Respond to two classmates poster 1) Now that we are looking at these several art

Respond to two classmates poster
1) Now that we are looking at these several articles, I can confidently say that one of the main reasons as to why the Islamic garb has been banned is because of the sustainment of their overall freedom of expression, one of the basic right that us Americans are privileged to have. In my opinion, I believe this provides more harmful than beneficial effects, as the text demonstrates several negative effects which the banning of the Islamic garb has had. For example, weapons and illegal substances can be concealed and hidden, as well as hidden. This is already bad enough, not to mention the social life limitation and the elimination of the display of a unique identity. When looking at what kinds of coverings are really what bring danger, it is said by many that what causes threats is the body coverings and not the face coverings because it is so much simpler so use the body covering to conceal something illegal and harmful. I truly don’t believe that wearing a religious garb poses some sort of threat to anyone’s safety and security, especially a threat worthy of falling under the national security title and protocol. It is stated that the Qur’an does not require women to cover their faces in public. “The Holy Quran does not mandate wearing of hijab or headgear for Muslim women”.
2) In the article ‘From France to Denmark…’ the main argument for the ban was that not only it posed a security threat, but lawmakers believe that those who wear the religious garments are not free because they are “deprived of all identity” (Tan, Aug. 16) amongst other reasonings. In the Time article, the main argument against the ban was that it was “racist, Islamophobic, and oppressive politics” (Sabina, quoted in Hustad, 2018). The ban on Islamic garb is a huge issue of freedom of religious expression. As stated by Hustad, “Sabina started wearing the niqab two years ago as a way to feel more connected to God[.]” (2018). It is not required, but some people use the niqab as religious expression and show commitment to their religion. The Qur’an does not require women to cover their faces in public, rather dress modestly and cover the head, neck, and chest area. “O Profit! Say to your wives, your daughters, and the women of the believers that: they should let down upon themselves their jalabib” (The Qur’an 33:59, as cited by Rizvi, n.d.). When it comes to national security, I think there could be an argument made about the threat due to a lack of outward identification, but I don’t think it’s something that should be taken as a ‘threat’. Although some may say that because of 9/11 there should yield some sort of national security issues with religious garb, there needs to be an understanding that just because someone wears religious garb does not mean they are considered a threat. Likely, sometimes in anti-Semitic countries there is backlash if someone wears a kippah (O’Connor, 2021), and Sikhs who wear a turban are also still subject to violence even a decade and a half after 9/11 (Venkatraman, 2022). It was interesting to go about the mask mandate and see what places allowed what types of face coverings. When there are mask mandates, I think more people wouldn’t question it because we all wore a ‘mask’ of some sort.
Hustad, K. (2018, Aug. 2). ‘Now It’s a Sign of Protest’: Muslim Women in Denmark Defy the Face Veil Ban. Time. /courses/145456/files/22856167/download?wrap=1
O’Connor, M. (2021, June 29). British Jews’ Fear and Defiance Amid Record Monthly Anti-Semitism Reports. BBC News. to an external site.
Rizvi, S. M. (n.d.). The Qur’an and Hijab. Al-Islam. to an external site.
Tan, R. (Aug. 16). From France to Denmark, Bans on Full-Face Muslim Veils are Spreading Across Europe. The Washington Post. /courses/145456/files/22980708?wrap=1
Venkatraman, S. (2022, April 13). Two Sikh Men Assaulted, Turbans Ripped Off in New York City. NBC News.

Leave a Comment