The Peak

Being secular does not mean banning religion

By Dan McPeake

Oh France! Number one in the world in heath care, and recently voted best place in the world to live (probably because of the health care). So why, why do you want to ban burqas?

Muslims make up a large percentage of the population in France, at 3.5 million, and Islam is the second largest religion in the country (about four per cent of the population). Now it’s true that not all Muslim women wear the burqa, but it is wrong to punish the ones that do. The president argued that the controversy has nothing to do with religion, and is about a woman’s freedom and dignity.

Freedom must have a different meaning to Sarkozy than it does to me. Unless I am mistaken, I thought having freedom meant having a choice; a choice to wear specific clothing, a choice to be a member of a specific religion, a choice to live life however you choose. A partial ban on the burqa, or any full veil for that matter, would not only take away a woman’s right to wear one, but would also be considered an attack on her religion.

Now it’s true that France is officially a secular state. Interestingly enough, however, Sarkozy, a Christian, not only runs the country, but also wants to lessen the gap between the separation of the church and the state; in other words, making France a Christian country. And he says the burqa ban is not about religion.

In one aspect I agree with them. Rather than being discriminated against on the basis of being Muslims, these women are being discriminated against because they are women. This only serves to make the situation worse. Considering that only 2,000 Muslim women actually wear the full veil, is a ban even worth it for something that small?

On the other hand, it is exactly about religion. If France calls itself a secular state, then a ban on burqas would be a ban on religion. However, France cannot call itself a secular state for two reasons. One, over 50 per cent of the French population identify as Catholic. Second, how can a country be secular if the head of state is a Catholic who wants to narrow the gap between the separation of church and state?

Now yes, France also has put the hit on certain Jewish and Christian items, but that still does not make this whole thing right. Being a secular state means having no dominant religion; it doesn’t mean having no religion. What did the Muslim women ever do? Just because someone wears a piece of religious clothing, or a religious artefact, does not mean that they are shoving it down your throats; they are simply choosing a way to live their lives. How can we punish them for that?

If the Pope came to France, he would not be required to disrobe or remove his hat, so what right does the French government have to tell Muslim women that they can’t wear veils. Similarly, there would be an uproar in India if the government did not allow Sikhs to wear their turbans.

The taking away of rights — whether it be gay marriage or the right to wear religious clothing — is wrong. People have a right to freedom of expression, religious, or otherwise. A Muslim woman wearing a niqab won’t make Paris any less French, or Christian, it will make it more diversified. That’s the way the world should be.