! Last sentence to read:
"I dont understand why the same standard of liberation should not apply to all women everywhere"

Sorry for confusion!

French president Nicolas Sarkozy order to legislation to bar women from wearing head scarf (Islamic Hijab) in public places or in streets. I was shaken with this news.Sarkozy never realized that the European Convention on Human Rights provides every individual with the right to practise the religion which she wants, under her inner convictions.Women who dress in such a way acts in accordance with their views according to their convictions, not wanting to open a face and their decision should be respected.Sarkozy forgot prior to passing such an order that no democratic government can dictate to its citizens what they should wear.If this happens, it means that the country does not adhere to democratic values. and adoption of such law will inevitably lead to a strained relations with the Muslim community.
The lawmakers should not vote such a law, because the number of women wearing the NIQAB is extremely marginal. Laws are made to edict general principles and not for solving problems caused by a hundred people.French common law is already determining that people's face must be seen in order to be identified, and it is sufficient enough to give the solution to the NIQAB issue without voting a new law.
Adopting the law, banning Muslim women to cover their faces, would reflect French negative attitude towards Islam and religion in genera

I am also a muslim woman from Pakistan who lives in the ultra muslim orthodox area of Bow and Mile End in London. I have lived in London for around ten years and this is my first experience of living in a majority muslim area as I lived in Clapham before. The problem I personally find with these radical talibanised muslims is that they don’t seem to approve of me going around on my cycle and not adhering to their code by covering myself up. I get all sorts of harrassment by the "orthodox" muslim men even though I am not dressed like a prostitute but I might as well be one in their eyes as I am not covered up from head to toe. But for some reason I just have this feeling that even if I was dressed the way they think is right, they would still find a problem with me because I am a woman. The thing that makes me so angry is their confidence, this being England and not a muslim country, thank God!
The muslim men in Mile End have the cheek to spit at me when I am cycling past them on my way back from work if I by mistake just glance at them because either they think I'm making a pass at them, or they feel so degraded because a woman has just glanced at them. But the thing is they are all the same. They are the same in Pakistan and Kuwait and Saudi Arabia and even in England!!! So even though it is a bit of a touchy subject, I feel I need to say something as I left that country to escape this kind of constant sexual persecuation which is worse than racism as that really hits the roots of your identity.
And what about the muslim women who are covered up? They seem to walk around extremely confidently in Mile End. They don’t seem to need all that burqa /hijab/ niqab because they seem to be able to defend themselves quite well without it. But the problem is that these women are in with the men on this. They are as radical and fundamentalist as the men - they protect their oppressors and wont let anyone question them or even let a woman fight for her rights as long as they are around to say how it is a symbol of their freedom! It infuriates me everyday. If they behaved like another minority which happened to be quite conservative and relgious, it would be okay. But these people are aggressive, uneducated, ignorant and complete bigots and they have a terrible sense of fashion. I could say a lot more but this argument is just going to start sounding weak (not to me though). Just wondering if there is any kind of support group I can go to which is not as radical as the other side? I cant go to the police just because muslim men are spitting at me and calling me names everyday, can I? And believe me I dress quite conservative as it is.

Every time I see a woman in a Niqab I'm shocked, startled. I can't help but think, are they wearing the covering by choice? The darker the colour the more confronting I find it, if a second lady is wearing one it multiplies the feeling. Most times black or dark blues are used in my area. Can someone explain the colours that are used? The lighter, the more colourful the covering the less confronting I find it.

The other feeling I have is that the woman wearing the veil is off limits. It seems like they are holding the rest of the community at arms length, if you aren't part of my family or group of friends I don't want to know you. Even if we were talking together I cannot see facial reactions. I'd find it as impolite as wearing sunglasses when talking with someone.

Maybe it comes down to my fears, those wearing the Niqab may not think like I've mentioned above. Like any two people sitting on a bench waiting for a bus, perhaps both parties would welcome a "Hi, how ya doing?"

Practicalities. Everyone must be identifiable. Do you know that men take advantage, wear the niqab to rob people? And what about DLs and other identification documents? These are laws in Western countries and everyone must adhere to the laws of the country they are residing in. I wouldn't go to a Muslim country and disrespect their dress codes, as ridiculous as I think they are and as uncomfortable as they are. In Western countries, we are not governed by religion. And that's that.

btw, identifiable also means the color of the hair.

The above is part 2. The smart thing decided to cut the first half of my message out.

So part 1:
It is often implied and sometimes said that banning the hijab will liberate muslim women but how the hell can you say that telling a person that (s)he cannot wear something that they want to is 'freeing' them. Sounds more like oppression to me. I choose to wear a hijab and am considering wearing a niqab also (so no volition there Mr Gardner) and I wouldn't feel empowered if was told that i can't wear something that I do to cover myself. Would you?

Isn't the argument against the burqa getting a little confused: sometime about empowering women, sometimes about security