Should the Burqa be banned in Britain?

Timothy: We have the lucky privilege in this country of belonging to a secular state (granted, there is some ambiguity in Britain, what with ‘God Save Our Queen’ and all, but this is not the time to bicker over legal technicalities). Essentially, in this country we are not told what religious culture to be a part of, and we, in turn, do not enforce any judgments on what others choose to believe. Banning the burqa is in direct opposition to my last comment; it is an interference of the state in the affairs of the church.

Priya: It is important for Britain to not be ashamed of its values, and we should not be ashamed of defending them. Banning the burqa will not weaken the Islamic religion. Religion is not defined by what one wears, because ultimately, all religions preach equality and the importance of being a good person. It is unfortunate that wearing the burqa shows a sign of inequality in so many ways.

T: How seriously do you think it actually goes against Western values? In Germany, it is illegal to wear a Nazi uniform, and there are obvious cultural reasons for this. I just think if you’re going to restrict a speech-act, it should be more justified than that.

P: I think it is justified. For instance, meeting in Costa for a good hearty coffee, whilst engaging in great conversation. Or strolling in St James Park and smiling at someone despite not even knowing them. As a Brit, I often take these simple things for granted and I embrace this culture. Yet, how is one supposed to have good conversation with someone whose face cannot be seen? Believe it or not, facial expressions and hand gestures are a vital part of any discussion. I don’t want to sit opposite someone whose eyes are only to be seen, and work out what they are feeling or thinking through the enlargement or contraction of their pupils. I want to see a person smile at my attempts to make a joke and pull a face at my sarcasm. How can that happen when a woman’s face is covered by a cloth? This cloth is depriving her of showing and developing a personality, and being a character. At the same time, her male Muslim counterparts and relatives are able to show their personality.

T: Let us not assume that we have knowledge of what the burqa truly means. Katherine Bullock’s ‘Rethinking Muslim Women and the Veil’ posits that the burqa is considered by many to be a liberation from the consumer-capitalist restraints of the ‘ideal’ woman. Agree or disagree, but Bullock’s research is not unfounded. It’s easy to enforce our opinions just because they fit within our own culture’s sphere of reference. But I’m more interested in listening to the other side of the argument: like it or not, we cannot assume that the burqa only clothes feeble and dehumanized women. By banning it, we are cutting off this particular talking point.

P: But that often isn’t the case. Of course there are some women who have made that decision themselves, but simultaneously we are constantly hearing stories about hundreds of other women committing suicide, or running away because they do not have the chance to speak for themselves. Banning the burqa would enable these helpless women to gain a voice and confidence – values which Britain takes pride in.

T: Do you not think the ban would create further tension? What you have described is very serious – but the ban would not stop it. It would instead be an act of further entrapment between domestic laws and legal laws. This ban would not be an act of liberation. ‘Oh,’ says the male relatives, ‘I suppose now Cameron’s said it, it must override our religious beliefs.’ This act can only end in a spiral of mass confusion for those involved. Putting an end to these crimes takes something more than an easy answer. It is a difficult process.

P: I think if someone is going to be living in this country, they should to a certain degree adapt to Western cultures. In my rather Conservative opinion, I don’t think it is right that a person uses the country’s public services but doesn’t give something back to Britain. These women are living in this country, but are not part of it. There goes Cameron’s Big Society…

T: The mantra of ‘Adapt to Western culture – or else’ has never been feasible.

P: But there is also the issue of double standards shown in a few cases. Firstly, a shopkeeper will not serve a motorist wearing a helmet because his face cannot be seen. But is that not the case with a woman wearing a burqa? If someone’s face cannot be seen they should all be refused service.

T: There is no need to wear a helmet on foot in a public place, and one of the main points of a burqa is that it is for public places. They are not the same, and cannot be treated as such legalistically. Also, I’m sick of people pretending they have an interest in the rights of motorcyclists.

P: Furthermore, the covering of the face can be rather dangerous when the lady is driving. It is a distraction not only to her own vision, but also drivers who may have to communicate with her. A person driving a car wearing a balaclava would look like he is creating trouble, because their face cannot be seen, so surely this same accusation applies to a woman whose face is hidden by her burqa.

T: I just wonder how many police hours would be wasted escorting covered women to police stations. The police need to spend time on things that actually matter, especially at this crucial economic turning point in our country. I would like to see some statistics on car crashes that are solely the fault of the burqa.