There are a few formatting issues which I’ve been trying to solve. Ignore them.
From a statement in the comment section of the article The Right to Remain Silent.
moosa on Sat, 17th Sep 2011 7:02 PM
Yameen, You seem to enjoying the joke!! Where is religious freedom? France (where hijab is banned)?? USA (where sworning to official post with Quran is banned)? Israel (where every muslim is a terrorist)?? DOnt joke pls!!
Religions have always been “used” coniviently by Politicials and power cirles!! And thus in Maldives. And your articles are echos of these elites and YOU ARE A PUPPET!!
I’m getting sick of people presenting what they think, and not even having the slightest clue of what the situation is, and not even considering acknowledging that they are misinformed of the situation which they comment with so much passion. I’m going to comment on the few claims made in that post. Specifically,
– It is illegal to wear a hijab in France
– Swearing to an official post with the Quran is banned in the United States
– That in Israel, every muslim is considered a terrorist
In regards to being illegal to wear a hijab in France, I doubt that the person who had made the comment had even read the law which was thought to have that as a direct result. So, what does the law in question actually say? Using the copy of it available here, I’ll provide what the law actually says.
– No person in public is to wear clothing designed to cover the face.
– For the purposes of Article 1, the public space is made up of public roads and places open to the public or assigned to a public service.
– The prohibition in Article 1 shall not apply if the holding prescribed or permitted by law or regulations, if justified by medical reasons or reasons professional, or if it is part of sports, from festivals or artistic or traditional.
– Ignorance of the prohibition contained in Article 1 is punished the fine for offenses of the second class. The obligation to complete the citizenship course mentioned in 8 of Article 131-16 of the Penal Code may be imposed at the same time or instead of the fine.
After section 1a of Chapter V of Title II of Book II of the Code Criminal is inserted a section 1 b reads:
“Section 1 b
“Forced to hide the face
“Art. 225-4-10. – The failure of any person or to impose a several other people to hide their faces by threat, violence, coercion, abuse of authority or abuse of power, because of their sex, is punished by imprisonment for one year and € 30 000 fine.” When the fact is committed against a minor, the penalties are increased to two years imprisonment and a fine of € 60 000. ”
– Articles 1 to 3 come into force at the expiration of a period of six months from the date of enactment of this Act.
– This Act applies throughout the territory of the Republic.
– The Government submits to Parliament a report on the implementation of this Act eighteen months after its promulgation. This report provides an assessment of the implementation of this law, measures support developed by the government and the difficulties encountered.
So is it banned? Not entirely. One can still wear the Hijab in the comfort of their own home, in religious institutions, and in any space not covered under the description provided for public spaces. One is unable to force another to wear it on the basis of gender, meaning that should a woman decide to wear it, it is their choice to do so.
Now, I’m pretty certain that somebody will bring up that Paris has banned prayer in the streets, and that some muslim groups are upset about it. So, lets take a quick look at that, and what is being done about it.
Since I was unable to find the law in question, I’m going off of an article in the online newspaper, The Telegraph, entitled “Praying in Paris Streets Outlawed”, in which the statement
“Under an agreement signed this week, believers will be able to use the premises of a vast nearby fire station while awaiting the construction of a bigger mosque.”
So while Muslims happen to be impacted by the law, more so than any other religious demographic, there are also alternatives to the street being offered as places to pray, while construction of a larger mosque which should be able to accommodate the excess people who, likely as a result of space, find it necessary to pray in the streets. In the chance that it fails to do so, given the rate that mosques have been built in France over the last few years, with alternatives being provided in the meantime, I wouldn’t be inclined to worry about it.
In regards to “Swearing to an official post with the Quran is banned in the United States,” I had to look around for this one. The closest I could find was a controversy from 2006 which didn’t have the impact of preventing the politician involved, Keith Ellison, from swearing an oath on the Quran, or any other politician from doing the same. But I remain open to the possibility. Should anybody want to demonstrate the accuracy of the claim that it is illegal to swear to an official post with the Quran in the United States, I expect them to find the law that forbids that, and present it. Should somebody find a federal law which does that, I will have no qualms with including it, and updating this article to have it in this section. Just to make things interesting, should somebody find it by November 31st, 2011, I’ll provide a link to it before every section, with the name of the person who pointed it out included.
To be honest about the whole “swearing an oath” on any book when taking a place of authority, it is worthless. People who are going to do good things with their authority are going to do them regardless of if they swore on a book, and people who are going to do bad things with their authority are going to do them regardless of if they swore on a book. Scrap the whole concept.
For the last comment I’ll address, “Israel (where every Muslim is a terrorist)??”, it was difficult to find any reference for that statistic from a reliable source, or even an unreliable source that at least had some data to back that up. The same offer as, with the condition that the source which supports the claim that every Muslim in Israel is a terrorist (I’ll take suspected at the very least), just to make it easy, be from the Israeli government, any intelligence agency with references, NGO that has investigated the situation in Israel and can refer to their data, or even from Wikileaks.
So lets see the conclusion. The first one was flat out wrong on account of the fact that women in France can still wear the hijab in their homes, or any place, as long as it isn’t designated as a public space. The second one is unsupported with an example to the contrary. The third one is unsupported. So Moosa, I don’t know who you are, but either provide references that if investigated, turn out to be correct, or acknowledge that your criticism of the nations you listed is unsupported.