Citizenship classes?
I don't see how covering their faces entirely is free speech. On the contrary, I am convinced that wearing a full face veil is an oppression of such essential liberty.
In France, it is very difficult to talk with religious groups (of any religion). Talks have been organized (even just a couple weeks ago) on the expression of faith to the public. France has been a secular country since 1905. After the horrors of WWII, it was deemed illegal to explicitly be able to identify one's religion in public (because the Nazis obliged Jewish people to wear a yellow Cross of David and people were obliged to be able to prove they were Christan baptized at anytime, even when just walking in the street).
One of the most famous French expressions [1] is the following (translated to English):
One's freedom stops where starts the freedom of others.
This expression is meant to teach one to limit their own freedom in a community and to not abuse of power. Banning expression limiting and often male-imposed full face veils enables two important freedoms:
- The freedom for the woman to choose her own religion without the obligation of a man
- The freedom for one to choose their own religion without being influenced by their public surroundings (no visible Christian crosses, no visible crosses of David, no visible full face veils)
In addition, it also put everyone and every religion on the same level of tolerance. As DENDODGE very rightly writes in the "Good!" thread, expecting to be allowed to do so in public is imposing your religious beliefs on others, and should not be permitted.
P.S.: If I had to choose between seeing some naked people in the streets and people wearing burqas, I would prefer seeing naked people. Now that would be an expression of liberty!
I see this point of the argument much better now. Thank you for your response, I believe it has changed my opinion on the topic. Lord Arador (talk) 03:48, 16 April 2011 (UTC)